Limitations

[Belinda]

I think we have to move beyond black and white thinking

Move, "beyond it?" You haven't got to it yet. You really cannot discover what is wrong with anything until you first know what is right. If you don't now what truth is, or even what it is, it is not possible to know what is not true.

But it is much easier to define what is bad, than it is to define what is good, which is impossible except by reference to what must be bettered or what is without badness.

[Lacewing]

Do you think that all of your knowledge is based on absolute truths, while the different/varied knowledge of other people is not?

What other people know or don't know is irrelevant and I have no idea why you always think in such terms.

Because we learn things through the insights of other people, and through considering how much more there always proves to be worth considering than our own thoughts at any point in time, so I have no idea why you focus on what you think as if it presents the only truth or potential worth considering.

If what I think I know is based on anything other than the truth, it is not knowledge, it is a mistake, simply wrong, credulity or superstition.

Right. Even if you are certain it is truth. And you wouldn't know until something happens to show you otherwise.

Knowledge consists of every proposition I understand which is certain an true.

At least at the time you think you know it and are certain of it. New/additional information could shift it.

I think it would be frightening to never know anything was certainly true and have a mind filled with ideas one could never be certain of

I'm not talking about being so floppy in ones knowledge/ideas that they have no stability to function. I'm simply pointing out that what we think we know may not be all it seems... which is a perfectly reasonable thing to point out in a philosophy forum... and to remain aware of. People, like yourself, who talk about truth and knowledge as if they have such a firm grasp of it, often show through their own claims how skewed and extreme they can become in making all sorts of claims which are anything BUT truth and knowledge.

It is very freeing not to lock into a mindset that feeds itself on being right about most everything it concludes... even about stuff it has no way of knowing. Rather, one could say: A) Here's what I think I know about this for now, so I'll work with that; B) I do not know all potential, so I won't build an identity as if I do;..., etc.

But truth is not some mystic esoteric thing that can be, "broader," or, "more dynamic." Truth is very simple. Truth is an attribute or quality, not of things, but statements (usually called propositions) which assert something about something else. "The keys are on the table," makes an assertion about where the keys are.

There are other perspectives from which to view from. The table is under (or supporting) the keys. Just because you are focusing on the keys, does not mean that's the only potential focus. And other perspectives may offer broader or more dynamic views of truth.

Knowledge consists of all the propositions one knows which are true.

That does not include what the knower does not know or consider, so that affects truth, does it not?

What is lazy is not doing the hard rigorous thinking and study required to ensure everything one thinks and says is true

But it's never the complete picture, is it?

based on observable evidence and ruthlessly careful thinking, not allowing feelings, sentiments, desires, or whims to interfere with our reason

You think you do that? With all of your extreme false projections? Reason cannot help but be built on the reasoner's own limitations (whatever they may be). What other foundation do you imagine you are working from?

There is only one thing that determines what is true and what is not, reality itself.

From which perspective?

[RCSaunders]

There is only one thing that determines what is true and what is not, reality itself.

From which perspective?

I know it is very comforting to be able to convince yourself that you can never be absolutely certain of anything because it relieves you of the responsibility for your choices. You don't have to worry if what you believe, think and choose is right or not, since you can't ever be certain. The problem is, reality doesn't care whether you know or not. It is what it is and has the nature it has and you either discover what reality and its nature are and conform your thinking and choices to what is really so or suffer the consequences.

It's your life and your mind and they are yours to use as you choose. What is not yours to choose, or anyone else's, are the consequences of your choices. It's reality, all that is the way it actually is, that determines the results of your chosen thinking and actions.

That's the perspective. Everything else is an attempt to obfuscate and evade the truth.

[Lacewing]

There is only one thing that determines what is true and what is not, reality itself.

From which perspective?

I know it is very comforting to be able to convince yourself that you can never be absolutely certain of anything because it relieves you of the responsibility for your choices.

And another false projection! Why is this necessary if you're truly focused on truth?

[RCSaunders]

From which perspective?

I know it is very comforting to be able to convince yourself that you can never be absolutely certain of anything because it relieves you of the responsibility for your choices.

And another false projection! Why is this necessary if you're truly focused on truth?

How can you be responsible for your choices if you are not certain of what is right or true? No matter what you choose to think or do, it, "might," be right, and if you are wrong, well, "we all make mistakes."

[Lacewing]

I know it is very comforting to be able to convince yourself that you can never be absolutely certain of anything because it relieves you of the responsibility for your choices.

And another false projection! Why is this necessary if you're truly focused on truth?

How can you be responsible for your choices if you are not certain of what is right or true? No matter what you choose to think or do, it, "might," be right, and if you are wrong, well, "we all make mistakes."

I don't need to be absolutely certain in order to make choices or be responsible for my choices. You ought to know, looking at the world, that a great deal of absolute certainty is delusion.

If you were dropped in the middle of an alien desert, which you knew nothing about, would you be unable to function and make choices because you didn't have absolute certainty? There are always situations where humans don't have certainty, and they are able to function just fine, and find their way through to resolve, improve, grow, etc. It is a moment-to-moment process of 'aliveness' with open eyes and minds. As opposed to rigidity and limitation from well-worn grooves that are not open to evolve/expand.

[RCSaunders]

If you were dropped in the middle of an alien desert, which you knew nothing about, would you be unable to function and make choices because you didn't have absolute certainty?

If you are going to make these silly hypothetical cases the basis of your reasoning, they have to be at least plausible. But since you've gone ahead and made the suggestion, why wouldn't I be able to function and make choices: first to learn all I could about my new environment, perhaps from those already living there as well as my own observation and examination. Since no real place is entirely unique, much of the knowledge I brought with me from wherever I was before I was, "dropped in the middle of this alien place," would certainly be applicable to the new environment--air would still be air, dirt would still be dirt, food would still be food, and water would still be water. Just like life any place else, I'd have to learn all I possibly could about the reality around me, and would only succeed to the extent I got it right.

That's what it means to say reality determines what is true, and why you have to know what is true to live successfully as a human being.

[Belinda]

If you were dropped in the middle of an alien desert, which you knew nothing about, would you be unable to function and make choices because you didn't have absolute certainty?

If you are going to make these silly hypothetical cases the basis of your reasoning, they have to be at least plausible. But since you've gone ahead and made the suggestion, why wouldn't I be able to function and make choices: first to learn all I could about my new environment, perhaps from those already living there as well as my own observation and examination. Since no real place is entirely unique, much of the knowledge I brought with me from wherever I was before I was, "dropped in the middle of this alien place," would certainly be applicable to the new environment--air would still be air, dirt would still be dirt, food would still be food, and water would still be water. Just like life any place else, I'd have to learn all I possibly could about the reality around me, and would only succeed to the extent I got it right.

That's what it means to say reality determines what is true, and why you have to know what is true to live successfully as a human being.

Survival strategies are founded upon probabilities not certainties.

[RCSaunders]

If you were dropped in the middle of an alien desert, which you knew nothing about, would you be unable to function and make choices because you didn't have absolute certainty?

If you are going to make these silly hypothetical cases the basis of your reasoning, they have to be at least plausible. But since you've gone ahead and made the suggestion, why wouldn't I be able to function and make choices: first to learn all I could about my new environment, perhaps from those already living there as well as my own observation and examination. Since no real place is entirely unique, much of the knowledge I brought with me from wherever I was before I was, "dropped in the middle of this alien place," would certainly be applicable to the new environment--air would still be air, dirt would still be dirt, food would still be food, and water would still be water. Just like life any place else, I'd have to learn all I possibly could about the reality around me, and would only succeed to the extent I got it right.

That's what it means to say reality determines what is true, and why you have to know what is true to live successfully as a human being.

Survival strategies are founded upon probabilities not certainties.

Are you certain of that?

[Belinda]

If you are going to make these silly hypothetical cases the basis of your reasoning, they have to be at least plausible. But since you've gone ahead and made the suggestion, why wouldn't I be able to function and make choices: first to learn all I could about my new environment, perhaps from those already living there as well as my own observation and examination. Since no real place is entirely unique, much of the knowledge I brought with me from wherever I was before I was, "dropped in the middle of this alien place," would certainly be applicable to the new environment--air would still be air, dirt would still be dirt, food would still be food, and water would still be water. Just like life any place else, I'd have to learn all I possibly could about the reality around me, and would only succeed to the extent I got it right.

That's what it means to say reality determines what is true, and why you have to know what is true to live successfully as a human being.

Survival strategies are founded upon probabilities not certainties.

Are you certain of that?

Omniscient? Me?

[Lacewing]

Survival strategies are founded upon probabilities not certainties.

Are you certain of that?

Omniscient? Me?

[RCSaunders]

Survival strategies are founded upon probabilities not certainties.

Are you certain of that?

Omniscient? Me?

Oh good. So you are not certain survival strategies are founded upon probabilities but think they "probably" are but might be based on certainty if you're wrong, which might be since you are not omniscient. Is that right?

In other words, you have no idea what survival strategies are founded on.

[Belinda]

Are you certain of that?

Omniscient? Me?

Oh good. So you are not certain survival strategies are founded upon probabilities but think they "probably" are but might be based on certainty if you're wrong, which might be since you are not omniscient. Is that right?

In other words, you have no idea what survival strategies are founded on.

Are you still on about my old psyche?