User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 59

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    If the question is "WTF?" then yes, it is.

  2. #12
    Arcesso pulli gingerios! Eldanen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    If the question is "WTF?" then yes, it is.
    Agreed. I call non sequitur!

  3. #13
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eldanen View Post
    *ponders whether this topic is begging the question*
    Topics can't beg the question. People beg questions, not topics. I am not begging the question, not because my conclusion is not presupposed by my premises (it is, and has to be if I am arguing validly), but because I do not expect my premises to justify my conclusion (at least not in any logical sense, perhaps psychologically).
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  4. #14
    Arcesso pulli gingerios! Eldanen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    Topics can't beg the question. People beg questions, not topics. I am not begging the question, not because my conclusion is not presupposed by my premises (it is, and has to be if I am arguing validly), but because I do not expect my premises to justify my conclusion (at least not in any logical sense, perhaps psychologically).
    The same way guns don't shoot people. See, men just hold out their finger and say *bang* and the other person drops dead.

  5. #15
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    Suppose there is a statement which two people think is true, and moreover, it is actually true. However, only one has knowledge, that is, has performed a procedure which proves the statement is true. One day, both are betting on horse racing, and the statement is, 'Flying Scotsman will win the next race.' Both place the same bet on the same horse, and when Flying Scotsman wins the race, both collect the same winnings. Only one knew that Flying Scotsman would win. However, if one without knowledge can be as successful as another with knowledge, then what does knowledge do? Perhaps it provides peace-of-mind or confidence. But suppose that for our two gamblers it does not. Would it matter if knowledge did not exist? Both would have still have won their bet even if neither had knowledge.

    Justified true belief offers no practical benefit which mere true belief does not, and it can, therefore, be safely discarded.

    Note: In fact, I would argue that it should be discarded.
    The conclusion doesn't follow because it's too broad. In your hypothetical with the horse race it might not matter, but that doesn't mean it's useless across the board. You can easily construct a hypothetical where it would be very important. Suppose the unjustified knowledge gambler chose the wrong horse but believed he was right. Justifying, or checking, his belief could prevent him from losing a bet. Conclusion: knowledge is valuable and should always be pursued, especially if you're betting on horses.

    (Sorry if BlueWing or someone else already said this.)

  6. #16
    Arcesso pulli gingerios! Eldanen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    The conclusion doesn't follow because it's too broad. In your hypothetical with the horse race it might not matter, but that doesn't mean it's useless across the board. You can easily construct a hypothetical where it would be very important. Suppose the unjustified knowledge gambler chose the wrong horse but believed he was right. Justifying, or checking, his belief could prevent him from losing a bet. Conclusion: knowledge is valuable and should always be pursued, especially if you're betting on horses.

    (Sorry if BlueWing or someone else already said this.)
    I've actually won a horse-racing bet before. My dad should have bet all of his money. We would have won! But he only spent a couple dollars so we didn't get a big return :<. Oh well .

  7. #17
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    The conclusion doesn't follow because it's too broad. In your hypothetical with the horse race it might not matter, but that doesn't mean it's useless across the board. You can easily construct a hypothetical where it would be very important. Suppose the unjustified knowledge gambler chose the wrong horse but believed he was right. Justifying, or checking, his belief could prevent him from losing a bet. Conclusion: knowledge is valuable and should always be pursued, especially if you're betting on horses.

    (Sorry if BlueWing or someone else already said this.)
    Except he wasn't wrong; he was right. The point is that once he is right, it doesn't matter if he has knowledge or not. Knowledge doesn't do anything which true belief doesn't do quite a well.

    All that you have stated is that false belief is not as useful as true belief (and by extension, justified true belief), but so what? Did anyone say otherwise?
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  8. #18
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eldanen View Post
    The same way guns don't shoot people. See, men just hold out their finger and say *bang* and the other person drops dead.
    Except a gun doesn't shoot someone of its own volition. Men use guns to shoot people.

    Anyway, men cannot use topics to beg questions! A topic is not even an argument, and even arguments do not beg the question by themselves. It is the intent or expectations which people have of an argument which might beg the question.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  9. #19
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    Except he wasn't wrong; he was right. The point is that once he is right, it doesn't matter if he has knowledge or not. Knowledge doesn't do anything which true belief doesn't do quite a well.

    According to you, false belief is not as useful as true belief. Of course, I agree, but it's wholly irrelevent.
    Okay, so you're saying: if it's already right but we haven't verified it, it's useless. Verification might be useless to that specific event, but does that mean it's useless in general?

    You can't really know if it's useful except in retrospect, and even then, you need a system of values to determine what ends you think have merit and what ends don't. It might be useful to verify something for reasons unrelated to that specific event (the horse race). If he finds out that Flying Scotsman will win because the horse always wins on Tuesdays, or because the other horses have all been shot to death, he can make more money next time. So, if you find out WHY you're right, you can seize that information and improve yourself.

    If you just mean with regard to the past race, then sure, I'd agree. But it's not surprising, since the outcome of the race (and of the winnings) is independent of the justification. As long as they maintain the same belief and act the same, they're in the same position as far as THAT race goes.

  10. #20
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Suppose that before time t Bluewing believes P is true, and after t Bluewing knows P is true. Why is P more reliable after t?

    Would P let Bluewing down before t? Would P feel obliged to be more reliable after t? What does the history of Bluewing's subjective experiences have to do with P (supposing P is not about his experiences)? And why would those experiences be important?
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

Similar Threads

  1. College is useless?
    By ThaumaturgicTheorist in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 08-04-2016, 06:50 AM
  2. Why There Is A Priori Knowledge
    By Mal12345 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-29-2012, 01:02 AM
  3. How important is self-knowledge of intelligence?
    By Cellmold in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 05-28-2012, 02:30 AM
  4. [INTJ] Some times it is better to keep knowledge for yourself?
    By Virtual ghost in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-28-2008, 08:08 AM
  5. MBTI is almost useless
    By Evan in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 09-13-2008, 05:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO