andrel wrote:
> On 9-8-2009 7:47, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> andrel wrote:
>>> On 7-8-2009 1:25, Darren New wrote:
>>>> andrel wrote:
>>>>> Because that is what everybody does, even you.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. That doesn't mean it *is* knowledge, and that doesn't mean 
>>>> everything is reasonably "knowledge" to someone. That's why I'm 
>>>> bringing up the examples of Napoleon.
>>>
>>> Let me put it this way: I say I *'know'* something if it is beyond 
>>> reasonable doubt for *me*. Beyong reasonable doubt can be for a 
>>> number of reasons:
>>> 1) based on authority that I have no reason to doubt (the sun is 
>>> about 150 million kilometers away)
>>> 2) own experience (there must be an algorithm that computes the cube 
>>> of an integer finalizing 3 bits per iteration*)
>>> 3) when the negation would be incompatible with my existence (god 
>>> does not exist)
>>> Possibly an underlying problem in this discussion is that you assumed 
>>> that the non existence of god is category 1 or 2 knowledge (because 
>>> it would be for you?) whereas it is actually category 3. Also 
>>> possibly confusing is that I admit that for theists the negation may 
>>> also be category 3. I don't see a problem in that because we are 
>>> different people.
>>>
>> body else, has never seen.
>>
>> And yet.. You miss category 4: "Because the negation would contradict 
>> societal ideas and social beliefs, which I am heavily invested in." 
> 
> I don't see the difference with my category 3. Then again I have 
> sometimes difficulty to understand what you exactly mean.
> 
Ok, I see what you mean. Yeah, they are the same in the case that I 
actually mention. However, there is what might be called the "Stockholm 
Syndrome" version of the same rule, which states that, on some level, 
they know its all delusional BS, but have become so invested in 
following it, that giving it up feels like the world will end, and the 
consequence of being wrong is both socially too high, and emotionally 
too extreme, to accept. That, in the end, its basically become like a 
phobia of germs, where elaborate ritual is performed, to avoid the 
otherwise non-existent consequences of coming in contact with what is 
*not* actually detrimental. It simply *has to be*, or otherwise the 
phobia would be a horrible self deception, and that just isn't acceptable.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message