I think your issue is not that I do not accept a philosophical way of looking at things but that I reject your philisophical way of looking at things.
I read your full post, it did not move me in any way. You claim that I am incapable of understanding philosophical arguments. In that you are wrong. I understand many of the arguments. I do not find moat of them very convincing.
Just because a person does not agree does not make them stupid or wrong. You seem to have a problem with my take on things. This does not mean you are correct.
I find empiricism is a very good way to function in life. Empirical data seems to be the basis of what makes me function. I also think everyone functions on empirical data. Your subjective evidence that leads to faith is just how your brain deals with the empirical data you have received through life. The difference between myself and other people is how I deal with that empirical data internally.
I reject that there is anything else besides empirical data and how we as individuals deal with and sort that data internally. We only have five senses, but with those senses different people can have vastly different interpretations of the data coming in. The brain is a very interesting, complex and scary thing.
You may well believe there are other ways of perceiving, but ultimately it is the data coming in from the five senses and how the brain deals with that data. Nothing more. I reject that there is a sixth sense or some sort of spiritual element.
That ma'am is a valid philosophical viewpoint. It may be different than yours but it is no less valid.
We cannot test for the existence of things that are just human ideas and mental constructs.
BTW, I know what epistemology is.
I am an empiricist. I do not believe in intuition and I do not believe that world is a construct of the mind. I do believe people have different perceptions of reality, but ultimately there is a reality.
IMO they are questions which cannot be answered empirically, so there must be other epistemologies we need to employ.
Why must they be answered? Does thinking of an answer make you feel better.
It's interesting that your reaction is to avoid having to do so at all by dismissing the questions themselves.
What does this mean? Do you feel I am ignorant or there is something wrong with me because I find no value in your questions.
I think we're straying from the topic here, which is the difference between faith and delusion.
They are your questions.
I have yet to hear an argument of why faith is different from delusion without people using judgmental statements and subjective evidence. Subjective evidence is completely non-convincing. People have used subjective evidence for Nessy, Bigfoot and ghosts. Why should I think any subjective evidence for faith is any different?
Edited by Theodoric, : Spelling
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
™ Version 4.2