Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 122 (8764 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-26-2017 1:31 PM
383 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: aristotle
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 812,124 Year: 16,730/21,208 Month: 2,619/3,593 Week: 86/646 Day: 26/60 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   defeasibility
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18658
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 1 of 4 (719032)
02-10-2014 2:51 PM


Another take on the question of balance between open-mindedness and skepticism

http://www.edge.org/q2011/q11_11.html#lombrozo

quote:
On its face, defeasibility is a modest concept with roots in logic and epistemology. An inference is defeasible if it can potentially be "defeated" in light of additional information. Unlike deductively sound conclusions, the products of defeasible reasoning remain subject to revision, held tentatively no matter how firmly.

Defeasibility is a powerful concept when we recognize it not as a modest term of art, but as the proper attitude towards all belief. Between blind faith and radical skepticism is a vast but sparsely populated space where defeasibility finds its home. Irreversible commitments would be foolish; boundless doubt paralyzing. Defeasible beliefs provide the provisional certainty necessary to navigate an uncertain world.

Recognizing the potential revisability of our beliefs is a prerequisite to rational discourse and progress, be it in science, politics, religion, or the mundane negotiations of daily life. Consider the world we could live in if all of our local and global leaders, if all of our personal and professional friends and foes, recognized the defeasibility of their beliefs and acted accordingly. That sure sounds like progress to me. But of course, I could be wrong.


How willing are you to change your mind -- not just on science but political and philosophical beliefs?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 02-10-2014 5:02 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4753
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 4 (719034)
02-10-2014 3:56 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the defeasibility thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18658
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 3 of 4 (719041)
02-10-2014 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
02-10-2014 2:51 PM


Recognizing the potential revisability of our beliefs is a prerequisite to rational discourse and progress, ...

... one should always be skeptical of ones beliefs and open minded enough to consider other possibilities ... now here's a word to describe it: defeasibility, an approach to knowledge that extends the tentativity of science into philosophy.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/ep-defea/

quote:
... As a first approximation, defeasibility refers to a belief’s liability to lose some positive epistemic status, or to having this status downgraded in some particular way. For example, a person may be epistemically justified in believing some proposition p at one time, but then the belief might become less justified or even unjustified at some later time. ...

New knowledge should always be able to change beliefs.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 02-10-2014 2:51 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
bibi123 
Suspended Member (Idle past 860 days)
Posts: 3
Joined: 11-18-2014


Message 4 of 4 (742211)
11-18-2014 2:46 AM


and acted accordingly. That sure sounds like progress to me. But of course, I could be wrong.

Edited by bibi123, : No reason given.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Reset spam signature to blank.


    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017