Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   One's Own Theory
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 31 of 46 (576784)
08-25-2010 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Tram law
08-25-2010 3:14 PM


The problem is with the statement of:
In order for something to be true it must have empirical evidence to support it.
There is a problem with that statement. We know that Einstein's Theory of relativity is true (in a tentative scientific way). We now know that Einstein's theories have always been true even when we had no evidence that they were true. Paraphrasing Stephen Jay Gould, apples did not suspend themselves in mid air waiting for experiments to determine whether Newton or Einstein were right.
The question is how we KNOW that something is true? How do we determine whether something is true or not? How do we go from belief to knowledge? Do we use our own subjective preferences to judge what is true or not? Or should we use objective evidence and reasoning? Can you think of any bit of knowledge that is based on belief alone?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 3:14 PM Tram law has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 3:53 PM Taq has replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4704 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 32 of 46 (576787)
08-25-2010 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Taq
08-25-2010 3:43 PM


quote:
Can you think of any bit of knowledge that is based on belief alone?
Well, first you'd have to define knowledge.
For me there's personal knowledge from experience as well as book knowledge or education.
But the thing is sometimes personal knowledge can be just a belief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 3:43 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 3:59 PM Tram law has replied
 Message 35 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 4:00 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 33 of 46 (576788)
08-25-2010 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Tram law
08-25-2010 3:14 PM


Tram law writes:
Yes this one is a tough one because it contains both cultural beliefs and moral beliefs at the same time. Not all cultures believes this way.
In contrast, some Muslim countries marry their girls off at the age of fifteen through arranged marriages and see nothing wrong with it and don't see it as abuse while child advocates (in America at least) would more than likely call it child abuse and want to take the child away.
Well, psychological studies show that that probably isn't a good thing. That's the evidence that it shouldn't be done right there.
Then wouldn't it be impossible to determine that some people are very loyal to their country?
I wouldn't see how. There are people, some of them are loyal to their country, everyone can see that. Where's the problem here?
And if it's impossible to determine it, then wouldn't that mean it can not be true?
No, but it would become indistinguishable from a non-truth. Which makes the knowledge useless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 3:14 PM Tram law has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 4:04 PM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 34 of 46 (576789)
08-25-2010 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Tram law
08-25-2010 3:53 PM


Tram law writes:
Well, first you'd have to define knowledge.
For me there's personal knowledge from experience
That's empirical.
as well as book knowledge or education.
That too.
But the thing is sometimes personal knowledge can be just a belief.
I'm sorry, but you're gonna have to give me another example.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 3:53 PM Tram law has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 4:11 PM Huntard has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 35 of 46 (576790)
08-25-2010 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Tram law
08-25-2010 3:53 PM


Well, first you'd have to define knowledge.
Certainty gained through verification.
For me there's personal knowledge from experience as well as book knowledge or education.
Both experience and books are not the same as belief.
But the thing is sometimes personal knowledge can be just a belief.
Can you give an example? If I believe that the Earth is a cube does it become knowledge because I believe it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 3:53 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 36 of 46 (576791)
08-25-2010 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Huntard
08-25-2010 3:58 PM


There are people, some of them are loyal to their country, everyone can see that.
We could make this more empirical. We could set up a test where someone was offered one of two choices. They could have 100 dollars or denounce their country. Only the interviewer would be privy to each individual's choice and their identity would be kept private so there are no social ramifications. People who forgo personal gain in order to not disparage their country would be considered loyal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 3:58 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 4:06 PM Taq has replied
 Message 39 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 4:18 PM Taq has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 37 of 46 (576792)
08-25-2010 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Taq
08-25-2010 4:04 PM


Tsq writes:
We could make this more empirical. We could set up a test where someone was offered one of two choices. They could have 100 dollars or denounce their country. Only the interviewer would be privy to each individual's choice and their identity would be kept private so there are no social ramifications. People who forgo personal gain in order to not disparage their country would be considered loyal.
I don't know about that test, for 100 dollars, I'd denounce anything, certainly for this kind of test. Like that really means anything.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 4:04 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 4:56 PM Huntard has replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4704 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 38 of 46 (576793)
08-25-2010 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Huntard
08-25-2010 3:59 PM


quote:
I'm sorry, but you're gonna have to give me another example.
A theist who can't understand that an atheist has a lack of belief in God so he calls them all agnostic because that's what he or she knows.
Does that work?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 3:59 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 4:25 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4704 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 39 of 46 (576794)
08-25-2010 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Taq
08-25-2010 4:04 PM


quote:
We could make this more empirical. We could set up a test where someone was offered one of two choices. They could have 100 dollars or denounce their country. Only the interviewer would be privy to each individual's choice and their identity would be kept private so there are no social ramifications. People who forgo personal gain in order to not disparage their country would be considered loyal.
I'm not sure that would be empirical, because when there are no ramification to an action many people will choose to do what is convenient.
For example, because internet discussion forums offer anonymity, many posters will not have manners and not treat other posters with respect. When you're talking to somebody face to face, you risk a ramification of if you have a dissenting opinion somebody might take it personally and use physical violence against that person.
There was also a famous test that bore this out. I can't remember the proper name of it, but it had people who would apply electrical shock to people if they were told to do so. However, it wasn't real electricity and the person hooked up to the machine receiving the "shock" was acting in a lot of pain. The people were told that there wouldn't repercussions if they used this device to discipline somebody for giving a wrong answer.
The object of the test was to determine why people follow a tyrannical government and allow things like genocide to happen.
The result was that when the people were told they would not receive any repercussions, they were more willing to apply the electricity at very high and almost fatal levels.
Edited by Tram law, : added a quote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 4:04 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 4:31 PM Tram law has not replied
 Message 42 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 4:54 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 40 of 46 (576796)
08-25-2010 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Tram law
08-25-2010 4:11 PM


Tram law writes:
A theist who can't understand that an atheist has a lack of belief in God so he calls them all agnostic because that's what he or she knows.
Does that work?
Yes, and in that case, the belief is wrong, because the knowledge of the person is insufficient. I would hope that when explained, he will see the error of his ways and change his belief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 4:11 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 41 of 46 (576798)
08-25-2010 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Tram law
08-25-2010 4:18 PM


Tram law writes:
There was also a famous test that bore this out. I can't remember the proper name of it, but it had people who would apply electrical shock to people if they were told to do so. However, it wasn't real electricity and the person hooked up to the machine receiving the "shock" was acting in a lot of pain. The people were told that there wouldn't repercussions if they used this device to discipline somebody for giving a wrong answer.
The object of the test was to determine why people follow a tyrannical government and allow things like genocide to happen.
The result was that when the people were told they would not receive any repercussions, they were more willing to apply the electricity at very high and almost fatal levels.
And were even willing to "kill" the person if told to. These are the famous Milgram Experiments, and many like that since. Most recently a French documentary showed that people were willing to kill other people under these circumstances.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 4:18 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 42 of 46 (576802)
08-25-2010 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Tram law
08-25-2010 4:18 PM


I'm not sure that would be empirical, because when there are no ramification to an action many people will choose to do what is convenient.
We would have to agree beforehand that those who did not take the money were loyal. We would predict that if there were loyal people that some of the people tested would not take the money. We then test the hypothesis, and the results of the experiment would be independent of either of our beliefs.
There was also a famous test that bore this out. I can't remember the proper name of it, but it had people who would apply electrical shock to people if they were told to do so. However, it wasn't real electricity and the person hooked up to the machine receiving the "shock" was acting in a lot of pain. The people were told that there wouldn't repercussions if they used this device to discipline somebody for giving a wrong answer.
This experiment demonstrated, empirically, that people will ignore their own judgement if someone in authority tells them to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 4:18 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 43 of 46 (576803)
08-25-2010 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Huntard
08-25-2010 4:06 PM


I don't know about that test, for 100 dollars, I'd denounce anything, certainly for this kind of test. Like that really means anything.
It means that you are not a loyal person.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 4:06 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 5:10 PM Taq has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 44 of 46 (576805)
08-25-2010 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Taq
08-25-2010 4:56 PM


Taq writes:
It means that you are not a loyal person.
Or that I know that loyalty is shown through actions, not by saying a sentence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Taq, posted 08-25-2010 4:56 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Tram law, posted 08-25-2010 6:05 PM Huntard has replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4704 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 45 of 46 (576810)
08-25-2010 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Huntard
08-25-2010 5:10 PM


So it is only actions that define a person?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 5:10 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Huntard, posted 08-25-2010 6:09 PM Tram law has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024