The fallibility of the human sensorium is precisely why I argue against the possibility of knowledge.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

You also argue against believing anything, and yet you share your beliefs and disbeliefs on here every day. Howso? If there is no knowledge and no belief, then there is no grounds to even communicate.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

depends on what you mean by belief. I can think something without believing it. I don't like absolutes. So when I say I don't "believe" something I mean only that I don't hold ideas unshakably. I am always open to the possibility that I am mistaken. Of course I can/do use the word "belief" in a looser sense. I believe I will have ham sandwich for lunch, but I try not to use it in the stricter sense of unshakable belief. I try to be open to the possibility that everything I think I know is wrong.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

So doesn't that take away from your ability to argue or debate anything? You believe in science don't you? That is quite stronger than having a sandwich. You have argued to me that gravity is absolute - haven't you?

by Anonymous 10 years ago

I might have. And I am pretty sure i was wrong. I do not believe I was right about gravity, and would be happy to argue that it doesn't exist if you like. Can't imagine anything taking away my ability to argue, I enjoy it too much.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

LOL..........I am not trying to pick or start a fight. But none of us can argue or debate without some reference point of absolutism. I may start with God or the Bible, while you may start with the Earth or a Big Bang. Either way, we have a constant of some kind that we "believe" in and are living by. You surely taught your kids that there were absolutes of some kind. Yes?

by Anonymous 10 years ago

If I did it was unintentional, but I probably did. I remember stating three things to them on several occasions: 1) The only thing certain is change, 2) the only thing I know for sure is that I don't know much, and 3) it is a poor mind that can think of only one way to spell a word.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Okie dokie then. I am just poking around a little bit tonight. Check out my new post. Would love your thoughts and advice. Working all night tonight, so here till 8 a.m.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

going to sign off in a minute or two. Have a good night.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

You should look into the Theory of Knowledge unit of the International Baccalaureate. It deals with exactly this point.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Sensory stimulation is believing. I've seen and heard that magicians use illusions so I'm not tricked into thinking they're magic. I just know that I don't know how they did the trick.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

agreed

by Anonymous 10 years ago

The point was and is - they can still do something that we are not seeing. They make us believe that we are either seeing something we really are not OR are not seeing something that we should or could be. Either way, they make us believe the trick and we can't figure it out. So there clearly are some things that can NOT be seen that we still believe. That was what I was driving at.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

The magician surely perceives what he's doing and how he does it. I personally like to search for answers, not settle with ignorance.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

the vast majority of people know that what magicians are doing is just illusion and sleight of hand. We just don't know exactly how they're doing it (or maybe we do and we're just really impressed they do it so well). It's not like people think that these people are really magical. What I'm seeing is a person doing a really impressive trick, and I believe it's pretty cool.

by Anonymous 10 years ago