(November 27, 2017 at 3:02 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:(November 27, 2017 at 2:44 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: No, where do you get that from?From the fact that you had no problem with my cat and no problem with my garage dragon. At no point have you yet objected to my invisible garage dragon. I can only conclude that you have none. Unless you enumerate them.
(November 27, 2017 at 2:21 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: If given sufficient evidence and reason yes. But frankly, your acting kind of shifty and squirrely right now. I'm not inclined to grant you much on the cat.Nope. I am simply pointing out that you have different criteria for given claims. I gave you two claims.
1. I have a cat.
2. I have an invisible dragon in my garage.
Do you accept both claims? One of those claims? None of those claims? Which?
Why? Or Why not? In each case, if you would be so kind.
I think that given the same facts and reasons, that a similar claim, should yield similar results. I believe that logic should be consistent and coherent.
You are the one asserting that we should move the goal for some claims. How do you justify that? How do you determine when to start and when to stop moving the goal (or do you not stop moving it)?
The subject of the OP is epistemology or the study of how we know. And as I have said before, if the reasons are the same, I think it is reasonable to come to the same conclusion. Further, I think that for various reasons, we can grant a measure of faith in which we believe in addition.
Do you think that you have given me enough reason to believe that you have a cat?
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
