(January 16, 2017 at 4:40 pm)Khemikal Wrote:Great news! Please produce(January 16, 2017 at 9:15 am)bennyboy Wrote: There are no metaphysical theories that pass even elemental tests of evidence.Sure there are.
Quote:Quote:And if you think you know the truth, it's because you are mistaking a reflection of your own nature as an insight into whatever's behind the mirror.Meh, we work with what we've got. If there's something behind the mirror, hidden from us, then there's something behind the mirror...hidden from us.
I'd like to outline a thought experiment, and you can tell me how you would classify some of the statements, if you don't mind.
I'd look to a worm, and say, "That worm cannot know some things because of its limitations." I can see what it cannot because I don't have those limitations. I can kind of understand what a bat is doing because of a basic understanding of sonar, but I cannot know what it's LIKE to be a bat using sonar; this is due to my limitations.
So I'd take this and extend it into the unknown-- I'd say there must be some things which can be experienced, but not by me, since I do not believe I am a maximally complete organism. Those things are not so much metaphysical as inscrutable.
But what if Bob walks into the room and says, "Show me the evidence"? Would you categorize my understandings of worms and bats as evidence for my proposition? What if I start talking about all possible beings and their capacities to experience? Would you say that there must be infinite ways in which an organism could experience truth which we cannot?
