(January 18, 2017 at 5:41 pm)Asmodee Wrote: A justified belief is in no way necessarily true.
Correct. For certain types of beliefs, the best anyone can ever say is that they are justified in believing what they do. If I think P1 is true and you believe P1 is false (or not true), then we will compare our reasons to see whose belief is more justified, i.e. is properly basic, conforms to prior knowledge, is coherent, logically follows from given axioms, etc. In my opinion, a small set of specific beliefs count as certain knowledge such as The Principle of Non-Contradiction and The Law of Identity. Scientific findings are not in this sense certain. Acceptance of one theory over another is always tentative.
(January 18, 2017 at 5:41 pm)Asmodee Wrote: Okay, so "order" essentially says "follows the laws of physics", making it meaningless. Everything follows the laws of physics…. nor is it clear exactly where you're going with this, nor what "order" has to do with the "patterns" we were originally talking about.
The reason it came up is that another member called the physical universe’s regularities meaningless patterns - Newtonian physics? apophenia. Boyle’s Law? apophenia. Ohm’s Law? apophenia. I don’t believe that for a second. Newtonian Physics is one way to model the actions of the physical universe. Another way uses Special and General Relativity. Quantum Mechanics models those actions in yet another way. What I am saying is that our passive models and descriptions reflect proscriptive principles that actively make the universe orderly.