Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 8:24 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(January 12, 2017 at 11:02 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Microscopes wont change the tabletop, it's not a power that they possess.  Just because the qualities you refer to as smooth and flat turn out to be something other than what you thought they were...doesn't make those qualities go poof in a puff of bad logic.
That's quite the strawman you're putting up, there. I've repeatedly said that you're not changing the things themselves, but that truth statements about them are dependent on context. The fact is that my desk is flat as I look at it and interact with it, and is very far from flat under a microscope. You can waffle around all you want, but if you don't see what I've just said as apparent, there's not much more to talk about.

Quote:Hey, here's a q for you that might actually take us somewhere.  Are you trying to draw a line from epistemic contextualism, to something?  That would give us a shortcut passed whatever communicative difficulties we're having.
I think my point is clear enough-- if truth is dependent on context, then evidence must be gathered in the context in which you want to establish truths. If my wife wants to know if there's really an apple on my desk, then she can walk into my room and see.

If she wants to know if reality consists of a material monism and nothing else, then hitting things with a rock, no matter how convincing, will not provide the kind of evidence she needs-- as metaphysics and physics are different contexts.
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(January 13, 2017 at 12:21 am)bennyboy Wrote: That's quite the strawman you're putting up, there.  I've repeatedly said that you're not changing the things themselves, but that truth statements about them are dependent on context.
The trouble, is that you've failed to present an example of that that isn't an equivocation.

Quote:The fact is that my desk is flat as I look at it and interact with it, and is very far from flat under a microscope.  You can waffle around all you want, but if you don't see what I've just said as apparent, there's not much more to talk about.
You're trying to use the same terms to ask two entirely disparate questions.  That's not a truth dependent on context, it;s just invalid argumentation.  Again, and as always, it's not yes and no to the same question, it's yes or no to different questions.   I want you to understand here, that I'm comfortable with paradox, paradox does exist, questions whose answer is simultaneously yes and no, claims which are simultaneously true and false, or at least seem to be so.  The video game example..not one of those.  The photon example, not one of those.  The table, not one of those.  

Quote:I think my point is clear enough-- if truth is dependent on context, then evidence must be gathered in the context in which you want to establish truths.
Meh, I had to ask, because when you say something like this, it sounds -exactly- like epistemic contextualism, but your examples don't line up with epistemic contextualism.  

Quote:If my wife wants to know if there's really an apple on my desk, then she can walk into my room and see.
Sure.

Quote:If she wants to know if reality consists of a material monism and nothing else, then hitting things with a rock, no matter how convincing, will not provide the kind of evidence she needs-- as metaphysics and physics are different contexts.
Does that somehow remove the requirement of evidence in determining whether or not a claim is sound...a requirement for any pursuant conclusion to be considered true? See, I'm not really concerned with whether or not reality is made of material this and that's and nothing else. It may be that something, somewhere, is made of something other than material this or thats. Before I entertain the idea as anything other than an idle what if, im going to need to see some evidence for the proposition, to determine whether or not it might be sound, so that we can then apply a valid argument...and arrive at what might be truth. The rules of the system don't change, regardless of whether or not we exist in a material monism...and the bar doesn't get lowered on account of the possibility that we don't.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(January 13, 2017 at 1:06 am)Rhythm Wrote: Does that somehow remove the requirement of evidence in determining whether or not a claim is sound...a requirement for any pursuant conclusion to be considered true?  

No, but metaphysical claims would require metaphysical evidence, and I don't believe that you would call it "evidence" at all. It may be that somebody in history has managed to achieve a spiritual state, or to otherwise discover some truth about the nature of existence that cannot be revealed through sensory observations: through insight meditation, perhaps.

We can take as a pretty simple example metaphysical claims that reality is materially monist. These are claims about the underpinnings or framework of reality, but we are trying to use evidence which is a subset of that reality. We cannot make any logical conclusion based on the nature of our "evidence"-- because the contexts don't match. We can't build a bridge from the subset to the whole.

But you've missed the boat in not realizing that I'd end up at subjectivism. Let's say I claim that a particular sunset I saw was the most beautiful thing I'd ever seen. If you demanded evidence, then how would I produce it? Would you reject my claim out of hand? I doubt it. I think that even you understand that subjective experiences are in a context for which people cannot provide evidence. Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you'll start babbling about fMRIs and such.
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
So, metaphysical evidence is a lowered bar?  Why would I be interested...and were still talking about evidence, aren't we?  We're still acknowledging the evidentiary requirement.  Insight meditiation isn't logic, you're equivocating on truth, now. They may discover something accurate, but we're talking about truth. Cant be revealed through sensory observations? What kind of observation did they make, a non-sensory observation? We don;t have that ability, so far as we know. All of our observations are sensory. Even the ones we imagine are fucking sensory, lol.....? The most potent sensory organ you possess is between your ears.

I wouldn't require any evidence for that, personally.  You say it was the most beautiful sunset you've ever seen, it was the most beautiful sunset you'e ever seen.  Nevertheless, a persons inability to produce evidence of a subjective experience (and.....we don't actually have any such inability - nor is any fancy equipment required) is their own problem - and you;re not actually discussing your ability to produce evidence of your subjective experience in that example, you're musing on your ability to prove it was "the most beautiful sunset you've ever seen".  Establishing that you had a subjective experience of a sunset should be trivially easy. I can accept that they're expressing their opinion, but if they want to turn that into a claim that they contend is logically true.....well, they're gonna have to pony up some evidence so that I can assess the soundness of the proposition...and they're going to have to pony up a valid argument....or else they'll just have to be content with me accepting their opinion, as their opinion, not some grand and logical truth.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(January 13, 2017 at 3:51 am)Rhythm Wrote: I wouldn't require any evidence for that claim.  You say it was the most beautiful sunset you've ever seen, it was the most beautiful sunset you'e ever seen.  Nevertheless, a persons inability to produce evidence of a subjective experience (and.....we don't actually have any such inability)
We totally do have that problem, actually.

Quote: is their own problem.  I can accept that they're expressing their opinion, but if they want to turn that into a claim that they contend is logically true.....well, they're gonna have to pony up some evidence so that I can assess the soundness of the proposition...and they're going to have to pony up a valid argument....or else they'll just have to be content with me accepting their opinion, as their opinion.

Those goalposts seem to be moving along nicely.  We were talking about all claims demanding evidence, and now we've gone to that claim which "they contend is logically true."
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(January 13, 2017 at 3:55 am)bennyboy Wrote:
(January 13, 2017 at 3:51 am)Rhythm Wrote: I wouldn't require any evidence for that claim.  You say it was the most beautiful sunset you've ever seen, it was the most beautiful sunset you'e ever seen.  Nevertheless, a persons inability to produce evidence of a subjective experience (and.....we don't actually have any such inability)
We totally do have that problem, actually.
You might, I don't.  

Quote:Those goalposts seem to be moving along nicely.  We were talking about all claims demanding evidence, and now we've gone to that claim which "they contend is logically true."

Are we or are we not talking about logic, reason?  Claims contended to be true? You;re making an awfully big ruckus about logic and reason and philosphy, about metaphysical claims, if that;s not what we're talking about. I'm getting exceedingly specific in response to your increasingly desperate equivocations. If you and I arent using the term truth in the same way, and consistently so...speak up. I;ve been blatantly and belligerently obvious about what I mean when I say truth, I;ve explained it multiple times.... goalposts...moving, from where? Get your shit together.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(January 13, 2017 at 4:05 am)Rhythm Wrote:
(January 13, 2017 at 3:55 am)bennyboy Wrote: We totally do have that problem, actually.
You might, I don't.  
That's only because you define terms in ways that quite blatantly beg the question.
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
If you say so.

Any insight on the other bit though?  Are we talking about the same thing when we talk about truth, or are you objecting to things I say about truth by reference to some other meaning of the word? Is discussing truth as I've consistently defined and used the term different, somehow, from discussing an insight meditation truth, or any other truth, as you're using the term?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(January 13, 2017 at 3:01 pm)Rhythm Wrote: If you say so.

Any insight on the other bit though?  Are we talking about the same thing when we talk about truth, or are you objecting to things I say about truth by reference to some other meaning of the word?  Is discussing truth as I've consistently defined and used the term different, somehow, from discussing an insight meditation truth, or any other truth, as you're using the term?

I'd say truth in belief can simply be defined as having your belief match an objective property.  I suppose the problem is that words themselves can be defined variously, often without a speaker knowing or thinking about it.

For example, take the idea of table flatness.  Obviously, we have an idea of geometric flatness that is impossible-- we are tolerant to a degree about how close something needs to match that term to be called flat.  You could say that if the outermost atoms of an object deviate from a virtually perfect plane no more than x%, people will generally call it flat, and so on.  Or you could be hardass and say that nothing is flat at all.

As for spiritual insight-- I can't answer, because I don't have access to that intellectual context.  I don't know what sensations or ideas might represent truth to them but not to me.  But I've read that there are such states, and that they are common enough among experts to be classified and named.
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
Right, then, responding to some statement I make about truth with an objection about "truth" in some other sense or meaning is........ what....? Whats the term for using a single term...with two or more meanings.....as we attempt to have a rational discussion, by shifting between those meanings or not explicitly describing, somehow, that we're not speaking of the same thing? You objecting to "truth" is no objection to truth. It's an equivocation.

-and just to head you off...it doesn't matter...-it doesn't matter- which one of us is using the "right" truth, or if either of us are, or if "tuth is dependant on context"...it will still be what it is, it will still be an equivocation, and so no possible basis for us to determine anything about what were discussing...rationally. You have fucking, torpedoed, us, my friend.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Greek philosophers always knew about the causeless universe Interaktive 10 1265 September 25, 2022 at 2:28 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  Why is murder wrong if Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is true? FlatAssembler 52 3739 August 7, 2022 at 8:51 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  How To Tell What Is True From What Is Untrue. redpill 39 3474 December 28, 2019 at 4:45 pm
Last Post: Sal
  Is this Quite by Kenneth Boulding True Rhondazvous 11 1479 August 6, 2019 at 11:55 am
Last Post: Alan V
Video Neurosurgeon Provides Evidence Against Materialism Guard of Guardians 41 4177 June 17, 2019 at 10:40 pm
Last Post: vulcanlogician
  The Philosophy of Mind: Zombies, "radical emergence" and evidence of non-experiential Edwardo Piet 82 11544 April 29, 2018 at 1:57 am
Last Post: bennyboy
  Testimony is Evidence RoadRunner79 588 115138 September 13, 2017 at 8:17 pm
Last Post: Astonished
Video Do we live in a universe where theism is likely true? (video) Angrboda 36 11287 May 28, 2017 at 1:53 am
Last Post: bennyboy
  Is it true that there is no absolute morality? WisdomOfTheTrees 259 24372 March 23, 2017 at 6:12 pm
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Anecdotal Evidence RoadRunner79 395 50591 December 14, 2016 at 2:53 pm
Last Post: downbeatplumb



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)