This is a little experiment to see what happens and to also test the way I understand the definition of 'knowledge' and 'know'.

I know that there are no gods. I expect someone to take me up on this claim.

(March 3, 2011 at 7:24 am)DoubtVsFaith Wrote: This is a little experiment to see what happens and to also test the way I understand the definition of 'knowledge' and 'know'.

I know that there are no gods. I expect someone to take me up on this claim.

Prove it then.....

Firstly, Define KNOWLEDGE.

(March 3, 2011 at 7:33 am)Zen Badger Wrote: Prove it then.....

I can't prove it I can only offer an argument as to why God(s) is improbable: Because he is complex, lacking in evidence and is far enough from our experience for us to consider him improbable without such evidence.

(March 3, 2011 at 7:40 am)theVOID Wrote: Firstly, Define KNOWLEDGE.

Awareness. Hence why when someone says "I am aware of that" they mean "I know that". So, I consider self-awareness to be identical to self-knowledge too.

Awareness and Knowledge are different words that mean different things.

Someone can be aware of something behind their back without having knowledge of that thing.

Also, how do you propose someone differentiates between assumed awareness (say, of the existence of a deity) and actual awareness (say, of a person in the room)? At the moment your're saying "If I am aware of I know" without describing how awareness comes to be counted as knowledge and how you know your awareness is accurate.

Also, if you say that you "can only offer an argument as to why God(s) is improbable" then you do not KNOW that there is no god - Keep in mind, using terms colloquially in philosophy only causes problems.

To be honest it's probably better if you rethink your definition of knowledge anyway.

(March 3, 2011 at 8:43 am)theVOID Wrote: Awareness and Knowledge are different words that mean different things.

If I am aware of the existence of X, I know of the existence of X. What's the difference?

Quote:Someone can be aware of something behind their back without having knowledge of that thing.

You're comparing two different things there.

That someone in the example, is aware that there is something behind their back, and knows that there is something behind their back, but they neither know nor are aware of exactly what that something is.

Quote:Also, how do you propose someone differentiates between assumed awareness (say, of the existence of a deity) and actual awareness (say, of a person in the room)?

Assumed awareness? What exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean: "How do you differentiate between the awareness of something real and the awareness of something illusory"? Or do you mean "How do you differentiate between someone actually being aware or knowing and them merely claiming that they are aware or know?"?

Quote: At the moment your're saying "If I am aware of I know" without describing how awareness comes to be counted as knowledge and how you know your awareness is accurate.

If I know something I must have awareness of that something otherwise how can I know? And also, it makes sense to equate the two because, as I said, when someone says "I am aware of that" what does that sentence mean? It means: "I know that". The two statements "I know that" and "I am aware of that" can be meaningfully equated.

Quote:Also, if you say that you "can only offer an argument as to why God(s) is improbable" then you do not KNOW that there is no god - Keep in mind, using terms colloquially in philosophy only causes problems.

I claim that I know that there is no God. I also treat awareness to be the same as knowledge. So what I am claiming is that I am aware that there is no God. In other words, all the things that I am aware of is not God. I might be wrong, maybe everything around me is God because maybe God exists and is in all things.

Quote:To be honest it's probably better if you rethink your definition of knowledge anyway.

It seems fine to me. When I say "I know that" I mean "I am aware of that" and vice-versa.

(March 3, 2011 at 7:24 am)DoubtVsFaith Wrote: I know that there are no gods.

How can you "know" that?

I wouldn't make that statement because I don't KNOW that there are no gods. I don't believe there are, but I don't KNOW.

Prove how you KNOW that there are no gods.

Know = To regard as true beyond doubt

I don't know how I know. Maybe I don't know.

(March 3, 2011 at 8:56 am)DoubtVsFaith Wrote: I don't know how I know. Maybe I don't know.

Time to take from Socrates here: I don't claim to know anything.

If you are defining knowledge as awareness, than how can you 'know' that that are no gods? To know that there are no gods would be to be aware of something which is non-existance...and if you are aware of it, it would stand to reason that it does exist. Of course, you could answer that you are aware of the universe's apparent lack of gods, but to do so would be to claim awareness outside of yourself, something we might all agree that you cannot claim to have without proper proof outside of your own testament.