(May 20, 2016 at 4:18 pm)Ignorant Wrote: Are original questions the only sort of questions welcome on this site? If so, let me know and I won't return (I am quite sure any question I [edit: would] have has been asked before).Apologies for my peevishness. The question you asked and the manner in which you asked it seemed consistent with theistic troll posts. I jumped to a conclusion.
Quote:As to your response: What you describe does not seem like empirical validation of the original proposition. Rather, it seems like empirical validation of particular truths.No, I'm talking about broad sets and meta-analysis. We have 2 sets: claimed-truths that have been empirically validated and claimed-truths that have not. If we examine the veracity of each set, we see that the preponderance of claimed-truths in the first set compare well to reality but the opposite is true of claimed-truths in the second. Consequently we can reasonably conclude that empirically validated truths are most likely to be true. Thus the proposition 'The truthfulness of all propositions must be empirically validated to count as knowledge' is empirically validated and may be considered a worthwhile axiom.
Quote:I haven't interacted with you yet on these forums. I just want to know what you think about these things. I am not presenting an argument.Pleased to meet you.
Sum ergo sum
