RE: Street Epistemology - Practice
November 27, 2017 at 10:30 pm
(This post was last modified: November 27, 2017 at 10:31 pm by curiosne.)
(November 27, 2017 at 10:03 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(November 27, 2017 at 7:55 pm)curiosne Wrote: To answer your questions on this:
1) Would the "evidential" bar not be raised the more out of the ordinary a claim is? Assessing what is ordinary and what is not though is subjective.
2) No, only if the cases are similar. When a case becomes more out of the ordinary (eg a Zebra is not ordinary), then heresay is not sufficient evidence. Would you agree with this?
3) You stop when you are subjectively satisfied that there is sufficient evidence for you to verify the claim in question. However, I personally don't stop here as my logic could be impaired so I usually go and ask others whether I am thinking right on analysing the evidence of the claim (obviously this claim should be incredulous for me to ask for someone else's opinion).
1.) Why
2.) No... and the question is still why wouldn't the conclusion still follow? Let's say that the only thing different is frequency (extraordinary). Why and how does this change things?
3.) Would you say then that your epistemology is largely based on feelings, and the opinion of the crowd? I don't condemn looking to other's for vindiation. However I do think that is only valid, if they give you reasons. If it's just that they subjectively agree, I don't think we have gotten very far down the road.
1) The exact same reason that you would justify how sufficient evidence needs to be for the nature of the claim. I still do not understand your train of thought. Obviously you also have a spectrum of how much evidence you need (from low epistemic burden to high) for the evidence to be sufficient to justify a particular claim. How do you determine when there is an epistemic burden and also how much evidence you would deem sufficient?
2) Same reason that you gave me when I claimed that I had $10...ie there is no epistemic burden on the $10 claim. So I would not look further into Abbondon_ire's dog claim. But would you not agree that there is an epistemic burden on Abbondon_ire when he claims to have a Zebra?
3) No. I assess other people's opinions for logical sense and to compare whether my reasoning is sound. My feelings aren't considered for any conclusions that I reach for any claims that I consider. When I ask other's opinions, I look for points of disagreements to my view to see whether they are valid point or not.