(April 7, 2018 at 4:57 pm)Khemikal Wrote:(April 7, 2018 at 4:46 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: Khem is too gnostic. Granted... he's gnostic about the plausible things, which speaks to his benefit, but he's suspicious about a mind that's open to all possibilities (ie critical of agnosticism). That's too anti-Socratic for my tastes, and I challenge him on it when it pops up.
-it's true, I'm not so open minded that my brain falls out...and yet I'm still sitting here without ghost pictures of my dead nana. Is that just..offhand, too ridiculous to take seriously or something?
Claiming you don't know doesn't mean that you believe in "dead nana visitation." It means YOU DON'T KNOW. You conflate agnosticism with acceptance of implausible truths. That is neither fair nor accurate. "I don't know" means "I don't know." Before you fault me for my tautology, let me put things in perspective.
I don't know what's in my neighbor's closet.
YOUR RESPONSE: You are pretty much allowing that a unicorn might be in your neighbor's closet.
No, I'm not. I'm admitting a gap in my knowledge. When you ask me if a unicorn is in my neighbor's closet, the most direct, honest, and appropriate answer is, "I don't know." Where you err, Khem, is thinking that somehow constitutes belief in unicorns. It does not. I do not believe in unicorns. Why? The same reason I don't believe in gods-- no evidence.
Ask me if there is a unicorn on the dark side of the moon. I'll tell you "I don't know." You could either say:
1) Ha! This motherfucker secretly believes in unicorns!
or you could say
2) This motherfucker only claims knowledge that he actually has.
Think about #2... that's all I'm sayin'.
