RE: Is evidentialism a dead philosophy?
April 21, 2014 at 9:31 am
(This post was last modified: April 21, 2014 at 10:20 am by MindForgedManacle.)
(April 21, 2014 at 1:52 am)Freedom of thought Wrote:(April 18, 2014 at 10:38 am)rasetsu Wrote: Evidence, not proof. The introduction of the concept of philosophical zombies shifts the burden of proof to those who suggest there can be such a thing. Failing that, we fall back on uniformitarianism which is generally assumed.
I understand what you are saying, but assuming there can be no such thing as a philosophical zombie is slightly naive. I can easily imagine such a world where only one real mind exists, and the rest are just figments of the existing mind's imagination, it's certainly a possibility. I don't think I live in such a world though. Introducing philosophical zombies into the discussion is usually by theists who are trying to demonstrate that we don't have actual evidence of other minds, yet we still believe they exist.
Actually, according to the 2010 PhilPapers survey, most philosophers reject the notion of philosophical zombies being metaphysically possible.
Further, you've missed Rasetsu's point about evidence. Consistently similar behavior to oneself is evidence that other entities are the same sort of thing as oneself. Sure, it's not a proof, but then again it's not supposed to be. Philosophers tend to relegate things like philosophical zombies and solipsism as sometimes interesting epistemological discussions, but metaphysically absurd and too speculative and ad hoc.
"The reason things will never get better is because people keep electing these rich cocksuckers who don't give a shit about you."
-George Carlin
-George Carlin