The Insult EvidenceVsFaith Thread

[Edwardo Piet]

Knowledge is necessarily subjective.

Prove that then.

Can a rock know something? Does an electron have knowledge?

I don't know. But I'd say at least almost certainly, no.

*IF* they did, then you might have an argument for knowledge being objective.

I'm not making an argument for knowledge being objective. I'm asking how you know knowledge is necessarily subjective? Can you prove it? I don't see how you can even if we assume you're right!

However, they do not

Still, how do you know?

(and there is no reason to suppose they do, or do you have one?)

I'll go with that in the sense that: I agree with you. But I'm still asking: How do you know?

, therefore knowledge cannot be absolute

How does that follow? I don't see how it does. Sounds fallacious to me.

You can't think of a good reason to suppose that a rock/electron can have knowledge "therefore knowledge can't be absolute" - doesn't follow as far as I can see. Please to prove me wrong if you can (I'm not sure how you even can, I consider these matters only really provable if they're tautological).

(I am assuming you mean "objectively exists"?).

All I'm doing is asking how you know knowledge is necessarily subjective. That's why I'm asking "How do you know?". I'm not making a claim there.

Of course... even *IF* they did have knowledge... all you would have done is established the possibility of "inter-subjective" knowledge.

I'm not trying to prove anything here though. You claim that subjective knowledge is necessarily subjective - so I'm pretty sure the burden of proof is on you. I am asking, as I am pretty sure I have said: "How do you know?".

Good question. I know because I have faith

Sounds like almost theopposite of knowing to me. For faith is belief that lacks evidence... and the presence of evidence is the closest we can get to knowing objectively I reckon.... the absence or lack of evidence is the opposite. So in the only truly real practical sense of knowing (apart from tautologies): Evidence is as close as we can get, faith is the opposite. Faith is belief with an evidence deficit, not rational - and I personally don't favour irrational over rational.

I call whatever is thinking "you",

I prefer to call me, "me". And the part of me that is thinking I prefer to call "the part of me that is thinking". If I call the part of me that is thinking "me" then what do I call the rest of myself? And if I call both "me" then that's kind of confusing and I'd prefer to be a little more pedantic really.

wether that be a human brain or some flea in an alternate universe.

But my point is... how do you know that I am the only one who thinks it? Substantiate that claim. I don't claim to not be the only one, I just think that it is more probable that I am not the only one who thinks 13.7 billion years is longer than a week, and I take this belief from my experience in life so far and my understanding of numbers and time.

You however claim that I'm the only one who thinks this, and, as I said, I am just asking (as I am asking my other "How do you know?" questions above (in response to your claims)): How do you know?

As I know anything. I know 1 + 1 = 2.

That's a tautology it's true by definition. That's different to non-tautological things.

How is that any more or less knowable than myself?

Because the 'self' is a philosophical problem and I am yet to read you providing a tautological proof that you know yourself. If you think you know your self that doesn't prove it unless you define it so that's true by definition (a tautology).

I feel like I am constantly saying that "Knowing dictates not truth".

Hmm... - could you elaborate on this perhaps? I'm quite interested.

Maybe I should sig it.

Maybe you should. I don't know. But I think I'd certainly like to read you elaborating on it or an aspect of it at least a tad somewhat.

Didn't have to. You implied it, wether intentionally or not.

Where exactly did I imply it?

Yes, you do think.

How do you know?

Surely there is no need to repeat it 3 times?

Well, I was merely trying to convey that not only do I believe I don't know things but I also don't believe I know that... or that or that or that - ad infinitum. If you know what I mean or not?

EvF