Posts: 66329
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: The Question of Why
December 29, 2011 at 2:08 am
(This post was last modified: December 29, 2011 at 2:10 am by The Grand Nudger.)
(December 29, 2011 at 12:50 am)Perhaps Wrote: What category of assertion is the phrase 'we don't know'?
An honest one? It's an assertion that requires no assumption.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 281
Threads: 11
Joined: December 10, 2011
Reputation:
4
RE: The Question of Why
December 29, 2011 at 2:17 am
(December 29, 2011 at 2:08 am)Rhythm Wrote: (December 29, 2011 at 12:50 am)Perhaps Wrote: What category of assertion is the phrase 'we don't know'?
An honest one? It's an assertion that requires no assumption.
Hm 
Perhaps.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
Posts: 2254
Threads: 85
Joined: January 24, 2010
Reputation:
29
RE: The Question of Why
December 29, 2011 at 4:26 pm
(This post was last modified: December 29, 2011 at 4:27 pm by Welsh cake.)
(December 28, 2011 at 11:46 pm)Perhaps Wrote: Since you're so adamant about me responding. Because its the polite and decent thing to do, yes.
Quote:I specified in my hypothesis, which could be seen as being based off of regress argument
It isn't another form of a regress argument, IT IS the regress argument in question. You don't get to have a -cut off point- where any given proposition no longer requires a justification to prove some arbitrary point. According to the Regress Argument "I don't know, I'm just making an assumption" ALSO requires justification and 'Why?' is asked yet again. Its identified as a never-ending loop for that reason.
Quote:Inductive reasoning is assumption based. You can use any synonym you wish to replace assumption, but it still supports my hypothesis.
The Problem of induction dates back to ancient philosophy, it doesn't support or address your 'hypothesis'.
Quote:We justify our assumptions, that doesn't change the fact that they are assumptions. I'm sorry that my hypothesis is a 'childish twat', as you say.
Usage of the Regress Argument in an epistemic debate or dispute is childish.
Posts: 1473
Threads: 20
Joined: November 12, 2011
Reputation:
26
RE: The Question of Why
December 29, 2011 at 4:29 pm
You're not still entertaining that waffling fuckwit are you?
You are currently experiencing a lucky and very brief window of awareness, sandwiched in between two periods of timeless and utter nothingness. So why not make the most of it, and stop wasting your life away trying to convince other people that there is something else? The reality is obvious.
Posts: 281
Threads: 11
Joined: December 10, 2011
Reputation:
4
RE: The Question of Why
December 29, 2011 at 4:43 pm
(This post was last modified: December 29, 2011 at 4:43 pm by Perhaps.)
(December 29, 2011 at 4:26 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: Quote:I specified in my hypothesis, which could be seen as being based off of regress argument
It isn't another form of a regress argument, IT IS the regress argument in question. You don't get to have a -cut off point- where any given proposition no longer requires a justification to prove some arbitrary point. According to the Regress Argument "I don't know, I'm just making an assumption" ALSO requires justification and 'Why?' is asked yet again. Its identified as a never-ending loop for that reason.
Regress Argument - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regress_argument
Quote:is a problem in epistemology and, in general, a problem in any situation where a statement has to be justified.
Not quite my hypothesis, although my hypothesis does use this same principle. I stated that eventually the justification becomes an assumption, which would end the reach of my hypothesis and conduct the experiment. One could then apply the regress argument and get a justification for the assumption.
(December 29, 2011 at 4:26 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: Quote:Inductive reasoning is assumption based. You can use any synonym you wish to replace assumption, but it still supports my hypothesis.
The Problem of induction dates back to ancient philosophy, it doesn't support or address your 'hypothesis'.
The fact that induction is not deduction supports my hypothesis in the fact that it is an assumption by simple definition. A deductive conclusion is a fact, an inductive conclusion is an assumed fact.
(December 29, 2011 at 4:26 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: Quote:We justify our assumptions, that doesn't change the fact that they are assumptions. I'm sorry that my hypothesis is a 'childish twat', as you say.
Usage of the Regress Argument in an epistemic debate or dispute is childish.
Doesn't change my hypothesis.
(December 29, 2011 at 4:29 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: You're not still entertaining that waffling fuckwit are you?
Thanks Boo 
Brevity is the soul of wit.
Posts: 1473
Threads: 20
Joined: November 12, 2011
Reputation:
26
RE: The Question of Why
December 29, 2011 at 5:08 pm
You know I love you really.
You are currently experiencing a lucky and very brief window of awareness, sandwiched in between two periods of timeless and utter nothingness. So why not make the most of it, and stop wasting your life away trying to convince other people that there is something else? The reality is obvious.
Posts: 7
Threads: 0
Joined: December 28, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: The Question of Why
January 31, 2012 at 5:29 am
(December 20, 2011 at 5:30 am)Perhaps Wrote: Simply stated, is there any statement which can be made with no fundamental assumption being made? In other words, is there a statement that can withstand the question 'why?'?
In terms of motivation/values, questions of 'why' always boil down to emotional preferences. You want something because you feel it. All reasons for action bottom out in emotional desires. Every single conscious thought and action is motivated by emotional goals.
But in terms of beliefs/knowledge, it's hard to get to the bottom of knowledge. How do we ever know if we have a complete knowledge of something? The human brain is geared to form reliable beliefs, rather than uber-rational beliefs.
|
