Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: 18th November 2017, 02:34

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(11th January 2017, 18:40)Stimbo Wrote:
(11th January 2017, 01:12)Rhythm Wrote: There is no pickle, and there is no spoon...nor..is there a statue around the corner.

In the context of the video game example, there's no corner either. Making the question of whether there is a statue around it equally meaningless.

And yet there I am running around the corner, and looking at the statue. What more evidence would I need? That it's really, really real?
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
No you're not, you're sitting in your chair playing a video game, surely you shouldn't need anyone else to inform you of that basic fact?  Is this honestly what passes for philosophy, or an exploration of deeply meaningful metaphysical this or thats, to you?

I'm guessing that there's a better way to express whatever it is you're trying to talk about, and perhaps, rather than cling to a defense of this, you should be looking for that?
Eat em up beat em up then switch sides.


Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
You're no more running around a computer-generated landscape looking at computer-generated objects than you are injured by computer-generated bullets. I have personally flown to a simulated Moon in a simulated spacecraft that, no matter how sophisticated the graphics and the application of real-world physical laws, still gets me no nearer to being an astronaut than does dreaming.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist.  This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair.  Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second.  That means there's a situation vacant.'
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(11th January 2017, 21:23)Rhythm Wrote: No you're not, you're sitting in your chair playing a video game, surely you shouldn't need anyone else to inform you of that basic fact?  Is this honestly what passes for philosophy, or an exploration of deeply meaningful metaphysical this or thats, to you?

Facepalm memes incoming, amirite?  I feel it in the tone.

IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GAME, I'm not sitting in the chair.  That's because the game has its own rules and representations, and I buy (for the moment) into that context.  And before you continue to mock me, you are doing just the same.  Unless you are constantly thinking "I'm a cloud of ambiguous wave functions in a virtual space," you are experiencing a representation of something that may or may not even be there, and whatever it is, you don't know what it is any more than I do.  And even if you ARE thinking that, you're not able to fully comprehend it anyway, because nobody can.

You can hit yourself on the head and say, "Rock feel hard, rock must be reality" but no matter how convincing that feels to you, it's not the rational conclusion that you seem to think it is.

(11th January 2017, 21:29)Stimbo Wrote: You're no more running around a computer-generated landscape looking at computer-generated objects than you are injured by computer-generated bullets. I have personally flown to a simulated Moon in a simulated spacecraft that, no matter how sophisticated the graphics and the application of real-world physical laws, still gets me no nearer to being an astronaut than does dreaming.

What's this "real-world physical laws" you are talking about?  Have you established the world really to be as you see it?  I don't think so, and I'd really like to see you try to do so.
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(11th January 2017, 21:34)bennyboy Wrote: IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GAME, I'm not sitting in the chair.  
Haven't we already been down the context road?  You're sitting in the chair, even in the context of you playing a video game.  Your avatar might be "doing something" on the board, a few feet in front of you, but you didn't ask me about your avatar.  Not that you've managed to describe that accurately either, which is why I don't think that we're even going to approach anything resembling a cogent thought from this angle.  

Quote:That's because the game has its own rules and representations, and I buy (for the moment) into that context.
Games actually don't have their own rules, again you're equivocating.  There are no special rules that make a video game function.  They're a novel application of all the same rules. 

Quote:And before you continue to mock me, you are doing just the same.  Unless you are constantly thinking "I'm a cloud of ambiguous wave functions in a virtual space," you are experiencing a representation of something that may or may not even be there, and whatever it is, you don't know what it is any more than I do.  And even if you ARE thinking that, you're not able to fully comprehend it anyway, because nobody can.
How might you manage to form some statement about whatever that is that can pass the criteria of the system to which you are appealing if that's the case, if it's somehow incomprehensible?  This isn't much of an objection to my thoughts on the matter, I'm comfortable with the possibility that this is the case, that doesn't change the status of your comments to that effect.  They're still failing to satisfy basic conditions of a true statement.  
Quote:You can hit yourself on the head and say, "Rock feel hard, rock must be reality" but no matter how convincing that feels to you, it's not the rational conclusion that you seem to think it is.
I personally doubt that our perception is arrived at rationally, which is why, again, I don't use the same terms for experience, evidence, and truth.........?  Nevertheless, it does seem to be the case that the contents of our experience can be rationally assessed in order to arrive at truth.  That's kind of the point of logic, of philosphy, in the first place.
Eat em up beat em up then switch sides.


Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(11th January 2017, 21:34)bennyboy Wrote:
(11th January 2017, 21:29)Stimbo Wrote: You're no more running around a computer-generated landscape looking at computer-generated objects than you are injured by computer-generated bullets. I have personally flown to a simulated Moon in a simulated spacecraft that, no matter how sophisticated the graphics and the application of real-world physical laws, still gets me no nearer to being an astronaut than does dreaming.

What's this "real-world physical laws" you are talking about?  Have you established the world really to be as you see it?  I don't think so, and I'd really like to see you try to do so.

Little things like gravity, ballistics, orbital mechanics, aerodynamics, friction, and other likewise known and repeatable minutiae. Stuff that, so far at least, have demonstrated such reliability that you can trust your life to them, would certainly notice if they suddenly stopped working, and can be modelled mathematically with exquisite precision.

You know, the things that make up your video games.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist.  This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair.  Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second.  That means there's a situation vacant.'
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(11th January 2017, 22:42)Stimbo Wrote: Little things like gravity, ballistics, orbital mechanics, aerodynamics, friction, and other likewise known and repeatable minutiae. Stuff that, so far at least, have demonstrated such reliability that you can trust your life to them, would certainly notice if they suddenly stopped working, and can be modelled mathematically with exquisite precision.

You know, the things that make up your video games.

None of the things you mentioned are dependent on a particular metaphysical reality, so far as you can demonstrate. All you know is that you experience things a certain way, and that you can draw certain patterns.

(11th January 2017, 21:57)Rhythm Wrote: Games actually don't have their own rules, again you're equivocating.  There are no special rules that make a video game function.  They're a novel application of all the same rules. 
Sure there are. Games implement physics and character interactions in all kinds of different ways, some of which are not represented in any other context.


Quote:I personally doubt that our perception is arrived at rationally, which is why, again, I don't use the same terms for experience, evidence, and truth.........?  Nevertheless, it does seem to be the case that the contents of our experience can be rationally assessed in order to arrive at truth.  That's kind of the point of logic, of philosphy, in the first place.
Let's say you've arrived at a truth-- say the truth of classical physics. Then you arrive at a truth-- the truth of general relativity. Then you arrive at a truth-- the truth of quantum mechanics. In what way do you feel you've arrived at big-T truth? Because remember, you are pushing that evidence is evidence and truth is truth, and that neither is dependent on context.
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(11th January 2017, 23:51)bennyboy Wrote:
(11th January 2017, 21:57)Rhythm Wrote: Games actually don't have their own rules, again you're equivocating.  There are no special rules that make a video game function.  They're a novel application of all the same rules. 
Sure there are.  Games implement physics and character interactions in all kinds of different ways, some of which are not represented in any other context.
No, they don't, that's industry jargon for their game engines, not a description of a seperate physics.  A "physics engine" has nothing to do with novel physics.....it;s the same physics at play making their engine work in the first place.  FFS........

Quote:Let's say you've arrived at a truth-- say the truth of classical physics.  Then you arrive at a truth-- the truth of general relativity.  Then you arrive at a truth-- the truth of quantum mechanics.  In what way do you feel you've arrived at big-T truth?  Because remember, you are pushing that evidence is evidence and truth is truth, and that neither is dependent on context.
I don't think that any of those things are truths, they're explanations.  Each is the conclusion of an inductive argument, they are potentially, but not necessarily, true.  Again, I think that you're making a huge mistake at the very bottom of this whole process.  

Just to reiterate a simple explanation for why I don't use those terms interchangeably.  A person may see a ghost, that doesn't make the ghost evident, nor does it mean that there really is a ghost.  Experience, evidence, truth.

The context bit is your baby, not mine, there's no sense in trying to saddle me with the consequences of your own poor word usage and equivocations. I don't and wouldn't use any of those terms in the manner that you've used them.
Eat em up beat em up then switch sides.


Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
(12th January 2017, 00:11)Rhythm Wrote: I don't think that any of those things are truths, they're explanations.  Each is the conclusion of an inductive argument, they are potentially, but not necessarily, true.  Again, I think that you're making a huge mistake at the very bottom of this whole process.  
So say something you think is true, then, and we'll examine it.

Quote:Just to reiterate a simple explanation for why I don't use those terms interchangeably.  A person may see a ghost, that doesn't make the ghost evident, nor does it mean that there really is a ghost.  Experience, evidence, truth.
You use the word "really" like it means something to you. I'm guessing it means that it conforms to your hunches about which of your experiences represet reality.

Quote:The context bit is your baby, not mine, there's no sense in trying to saddle me with the consequences of your own poor word usage and equivocations.   I don't and wouldn't use any of those terms in the manner that you've used them.
It's not surprising that a materialist doesn't get the point of establishing context-- it is your position that there's only one context, making the word pretty much irrelevant to you. But if you're such a fan of evidence, then demonstrate, using evidence, that your metaphysical position really does represent truth.
Reply
RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
It has been my experience that clams always do demand evidence. I pointed out to a clam one time that the heat death of the universe is an inescapable event due to entropy. The clam wiggled out of the sand, shouted 'Prove it!' and and hit me with his copy of 'Creative and Critical Thinking For Dummies'.

Fucking clams.

Boru
'There are people who long for immortality in the afterlife who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon.' - Isaac Asimov
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Testimony is Evidence RoadRunner79 588 11021 13th September 2017, 20:17
Last Post: Astonished
Video Do we live in a universe where theism is likely true? (video) Jörmungandr 36 1538 28th May 2017, 01:53
Last Post: bennyboy
  Is it true that there is no absolute morality? WisdomOfTheTrees 260 5049 23rd March 2017, 18:12
Last Post: Hammy
  Anecdotal Evidence RoadRunner79 395 12241 14th December 2016, 14:53
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  What philosophical evidence is there against believing in non-physical entities? joseph_ 150 5368 3rd September 2016, 11:26
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  Afterlife, I'd be happy if it were true..... maestroanth 35 2177 12th June 2016, 03:13
Last Post: Little lunch
  The nature of evidence Wryetui 150 6227 6th May 2016, 06:21
Last Post: ignoramus
  Witness Evidence RoadRunner79 248 18946 17th December 2015, 19:23
Last Post: bennyboy
  Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence RoadRunner79 184 12549 13th November 2015, 12:17
Last Post: Khemikal
  Does a "True Self" Exist? Salacious B. Crumb 68 8121 17th July 2015, 06:11
Last Post: chasbanner



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)