Re: dhw--Epistemological Framework (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, January 12, 2011, 02:31 (4873 days ago) @ xeno6696

Now for the part about life being designed. -One part of my framework that I was not clear about--final decisions on a topic should only be made when we can rest assured that we have knowledge. -The design of life--while I am open to the possibility, it has several problems that I've enumerated before and will do again. -1. You need to be able to demonstrate the difference between designed and not designed. This has a critical corollary.
1.a: You need to be able to differentiate further between a good and bad design. -You previously mentioned a television; we have people who can attest to having built them. We have plans and knowledge of electricity, radio waves, and digital equipment if you have satellite or cable. -The only evidence we have for consciousness is that we feel we are able to make decisions. I say this weakly on purpose, as there is evidence that some people (OCD sufferers) have problems with free will. This feeling is an intuition (see my previous definitions.) -If the television analogy is the best argument you can come up with, I hand it back to you thoroughly defeated. There is NO comparison possible to man made things and life. I will close the hole here by also asserting that a possibility is not itself evidence. -I will concede that you can make this hole a "reason." But note that nowhere in my normative framework do I allow reason alone as knowledge (it violates validity) and that questions are only closed when we have knowledge... it simply isn't sufficient. -All of the arguing we have here is due to distinctions of these kinds. We mentioned before about things such as shared experiences; as these experiences are tacit to anyone not a party to--this also is not knowledge. -What we come to is the firm realization that we have two kinds of knowledge (ultimately empirical and tacit) and that at least in my case; I will not accept tacit knowledge alone as basis to make a decision.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"