Re: Solidity is degree of justification (was: Mirror neurons at autopsy)
You Know Me <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.science.physics.fabric-of-reality |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Dec 27, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Elliot Temple wrote: > On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 9:47 AM, You Know Me <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Dec 27, 2012, at 7:04 AM, David Deutsch wrote: > >> On 25 Dec 2012, at 23:58, Elliot Temple <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:13 AM, David Deutsch <david.deutsch-LR/[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> currently called 'justificationism', namely that knowledge is that which can be justified as true, or likely to be true, etc. > >> > > >> > That is not what justificationism means. Justificationism is the > >> > concept that ideas have an amount/degree/weight of justification > >> > (epistemic status, aka confirmation, support, authority, probability, > >> > etc), by which we should judge them. > >> > >> for truth > >> > >> > Ideas with more > >> > justification/weight/evidence/etc are deemed better than ideas with less. > >> > >> Deemed to be truer, more likely to be true, more likely to contain more truth, etc. That is the mistake. > >> > >> But that does not mean that ideas cannot have any non-binary attributes. For example they can be longer or shorter to express, depend more or less on mathematics, be more or less relevant to a given problem, be more or less original, more or less useful -- and (as I have said) easier or harder to vary as explanations (relative to a given state of background knowledge). > > > > Now That's "True". > > Now that's unproductive. > > -- > Elliot Temple > http://curi.us/ So you respond with another unproductive statement ? Nice one Elliot! A reflection of your genius, to say the least but I digress or maybe you need to. lol! All in good jest, Elliot and I'm glad your paying attention ! - SM [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]