Christian failing to understand epistemology
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-10-2017, 04:45 AM
RE: Christian failing to understand epistemology
(23-10-2017 05:05 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  Thought I'd post a little ongoing exchange I'm having with a somewhat ignorant/dishonest woman on Twitter. We'll see how this develops...

Personally I wouldn't (and don't) waste any of my time "debating" this sort of stuff with theists. You're effectively on a hiding to nothing.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2017, 04:58 AM
RE: Christian failing to understand epistemology
(24-10-2017 04:45 AM)SYZ Wrote:  
(23-10-2017 05:05 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  Thought I'd post a little ongoing exchange I'm having with a somewhat ignorant/dishonest woman on Twitter. We'll see how this develops...

Personally I wouldn't (and don't) waste any of my time "debating" this sort of stuff with theists. You're effectively on a hiding to nothing.

Low hanging fruit.

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike
Excreta Tauri Sapientam Fulgeat (The excrement of the bull causes wisdom to flee)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2017, 06:06 AM
RE: Christian failing to understand epistemology
(23-10-2017 05:05 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  Thought I'd post a little ongoing exchange I'm having with a somewhat ignorant/dishonest woman on Twitter.

You asked for evidence and she gave you evidence. We all consider it good evidence when we read authorities we trust or books that seem trustworthy to us. This is normal. Evidence isn't proof -- evidence is anything we consider to make a proposition more likely to be true.

She referred you to sources she considers to be trustworthy and authoritative. That constitutes evidence.

Of course you wanted a different kind of evidence. You wanted different authorities, or different kinds of statements to make her beliefs more likely. But you didn't spell this out to her. You assumed she would share your conviction that "evidence" always means a certain kind of empirical science.

But if you have studied epistemology, you should know that we gain knowledge in different ways, and the fact that she didn't follow your unspoken requirement was not proof that she is ignorant of epistemology. (Probably she is.) It looks to me, though, that you are just enjoying the fun of prompting people to say things you know you will find stupid, based on your own prejudgements.

That isn't a victory for epistemology, it's taking pleasure in laughing at people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2017, 06:44 AM (This post was last modified: 24-10-2017 06:57 AM by Thoreauvian.)
RE: Christian failing to understand epistemology
(24-10-2017 06:06 AM)Belaqua Wrote:  But if you have studied epistemology, you should know that we gain knowledge in different ways, and the fact that she didn't follow your unspoken requirement was not proof that she is ignorant of epistemology. (Probably she is.)

People think they gain knowledge in different ways, but if the question is about how they derive that knowledge, then it's entirely proper to ask for some justification referencing verifiable facts. Plus, such questioning is a way to get people to actually think about how they justify what they think they know. More often than not, religious people were socially conditioned into their beliefs, not convinced by facts or logic. Atheists who question them care more about them in a real sense than any of their religious "teachers."

To say atheists just want to make fun of people is to miss the point. Did Socrates just want to make fun of people?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thoreauvian's post
24-10-2017, 08:50 PM
RE: Christian failing to understand epistemology
(24-10-2017 06:06 AM)Belaqua Wrote:  
(23-10-2017 05:05 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  Thought I'd post a little ongoing exchange I'm having with a somewhat ignorant/dishonest woman on Twitter.

You asked for evidence and she gave you evidence. We all consider it good evidence when we read authorities we trust or books that seem trustworthy to us. This is normal. Evidence isn't proof -- evidence is anything we consider to make a proposition more likely to be true.

She referred you to sources she considers to be trustworthy and authoritative. That constitutes evidence.

No, it doesn't. Evidence is objectively verifiable. Opinions are not evidence.

Quote:Of course you wanted a different kind of evidence. You wanted different authorities, or different kinds of statements to make her beliefs more likely. But you didn't spell this out to her. You assumed she would share your conviction that "evidence" always means a certain kind of empirical science.

Her ignorance of what constitutes evidence does not make her opinion correct.

Quote:But if you have studied epistemology, you should know that we gain knowledge in different ways, and the fact that she didn't follow your unspoken requirement was not proof that she is ignorant of epistemology. (Probably she is.) It looks to me, though, that you are just enjoying the fun of prompting people to say things you know you will find stupid, based on your own prejudgements.

That isn't a victory for epistemology, it's taking pleasure in laughing at people.

Religion and other faith positions deserve ridicule.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
26-10-2017, 02:02 AM
RE: Christian failing to understand epistemology
(24-10-2017 06:06 AM)Belaqua Wrote:  You asked for evidence and she gave you evidence. We all consider it good evidence when we read authorities we trust or books that seem trustworthy to us. This is normal. Evidence isn't proof -- evidence is anything we consider to make a proposition more likely to be true.

I didn't ask for "proof". I simply asked for evidence. What she provided was opinions based on a source that lacks credibility - one which contains numerous demonstrated errors, contradictions etc. and its content cannot be verified by any independent means.

Quote:She referred you to sources she considers to be trustworthy and authoritative. That constitutes evidence.

No that does not constitute evidence. That is opinion. Flat-earthers continually refer to "sources" that seemingly support their contention that the earth is flat, but we know that's nonsense.

Quote:Of course you wanted a different kind of evidence. You wanted different authorities, or different kinds of statements to make her beliefs more likely. But you didn't spell this out to her. You assumed she would share your conviction that "evidence" always means a certain kind of empirical science.


I don't need to "spell it out" to her. I didn't require anything in the way of "science" from her. Just plain old credible evidence.

Quote:But if you have studied epistemology, you should know that we gain knowledge in different ways, and the fact that she didn't follow your unspoken requirement was not proof that she is ignorant of epistemology. (Probably she is.) It looks to me, though, that you are just enjoying the fun of prompting people to say things you know you will find stupid, based on your own prejudgements.

We gain knowledge in different ways, but using faith as a claim to knowledge is flawed. You should know that. Faith enables people to believe ANYTHING. It is therefore not a reliable path to truth, and the acquisition of knowledge has to be based on the pursuit of truth. The collection of evidence allows us to make conclusions in an objective manner and so gain knowledge in a reliable way.

Quote:That isn't a victory for epistemology, it's taking pleasure in laughing at people.

No it's pointing out to people that they shouldn't make dumb assertions on Twitter which they are unable to substantiate, and then make themselves look even dumber by trying to reverse the burden of proof.

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike
Excreta Tauri Sapientam Fulgeat (The excrement of the bull causes wisdom to flee)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Silly Deity's post
26-10-2017, 07:28 AM
RE: Christian failing to understand epistemology
(24-10-2017 06:44 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  ...
Did Socrates just want to make fun of people?

My money is on "yes".

Alongside Falstaff and Beeblebrox, Socrates was one of history's greatest trolls.

Yes

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: