Faith.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-12-2012, 09:18 PM
Faith.
Simple question.
The things that get discussed in this section of the forum, regardless of if you believe them or not.

How do you know 100% that you are right?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2012, 09:23 PM
RE: Faith.
(04-12-2012 09:18 PM)bemore Wrote:  Simple question.
The things that get discussed in this section of the forum, regardless of if you believe them or not.

How do you know 100% that you are right?
I don't think I believe much of anything 100% except mathematics and logic.
Everything else is mediated by my senses. Of that I'm 100% sure. Drinking Beverage

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
04-12-2012, 09:32 PM
RE: Faith.
Nobody knows 100% that they are right (no matter how much they might believe that they are). But there is a difference being 100% certain, knowing something beyond reasonable doubt, and applying Occam's Razor to the most plausible/ and/or strongest claim in terms of evidence. On certain matters, most logically thinking individuals will hold a particular argument as true since the evidence so overwhelmingly points in that direction. Other issues are far more complex and will result in a far broader range of opinions and viewpoints.

That being said, I think a lot of the times when people make the appeal of "you can't be 100% sure of this or that" they are making a fallacious appeal for consideration. What that means is that instead of/or once being thoroughly outmatched by another argument in terms of evidence, they make that plea in a vain attempt to keep their argument on the table. No, I don't have to consider your claim just because it will always have a chance of being the case, no matter how small. I will consider a claim if the evidence is solid for it and outmatches or is on par with the other claims being made on the same issue.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2012, 10:17 PM
RE: Faith.
(04-12-2012 09:32 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  Nobody knows 100% that they are right (no matter how much they might believe that they are). But there is a difference being 100% certain, knowing something beyond reasonable doubt, and applying Occam's Razor to the most plausible/ and/or strongest claim in terms of evidence. On certain matters, most logically thinking individuals will hold a particular argument as true since the evidence so overwhelmingly points in that direction. Other issues are far more complex and will result in a far broader range of opinions and viewpoints.

That being said, I think a lot of the times when people make the appeal of "you can't be 100% sure of this or that" they are making a fallacious appeal for consideration. What that means is that instead of/or once being thoroughly outmatched by another argument in terms of evidence, they make that plea in a vain attempt to keep their argument on the table. No, I don't have to consider your claim just because it will always have a chance of being the case, no matter how small. I will consider a claim if the evidence is solid for it and outmatches or is on par with the other claims being made on the same issue.
How do you know when you have assimilated all relevant possible data to come to a conclusion?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
05-12-2012, 05:34 AM
RE: Faith.
(04-12-2012 09:18 PM)bemore Wrote:  Simple question.
The things that get discussed in this section of the forum, regardless of if you believe them or not.

How do you know 100% that you are right?
I don't. I know 100% that you're wrong. Big Grin

I know it is a 100% pain in the ass to add qualifiers to every contention, but this is a bonehead theist question. Dodgy

[Image: 10289811_592837817482059_8815379025397103823_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2012, 06:11 AM
RE: Faith.
(05-12-2012 05:34 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I know it is a 100% pain in the ass to add qualifiers to every contention, but this is a bonehead theist question. Dodgy
Why is exploring this a bonehead question?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2012, 06:45 AM
RE: Faith.
I know that I know nothing. Dodgy

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
05-12-2012, 08:27 AM
RE: Faith.
Everyone uses "faith" to some extent, religious people use it much more often.

When one uses certain facts and disregards certain facts to reach the expected conclusion this is when faith is used to frame a specific set of chosen facts and disregards a specific set of chosen facts. The outcome of this act I would call faith based belief.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2012, 08:35 AM
RE: Faith.
(05-12-2012 08:27 AM)I and I Wrote:  When one uses certain facts and disregards certain facts to reach the expected conclusion this is when faith is used to frame a specific set of chosen facts and disregards a specific set of chosen facts. The outcome of this act I would call faith based belief.
No, that's called confirmation bias and cherry-picking. Faith is a belief based on no evidence and no facts.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2012, 08:46 AM
RE: Faith.
Applying percentages to knowledge is irrelevant. Nature may be best described by probabilities, but that is how we describe it, they are merely descriptors of what may or may not happen or have happened. You don't need some predetermined amount of knowledge to make a decision either. You could make the argument that any information prior to a decision at least makes it more likely to make an informed opinion, but ultimately any conclusion is either right or wrong, no matter how much background research you conduct. And you may never know which it is.

Short answer, I don't think of anything relating to knowledge on a percentage scale. I can do science and justify my claims based on certainties and possibilities and even probabilities. But the very nature of probabilities makes absolute certainty irrelevant and unattainable.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: