Faith.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-12-2012, 08:51 AM
RE: Faith.
The reason I think of it this way is because of jackasses like this.





He thinks in terms of knowledge being quantifiable, it ain't. He thinks he knows whether knowledge is limited or infinite. He doesn't and no one does. He thinks he can predict (or at least make some guess) based on his incorrect assumption that he knows knowledge is finite, the amount of knowledge mankind (and womankind ladies) has attained. Bollocks.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2012, 12:52 PM
RE: Faith.
(05-12-2012 08:51 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  The reason I think of it this way is because of jackasses like this.





He thinks in terms of knowledge being quantifiable, it ain't. He thinks he knows whether knowledge is limited or infinite. He doesn't and no one does. He thinks he can predict (or at least make some guess) based on his incorrect assumption that he knows knowledge is finite, the amount of knowledge mankind (and womankind ladies) has attained. Bollocks.
He is building an argument on the foundations of broad generalizations lol.

Given what TBD has said about percentages and everything surrounding it.... do people think a sort of framework or method/s of looking for the "truth", however futile it may be viewed, would be possible?

How would you go about such a thing?

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, 01:11 PM
RE: Faith.
Damn, now I gave to read up on epistemology to make an intelligent comment. Instead let me just add that I was taught that faith is acting on what you believe and the method of acquiring the belief is irrelevant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2012, 01:19 PM
RE: Faith.
"Truth" itself may never be perfectly knowable, but through scientific inquiry, we can determine those ideas that are supported by evidence with no opposing counter-evidence are more likely than not to be true. We can do this while at the same time putting other ideas to the test and finding little or no supporting evidence with examples of other ideas discrediting it further.

I think that framework has to start off with the notion that you may be wrong, that your preconceived notions may be wrong, and that you can only demonstrate evidence in the positive direction and never definitively disprove anything.

I.E. Science.

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: