tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post5359203507145243438..comments2024-03-28T08:58:27.412-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: Why is only empirical evidence evidence? Isn't this a self-refuting requirement? Victor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-62915822183957001362018-06-04T05:27:42.454-07:002018-06-04T05:27:42.454-07:00David Brightly,
I seem to have misunderstood your...David Brightly,<br /><br />I seem to have misunderstood your initial comment. My apologies.One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-21882901073876867652018-06-03T04:11:35.016-07:002018-06-03T04:11:35.016-07:00OB, I'm a bit confused by your 'it's n...OB, I'm a bit confused by your 'it's <i>not</i> a belief'---was that a typo?---but I don't see a problem here. From observing the large footprints under the library window we might form the belief that the murderer has big feet, without ever having seen him. I would have thought that the greater part of our belief in general has this indirect and tentative character.David Brightlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06757969974801621186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-6054847115255465712018-06-02T19:42:38.677-07:002018-06-02T19:42:38.677-07:00David Brightly,
For example, there is no direct e...David Brightly,<br /><br />For example, there is no direct evidence that men are apes. That is the inference of many other pieces of evidence. It's not a belief, but not directly observable.One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-61167587837428760442018-06-01T11:48:58.432-07:002018-06-01T11:48:58.432-07:00LoL: Yes, that's right. The usual definitio...LoL: Yes, that's right. The usual definition is 'by virtue of the meanings of the terms alone', as in 'all bachelors are unmarried'. <br /><br />OB: Have you an example in mind?David Brightlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06757969974801621186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-79375719018779104092018-06-01T06:11:14.192-07:002018-06-01T06:11:14.192-07:00Legion of Logic,
To my understanding, Kant made a...Legion of Logic,<br /><br />To my understanding, Kant made a distinction between the analytic truth (true by deduction only) vs. the synthetic truth (true based on external evidence). <br /><br />David Brightly,<br /><br />I saw no allowance for the inferred truth in you paragraph, something true based on inductive reasoning over several witnessed events, but that can not be directly witnessed. One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-44066350672184442172018-06-01T04:03:45.595-07:002018-06-01T04:03:45.595-07:00There is no need for evidence for these claims, ce...<i>There is no need for evidence for these claims, certainly not evidence in the narrow sense, as they are analytic truths.</i><br /><br />I've never seen that term before. Is "analytic truth" essentially synonymous with "by definition"? Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02593005679430527458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-58230218116479355042018-06-01T01:47:36.687-07:002018-06-01T01:47:36.687-07:00David, brilliant.
Even though the examples of the...David, brilliant. <br />Even though the examples of the wider view are not listed, some are probably implied. Widening the heading 'evidence' is almost synonymous with widening 'existence' to include some form of independent realm of existence that cannot be assessed through empirical means.World of Factshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11066732051794158264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-56240221383840723402018-06-01T01:15:22.626-07:002018-06-01T01:15:22.626-07:00Much hinges on how widely or narrowly we interpret...Much hinges on how widely or narrowly we interpret the term 'evidence'. The narrow view takes evidence as something to be seen: videre=to see. Thus evidence is of necessity empirical, just as two is of necessity even. There is no need for evidence for these claims, certainly not evidence in the narrow sense, as they are analytic truths. In contrast, the wide view seems to want to include other kinds of belief justification under the heading 'evidence'. Is that a fair characterisation? If so, we ought to look at good examples of such justifications. Sadly, the post doesn't give us any. It merely rejects the narrow view on the ground that it is self-defeating, that it has no justification under its own terms, which is to forget that it needs none.David Brightlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06757969974801621186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-52349855505505443292018-05-31T13:08:52.987-07:002018-05-31T13:08:52.987-07:00Starhopper,
I agree there as well.Starhopper,<br /><br />I agree there as well.One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-31867929938414911522018-05-31T10:01:30.157-07:002018-05-31T10:01:30.157-07:00One Brow,
Thank you for a most thought provoking ...One Brow,<br /><br />Thank you for a most thought provoking comment!<br /><br />I occurred to me after mulling over your posting that your use of the term "argument" is restricted to things that can be reduced to words. But words are only a subset of our total thought processes, and of our ability to understand and relate to the world around us.<br /><br />By looking at <a href="https://i.pinimg.com/originals/60/3d/18/603d18d7fde42c9594341b5d307db3f6.jpg" rel="nofollow">Saffron 1957</a> by Mark Rothko, I learn more about myself and the universe than otherwise. But I simply cannot translate that knowledge into words. When listening to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkP2y24ACT8" rel="nofollow">Where Hope is Shining</a> by Ralph Vaughan Williams, I understand humanity better than if I hadn't. But any attempt to communicate those insights in any medium other than music would be fruitless.<br /><br />If it were possible to do so, then Rothko would have written a book rather than painting a painting, or Vaughan Williams an essay rather than a film score.<br /><br />Logical arguments and empirical reasoning are wonderful tools for understanding reality and communicating what we learn to others, but they are far from being the only means of doing so.Starhopperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18350334327301656588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-84896343484494565192018-05-31T05:36:58.346-07:002018-05-31T05:36:58.346-07:00Logical arguments are inward spirals. You start f...Logical arguments are inward spirals. You start from broader presumptions and argue to narrower conclusions. Arguments based on belief have not evidence at all. By contrast, arguments based on empirical evidence can add true concepts to our knowledge. It's the one form of argumentation that does not rely on something being true being proved outside of the argument.<br /><br />I am not supporting that only empirical evidence is valuable, but it does have this unique feature.One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-36663612601617331672018-05-30T13:54:37.808-07:002018-05-30T13:54:37.808-07:00Where's the empirical evidence for what Mahler...Where's the empirical evidence for what Mahler's Second Symphony has to tell us? Or Homer's Iliad? Or Michelangelo's Pieta?Starhopperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18350334327301656588noreply@blogger.com