Paradigm. Do you know what one is? Do you have one? Are you blinded by it?

[KrazyHorse]

God, you philosophers talk a lot of **** based on nothing...

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by Flinx
How Do You Know What You Know?

Experience.


Yes, I utilize a pradigm. I am not blinded by my paradigm because part of my paradigm is to assess and interogate the environment that I find myself in, and act in response to that information. Does that always mean I will be succesful? No. Hence my reply above of "experience".


D

[Agathon]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
God, you philosophers talk a lot of **** based on nothing...

God you physicists talk a load of **** that doesn't even add up to a smidgum of knowledge.

Besides, you all smell and can't get any girls.

[KrazyHorse]

Actually, we have a load of stuff that we've managed to put together in a fairly cogent form.

And while I may smell, I've never had any trouble getting girls.

[molly bloom]

I wasn't keen on Hitchcock's 'The Paradigm Case'.

Krazyhorse- were they live girls?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Actually, we have a load of stuff that we've managed to put together in a fairly cogent form.

But it isn't knowledge. Warranted belief perhaps, but not knowledge. Besides, it will all be thought foolish nonsense in a couple of hundred years, if history is any guide.

And I imagine that Plato and Aristotle will still be part of the curriculum for those who want a rounded education.

And it's probably not a good idea to take Poly as an example of what contemporary philosophers actually do. People in year one survey courses yes, but not the real thing.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Flinx
Yes and no. Maybe more no. Try this question first:

How Do You Know What You Know?

Ah -- so with that question, I'm assuming you're a big fan of Hume.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
God, you philosophers talk a lot of **** based on nothing...

Begone, you uncultured, unsosphisticated peon.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by MrFun


Begone, you uncultured, unsosphisticated peon.

It's a Canadian thing. Remember Asher and his culture whine?

[KrazyHorse]

But it isn't knowledge. Warranted belief perhaps, but not knowledge.

Better than unwarranted belief.

it will all be thought foolish nonsense in a couple of hundred years

No, it will be thought a very good second or third approximation.

Just like nobody with any sense thinks Newton or Faraday were fools...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by molly bloom


It's a Canadian thing. Remember Asher and his culture whine?

I guess I never came across that post/thread.


From what you're implying, I guess I should be grateful I was spared reading it.

[KrazyHorse]

Now, as to what particle theorists do nowadays, that might well be thought foolish nonsense in a couple of hundred years...

[KrazyHorse]

Was the culture thing at CG?

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Sava
uhmmm what?

are you looking for a dictionary definition? I'm not clear as to the purpose of this thread.

Clearly he is talking about sub-woofers.

http://www.datavis.com/webapp/commerce/command/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=448045&prmenbr=2000

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

But it isn't knowledge. Warranted belief perhaps, but not knowledge.

Better than unwarranted belief.

it will all be thought foolish nonsense in a couple of hundred years

No, it will be thought a very good second or third approximation.

Just like nobody with any sense thinks Newton or Faraday were fools...

Is that Isaac Newton the alchemist and Michael Faraday the Sandemanian?

"Sir Arthur Eddington, in reviewing this book, says: "The science in which Newton seems to have been chiefly interested, and on which he spent most of his time was alchemy. He read widely and made innumerable experiments, entirely without fruit so far as we know."

One of his servants records: "He very rarely went to bed until two or three of the clock, sometimes not till five or six, lying about four or five hours, especially at springtime or autumn, at which time he used to employ about six weeks in his laboratory, the fire scarce going out night or day. What his aim might be I was unable to penetrate into." The answer is that Newton's experiments were concerned with nothing more or less than alchemy. (from Alchemy Rediscovered and Restored by A. Cockren)"

http://www.alchemylab.com/isaac_newton.htm

Faraday:

"As a Sandemanian Faraday would not accept that the book of nature is written in a language so removed from experience as the language of mathematics. Theories could be admired and used but to him they were more tinged with humanity than with the divine. Sandemanian suspicion of theology and mathematical abstraction suggested that those come between observers and the book of nature. This is why Faraday insisted on separating the discussion of religious from scientific matters. In a lecture given in 1854 in the presence of Prince Albert, he argued that their humanity makes all people-including scientists-'active promoters of error.' How, then, is scientific knowledge possible?

The Sandemanian element in his Christianity promised that, like the Bible, the book of nature would be open to anyone who sought to read it without prejudice."

http://www.bath.ac.uk/~hssdcg/Michael_Faraday.html