to know is to : be aware of through observation, inquiry, or information. — Garrett Travers

I could ask you how you know that this definition isn’t completely worthless but it seems tangential. I’d prefer to ask you what you mean by information or inquiry. But I suppose I’ll start with observation. What qualifies as an observation in your view? Do you use the word like others do? Meaning that it refers to something nebulous like someone’s opinion.

How will you know if I will, unless I do? — Garrett Travers

I hope you will even if I can’t verify what took place in your heart of hearts.

lol I like you.

Because I conceptualized it, built it, and tested it for the standards I wished to build it with, namely telescope features. — Garrett Travers

But how do you know that all of this actually took place? What if you were hallucinating or dreaming and awoke to find yourself in a world where none of that ever took place?

You've asked the same question twice. — Garrett Travers

I did that for the sake of clarity. I hope you’ll pardon me.

If the telescope needed to be validated by itself, it wouldn't be the telescope. — Garrett Travers

How do you know that the telescope actually exists? What if it was just a mirage?

how do I know that the surgeon is real?

To be an epistemological skeptic is to invite the judgment you just killed yourself!. — Agent Smith

I’m not a skeptic.

By simply accompanying the person to the vaccine clinic and seeing the needle emptied in his upper arm.
Seriously? — L'éléphant

But how do you know that your experiences are reliable or that you are interpreting them correctly?

One way to know is experience — L'éléphant

But how do you verify the validity of experience? Do you need another experience? If you use experience to verify the validity of experience then that seems a bit circular.

That being because, such standards come from abstractions, which come from data accrued. — Garrett Travers

Correct me if I’m wrong but it sounds like you’re using empiricism to verify the validity of empiricism. Doesn’t that seem circular?

I think it’s interesting to say the least but I suspect that you meant something like useful or valuable when you used the word actionable. The question then becomes how do you measure utility or value when it comes to knowledge?

why do you emphasize action? Are you implying that if knowledge isn’t “actionable” it isn’t knowledge?

so basically empiricism?

that word is just a fad word it can easily be thrown away or replaced and it not effect the physical world one but because it isn't the "thing" itself. — MAYAEL

Why do you believe this?

And so you might call someone intelligent today but in 200yrs most likely they will be a moronic fool. — MAYAEL

Are you trying to imply that it’s completely subjective?

lol

Small birds are perfect, like hummingbirds. — L'éléphant

Yup

Ignoranc (being another semantic that doesn't actually exist) — MAYAEL

If Intelligence and ignorance don’t actually exist wouldn’t that mean that there are no intelligent or ignorant people?

Is it the absence of mistakes and is it something which can be measured at all — Jack Cummins

I think it can be measured mathematically.

I am not sure how you define perfection? — Jack Cummins

I don’t have any formal training when it comes to developing definitions. Maybe people who write dictionaries do but I don’t. I’m like a blind man trying to find his way in the darkness.

But it does make a difference how it is judged, especially whether it is about the way one lives or about an underlying attitude to life. — Jack Cummins

I think that it has more to do with the way one lives. I don’t really know a whole lot about underlying attitudes.

It may be easier for those who are in relative privileged positions to live up to than for the disadvantaged. In other words, those who have an easier life may have less difficulty reaching for the highest ideals than those who are struggling to survive. — Jack Cummins

You might be right but I have reason to suspect that this is probably not the case.

Is perfection more a state of mind? — Jack Cummins

I doubt it but I’m not sure what would qualify as a state of mind in your view.

you are talking about a flawless life. How is this defined? — Tom Storm

I’m not sure what kind of answer would satisfy you.

if I’m failing to engage with your points I apologize but I’m trying my best. I know that you didn’t say those words which is why I said I doubt that you agree with them. Keep in mind that I’m just trying to have some fun too. Also my background is in rhetoric not dialectic.

If it only means succeeding in what they chose to succeed in - this is problematic. — Tom Storm

If an archer only shot arrows at a target that was impossible to miss I doubt that anyone would consider them a master marksman.

I highly doubt you believe success is connected to what we voluntarily chose to do. Isn’t success dependent upon objective necessity? Can one really consistently succeed at anything if one fails to factor in the real conditions that surround the individual?

I think of perfection or “flawlessness” as a state that exists when something has been improved to the point that it has become the best that it could possibly be. For example if an archer were to shoot arrows at a target and hit the target every time then I would consider their performance to have been flawless. So perfection or “flawlessness” would be a notion associated with successfully achieving objectives consistently. Something would be flawed if it only occasionally was associated with desired outcomes due to luck or some other factor unconnected to actual ability.

thank you for sharing that information. It’s fascinating stuff.

Flawlessness can only be measured in relation to some agreed upon criteria. — Tom Storm

Why do you believe this? Is it just another self evident axiom?

I detest perfection -- whatever that means since I don't think I have encountered perfection ever. — L'éléphant

You’re a fortunate man if you’ve never had to encounter something that you detest. I wish I was that lucky.

first define perfection as it applies to human beings. — Tom Storm

I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “as it applies to human beings”. Would you mind providing some clarification?

okay I’m sorry if I got defensive.

It is a pretty subjective concept. — javi2541997

perfection could exists but is up to the people's thoughts or tastes. — javi2541997

I hope you don’t mind me asking but why do you believe these claims are true?

When was the last time you met a perfect human being? — Tom Storm

I think human being is a synonym for imperfection — Tom Storm

How could I ever meet a perfect human being if human being is a synonym for imperfection? If anything is incoherent it’s your question.

You say that every human being is imperfect but if that’s true by definition, because you said that they’re synonymous, then it seems like circular reasoning to me. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Have you ever heard Ana Vidovic play classical guitar? — Garrett Travers

I admit she has talent

When was the last time you met a perfect human being? — Tom Storm

all swans we have seen are white, and, therefore, all swans are white?

If you are asking is it possible to be a human being and not make the wrong choices occasionally or often the answer I think is 'no'. — Tom Storm

Why do you believe that it’s impossible?