You always get percentage of certainty. Some certainties are more certain than other certainties.
Therefore I suggested "All life on the earth will die eventually." was one of the 100% certainty. Because it is a conclusion derived by billions and billions of examples in millions of years of historic records, the biological facts of lives + the on-going processes happening right now. There maybe other 100% certainty cases, I am sure. — Corvus
There are percentage of certainty attainable in accurate maths value if the data was available. — Corvus
Why would a proton be affected by other particles in a 5 light seconds radius? Surely, the zone of being affected would be mere millimetres or even less? — Truth Seeker
And what would the data for certainty be? — Moliere
"I i think therefore I am" seems like the only justifiable 100% certainty to me. The best you can get after that, I would think, it's 99.9 followed by some amount of 9s percent certainty - there's always some doubt for any other statement I think. — flannel jesus
To my mind, this suggests a sort of gradient of "accuracy," if not truth. — Count Timothy von Icarus
Within the assumption that it is a duck we can know with 100%
perfectly justified complete certainty that it is an animal.
deduction doesn't give us anything we don't already know, making knowledge production seem near impossible. — Count Timothy von Icarus
↪PL Olcott I agree that a shapeshifting alien could be pretending to be a duck and we would not be able to tell without analysing blood samples, etc. — Truth Seeker
↪PL Olcott How can a duck's consciousness be replaced by an alien? Is consciousness something separate from the body that can be put in different bodies or is it something emergent as a result of brain activities? — Truth Seeker
↪PL Olcott How do I know that something self-evident is true? My perceptions could be real or simulations or hallucinations or dreams or illusions. — Truth Seeker
Truth Seeker
38
↪PL Olcott I agree.
seconds ago — Truth Seeker
I assume that this applied at the exact moment you were composing this topic. Because you cannot say "I am conscious" in general, i.e. with no time reference. So, since we are talking about 100% certainty, we should also be as exact as possible in our statements, whether these are applied to being, having or doing.I am 100% certain that I am conscious — Truth Seeker
Right. This is the first thing that came to my mind. And see, you are bringing it up yourself, invalidating therefore your first statement, i.e. that you are 100% certain that you are conscious! :smile:It is possible that what I perceive is either a dream or a hallucination or an illusion or a simulation and not objectively real. — Truth Seeker
Second invalidation! :smileI have no way of knowing this with 100% certainty. Given the fact that I cannot know with 100% certainty what is objectively real — Truth Seeker
Now, this makes it much more difficult to talk about 100% certainty, since morality is something relative and can be defined in a lot of different ways.how can I know what is morally correct with 100% certainty? — Truth Seeker
I think that now we lost --at least I-- the ball!How can we know if macroscopic determinism is true or false with 100% certainty? — Truth Seeker
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.