Well the truth is all questions assume. They must. In order to have any meaning at all. — Benj96
The best question to ask would be one that does not assume anything about existence. Perhaps the best question is the one that does not assume the need to question in the first place?
Because to posit a question is to create a void in answers. To not question at all is to not require answers. — Benj96
Doubt can only take place against a background of certainty. — Banno
An important outcome is Wittgenstein's claim that all doubt is embedded in underlying beliefs and therefore the most radical forms of doubt must be rejected since they form a contradiction within the system that expressed them. — Wheatley
It all depends on your tolerance for anxiety. Anyone with an anxiety disorder will do well to stay away from those philosophers.suspect you do not believe all doubt is unhealthy. You point out a few examples of what you find to be unhealthy traditions, but I wonder what you believe makes them unhealthy. Is there some boundary, where a philosopher may remain confident that their question is in the healthy realm, without engaging in the sins of the unhealthy traditions? — Adam's Off Ox
Most of the time it is harmless.Also, what are the consequences of engaging in an unhealthy skeptical tradition? — Adam's Off Ox
24. The idealist's question would be something like: "What right have I not to doubt the existence of my hands?" (And to that the answer can't be: I know that they exist.) But someone who asks such a question is overlooking the fact that a doubt about existence only works in a language-game. Hence, that we should first have to ask: what would such a doubt be like?, and don't understand this straight off.
What assumption am I making when I ask 'do trees exist?' — Welkin Rogue
24. The idealist's question would be something like: "What right have I not to doubt the existence of my hands?" (And to that the answer can't be: I know that they exist.) But someone who asks such a question is overlooking the fact that a doubt about existence only works in a language-game. Hence, that we should first have to ask: what would such a doubt be like?, and don't understand this straight off.
That you and I speak english, at least to the extent that we use "trees" in a sufficiently similar way for my answer to be applicable.
That we will recognise the structure of the text as a request
That your typing will produce a post on the forum
That the post will be read by others
That the keyboard will not dissolve as you hit the keys
I could go on at length, setting out the context in which the question has meaning. For: — Banno
I would say that my motivation to post the question might rely, psychologically, on these assumptions. — Welkin Rogue
All questions assume. At the very basis of a question is the assumption that it was worthy of asking in the first place/ may have an answer. — Benj96
...that is, you rely on not doubting them, or in other words to treat them as certain.
Of course you might bring one or two into doubt; but in order to do so, you must hold firm to other beliefs. — Banno
Secondly, there is a distinction between the question and the questioner. A questioner can make assumptions that the question doesn't. For example, the question 'does you car have petrol in the tank?' assumes that there is a car, that it has a tank, that it is yours, and so on. But the question 'are there trees?' doesn't itself make assumptions like that. At most, the questioner putting it might make certain minimal assumptions in order to engage in the practice of asking the question. — Welkin Rogue
Figuring out just what the presuppositions are can be not-so-simple. If in the kitchen I think to myself, "That's a can opener," that's because in my mind was the question, "What's that, what is that for"? The constellation of presuppositions includes can openers, bottle openers, and so forth. But the central presupposition, on seeing the object, is that it's for something, some purpose. If I did not presuppose that the object was something for some purpose, I would never have formulated the question. — tim wood
Presupposing presupposes. It doesn't claim to know or be true. Best not to confuse the two.But what presupposition I am making in knowing — Welkin Rogue
Presupposing presupposes. It doesn't claim to know or be true. Best not to confuse the two. — tim wood
you rely on not doubting them, or in other words you treat them as certain.
Of course you might bring one or two into doubt; but in order to do so, you must hold firm to other beliefs. — Banno
Yep. So I am not presupposing anything. Right? My claim was that in asking the question "What's that, what is that for?" I am not presupposing that X has a purpose. — Welkin Rogue
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.