I do think that [XXX] can be brushed off for being unrealistic, just as the evil demon, brain in a vat, and dreaming butterfly thought experiments can be brushed off. — Sapientia
This is the main lesson that philosophy, via logic, passes to humans: that these theories can't be brushed off. No theory which accounts for all the evidence - especially when there's little evidence, or none at all - can be dismissed. We can only chose between them on the basis of utility; of how useful they are. You could be a brain in a vat. There is no way you can tell. — Pattern-chaser
No, that's a false narrative. I'm actually doing philosophy a service by encouraging waste removal. There seems to be a common misconception, especially amongst those who are relatively new to philosophy, that the wildest imaginings to have come out of philosophy should be given more credence than they are due, and that they should be treated as being on par with views of a much stronger grounding. — Sapientia
If we will only allow that, as we progress, we remain unsure, we will leave opportunities for alternatives. We will not become enthusiastic for the fact, the knowledge, the absolute truth of the day, but remain always uncertain … In order to make progress, one must leave the door to the unknown ajar. — Richard Feynman
Claims without evidence can be invitations to talk nonsense — tim wood
It's about how we treat theories when there is no evidence. — Pattern-chaser
I am using the term “religious temperament” in a way that I have not invented (though I do not know its source), but that may seem illegitimate to those who are really religious. But I think it is the appropriate name for a disposition to seek a view of the world that can play a certain role in the inner life – a role that for some people is occupied by religion.
Whether anything like this was part of the religion of fourth century Athens I do not know. But Plato was clearly concerned not only with the state of his soul, but also with his relation to the universe at the deepest level. Plato’s metaphysics was not intended to produce merely a detached understanding of reality. His motivation in philosophy was in part to achieve a kind of understanding that would connect him (and therefore every human being) to the whole of reality – intelligibly and if possible satisfyingly.
So, in the context of this discussion, how do we tell what is nonsense and what is not? That's rather the core of this discussion. How do we tell, logically and rationally, whether a topic is nonsense? — Pattern-chaser
Do we need to know if a theory is nonsense? If there is no pressing need to answer the question, I'd vote for wide ranging open mindedness. — Jake
It's about how we treat theories when there is no evidence. — Pattern-chaser
Basically "theories" without evidence are not theories. The lack of the evidence would take the speculation as a thesis at best... :) — Damir Ibrisimovic
I think there's a certain lack of sensitivity to the actual subject of philosophy in this OP. — Wayfarer
We deal with theories without evidence by testing them. If they can't be tested, we move on. — Ciceronianus the White
Simply put, the question whether we're brains in a vat, and similar questions or claims, are frivolous. — Ciceronianus the White
But how do we justify, logically, this "moving on"? — Pattern-chaser
And logic says that a plausible theory that can't be falsified or disproven is (at least until the arrival of new evidence) acceptable for use, and may not be casually dismissed. — Pattern-chaser
The brain-in-a-vat theory is a good example because it can account for all available evidence, but our knee-jerk nonconscious-mind response is to dismiss it without further consideration. — Pattern-chaser
You know it's okay to quote the participants of this thread verbatim. I don't see anyone here saying he is dismissing the theory cause he dislikes it.Can we justify - logically - dismissing theses which account for all available evidence, just because we don't like them? — Pattern-chaser
But how do we justify, logically, this "moving on"? — Pattern-chaser
I'm not sure I know what you mean, here. — Ciceronianus the White
Are you saying that if something is logically possible, there is no reasonable basis on which it may be disregarded? — Ciceronianus the White
And logic says that a plausible theory that can't be falsified or disproven is (at least until the arrival of new evidence) acceptable for use, and may not be casually dismissed. — Pattern-chaser
I think the significant word in this otherwise absolute statement is "plausible." A plausible theory is one that is reasonable, probable, feasible. So, it would first be necessary for the theory in question--e.g., that we're brains in a vat--to be plausible. If you maintain that we're brains in a vat, you must establish that is a plausible theory before you can say it may not be casually dismissed. — Ciceronianus the White
You have the burden of proof--Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat. — Ciceronianus the White
I may have a greater regard for considerations of utility in making judgments than you do. — Ciceronianus the White
Really? I can't see it. Perhaps I'm just being daft. It happens from time to time. :wink:It seems to me your position is based on a logical fallacy, i.e. the argument from, or appeal to, ignorance. — Ciceronianus the White
You'll apparently be surprised to learn that when I make a claim, I do so with every expectation that I should be able to defend it. It seems we may differ in that respect as well. — Ciceronianus the White
But if we apply - and rely on - logic, we must follow it to its conclusion, even if we'd rather not. And logic says that a plausible theory that can't be falsified or disproven is (at least until the arrival of new evidence) acceptable for use, and may not be casually dismissed. — Pattern-chaser
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.