I'm familiar with Plantinga's argument (though the iteration I'm accustomed to gives the supposition that our cognitive faculties are geared towards the truth as K, I think R makes more sense); but I'm not sure what D* represents in your argument and don't see it defined. Same thing with O. What are D* and O? — Astro Cat

Yeah, fallibilism – "I could be wrong" about that too. — 180 Proof

Better to be wrong with Galen than to be right with Harvey. — Ashok Kumar

I suspect fallibilism is more suitable for a contemporary kynic (unless you're a 'a deliberately homeless, p0m0 luddite') than (Hellenistic) skepticism. — 180 Proof

Is it incorrect to characterize the above question as a spark igniting epistemological inquiry? — ucarr

I was a Pyrrhonian in my wayward youth and still have great regard for that form of skepsis (incorporating its praxis, along with fallibilism, in my Epicurean-Spinozist 'framework'). — 180 Proof

You're a kynic, I'm an epicurean. — 180 Proof

Less and less the older I get. (Old dog vs new tricks paradox?) IIRC, the last major change was over fifteen years ago – a radical shift in my thinking about and comprehension of metaphysics (thanks again, Tobias) – and subsequently lots of minor tweaks and refinements, mostly of my conceptual vocabulary. I've also discovered many and developed a few new arguments which I'm always trying to improve. The path itself is the destination, right? — 180 Proof

Sabbe sattā ummattaka — Wayfarer

no false lemmas — Ludwig V

Long stretch of time with dozens of mock-ups getting vaporized until, one fateful day, the atomic hurricane knocks the latest Hooterville sideways and... it stays upright, un-vaporized. Influx of residents as real estate values skyrocket. Join the cocktail party chit-chat and you're bound to hear someone say, "Are you cotton to the latest take on being post-modern? Gender phantasia!" — ucarr

Claiming something like “Cooperation is moral” fails for just the reasons you describe. People can, and too often do, cooperate to exploit outgroups.

The recast claim “Solving cooperation problems is moral” does not suffer the same failure.

This recasting can recognize the cooperation and self-sacrifice within criminal organizations as moral, while rejecting the goal of that cooperation, the exploitation and harm to outgroups, as immoral based on it creating cooperation problems – the opposite of the function of cultural moral norms. — Mark S

Why would you class the mind as a sixth sense? The idea that the mind acts as a sixth sense was dispelled by Aristotle, a long time ago. The mind unifies the senses, it does not act as a distinct sense. — Metaphysician Undercover

The point of philosophy is playing with the puzzles, not solving them. There aren't really any solutions. — T Clark

We don't "see eye-to-eye", amigo, because – as I've pointed out in over half of my near 300 exchances with him – "Enformationism" is conceptually incoherent and that "The Great Enformer" himself lacks intellectual integrity. Thus, he cannot address these questions (below) without further invalidating his "ideas". — 180 Proof

Btw, I enjoyed The Matrix (only the first movie) as shallow, comic bookish gnosticism, not really a riff on Bostrom's digital update of Plato's Cave. Like e.g. Carlo Rovelli, David Deutsch, Seth Lioyd and Stephen Wolfram, I think the 'laws of nature' are computable even though the universe – like the brain – is not a "computer" (ergo, without some intentional agent aka "programmer") — 180 Proof

Of course it’s much easier said than done — Wayfarer

What can't you afford, exactly? Being calm and measured? That would certainly map well against your output. — Wayfarer

Sage advice from the Buddha: watch your breath. Don’t pursue chains of thought, or allow yourself to be seized by emotion. Know that everything is transient. Carry on. — Wayfarer

Reflecting on my own experience on forums, I’ve become upset mainly when I’m enthusiastic about an idea or perspective and others pour cold water on it. There have been times when I’ve been seriously perturbed by online debates. Debates about religion, philosophy and politics are often like that, one of the reasons that it has been considered poor etiquette to broach political and religious topics on social occasions (although of course this being a forum that is what is expected). But then learning to deal with adverse reactions has also been an important learning, and detachment is an important attribute. One of the best lecturers I had in philosophy had an uncanny ability to present differing philosophical perspectives in a way that was sympathetic to both sides without ever really needing to signal what he himself thought was right. He just laid out the cases, anticipated objections, summarised the issues. I admired that in him.

It’s also a factor that we live in a period of intense polarisation of views - culture wars, and the like. Many people hold very strongly to ideas that others may feel are absurd or dangerous. Anti-religious ideologues may see all religion as superstition, and fundamentalists may see science as the work of the devil. And so on. It’s one of the background factors in today’s culture. Again it’s where an element of detachment is important - doesn’t mean being apathetic, but learning to make dispassionate judgements. — Wayfarer

I have become agnostic based on my evaluations of theory, evidence, probability, limitations of knowledge etc. — Andrew4Handel

Whether the world is finite or infinite, limited or unlimited, the problem of your liberation remains the same. — Siddhartha Gautama (Parable of the Poisoned Arrow)

Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là. — Pierre-Simon Laplace

There’s actually no empirical difference between those two cases. There is if there was a true superposition, but there isn’t in the cat case. It’s been demonstrated with macroscopic objects, but under conditions which would kill any cat (such as being in a vacuum and almost 0°K). — noAxioms

[ ... ] Without laughter there is no Dao. — Laozi

I just don't see the sinister or aggression of an Agent - no insult intended. — unenlightened