Epistemology: Part 2

[Xenocrates]

Read part 1 here (http://www.caribyard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3088).

How can we prove that an idea is sensible?

[BlackCryptoKnight]

Read part 1 here (http://www.caribyard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3088).

How can we prove that an idea is sensible?

What is "sensible" ?

[Xenocrates]

Very good answer BCK. :eusa_clap By extension, what are the parameters we subconsciously use to determine sensibility?

[ramesh]

We determine an idea is sensible if it conforms to our existing evaluation of what is sensible. In other words, if it does not promote what you consider to be the truth it is nonsense.

[Xenocrates]

Then what do we consider to be truth?

[ramesh]

Then what do we consider to be truth? Personal truth is all around us, but total truth may be inconceivable to the human mind. It would have to take in everything that has happened to every subatomic particle in this and every other Universe.

[Xenocrates]

With that said, is it plausible to assume then that since truth is relative to the human mind, that nothing we conceive of is sensible?

[ramesh]

We can conceive of ideas that we believe are sensible based on our personal perception of what the word means. For each person this may be something completely different or abstract.

Take the case of Adolf Hitler. To him, the segregation and/or extermination of non-Aryans was a most sensible prospect.

To Al Qaeda death squads the idea of self sacrifice is the most sensible approach to serving Allah.

[Xenocrates]

So therefore because these people in history did what they did, it is therefore sensible simply because they perceived it as such? Is that sensible to anyone else? Why?

[ramesh]

You an I may not view these ideas as sensible. That is because of how we were brought up and perceived the world around us. They were brought up under different ideas and ideals. It is perhaps all a question of what input we receive from the world around us. The Bible says, "As you so, sow shall you reap." ;)

[AngelsKiss]

To Al Qaeda death squads the idea of self sacrifice is the most sensible approach to serving Allah.

If you think about it, any soldier going to war should be prepared to die, unless the enemy decides to drop and play dead so you can make him a POW.

The difference between the Al Qaeda soldiers and the American soldiers is that the the Al Qaeda soldiers have already made peace with their God and are prepared to die, where as the American soldiers believe their leader's hype that they are invincible and that "they are going to shock and awe them".

The Al Qaeda soldiers believe they are fighting for God against the infidels, while the American soldiers believe they are fighting for freedom and against terrorism. The former is labeled a terrorist, the latter a freedom fighter. Which of the 2 is right is all a matter of perspective.

Perception is reality to those who hold the belief that what they perceive is the truth as they know it.

[gucci man]

everything is relative, xeno, everything.

therefore, we all perceive things differently based on what we hold as valuable.

killing myself to kill many others to serve my God?
The taliban: GREEATT!
The christians: Are you kidding me?

[gucci man]

If you think about it, any soldier going to war should be prepared to die, unless the enemy decides to drop and play dead so you can make him a POW.


The objective of war is not to die for your country, it's to let the other bastards die for theirs!

:D

[Manu]

The objective of war is not to die for your country, it's to let the other bastards die for theirs!

:D


By your logic....so too is this relative... it depends on which side you're on... lol....the side that is right.... or the one that is left.

[AngelsKiss]

The objective of war is not to die for your country, it's to let the other bastards die for theirs!

:D

And exactly what do you think the enemy is thinking? I didn't say the objectives is for them to die, but that they should prepared to die.

[Xenocrates]

So then we agree that sensibility is relative to life experiences then, right? Ok, here's the next question:

Question #1: If sensibility is relative to personal experience, isn't it reasonable to deduce that our individual sensibilities are effectively nonsensical, because of our limited life experiences?

Think about it: If I grew up a Muslim, I may think the christian (or indeed, the Western) way of life is nonsense. However, if I grew up a christian, I may think that the Muslim (or indeed, the Eastern) way of life is nonsense.

Question #2: How can I obtain pure sensibility, such that it doesn't matter whether I'm Muslim, Christian, black, white, rich or poor - basically, irrespective of my life experiences, that whatever I conceive of is purely and truly sensible? Does such a sensibility even exist?

[ramesh]

Question #1: If sensibility is relative to personal experience, isn't it reasonable to deduce that our individual sensibilities are effectively nonsensical, because of our limited life experiences? Perhaps this is why group experiences are taken into account when making decisions. The group life experience exceeds the individual life experience and therefore has more respect. This in itself engenders a society based culture where a group's consensus is given top prority, especially in a Democratic system. Other models hold that an elected official has most knowledge because all respect him. Also, some cultures believe there is an elite class whose knowledge has been passed down through their genes, albeit with the help of advisors.

Think about it: If I grew up a Muslim, I may think the christian (or indeed, the Western) way of life is nonsense. However, if I grew up a christian, I may think that the Muslim (or indeed, the Eastern) way of life is nonsense. Exactly. How does any one person or entity know that their ideas are correct or that there is even a correct idea. For all we know the Universe is much more complex than anyone can imagine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEOkxRLzBf0) and there is no us, just an idea.

Question #2: How can I obtain pure sensibility, such that it doesn't matter whether I'm Muslim, Christian, black, white, rich or poor - basically, irrespective of my life experiences, that whatever I conceive of is purely and truly sensible? Does such a sensibility even exist?Abandon all idea that these religions know the truth or are capable of doing so. Blind faith may take you into a chasm or through the valley of the shadow of death. Either way it is not your ideas, they are someone else's.

[Xenocrates]

Abandon all idea that these religions know the truth or are capable of doing so. Blind faith may take you into a chasm or through the valley of the shadow of death. Either way it is not your ideas, they are someone else's. - Then why do so many people ascribe some degree of sensibility to religion? I've realised that religion is preferred largely by people who are gullible. Other people who question the logic of everything are less likely to subscribe to any religion, because religion in and of itself doesn't seem to make sense. So here's the 64 million dollar question (and this is for everyone):

Is it that religion requires that the people accept nonsense without questioning the sensibility of it, or is it that there is sensibility in religion such that people at some level are aware of it?

[gucci man]

I'll rather live believing that my God is real, than live in disbelieve only to die and awake into my own judgment.

Also, There should be no faith without reason.

[Xenocrates]

Shouldn't that be, "...there should be faith without reason"?

Either way, I want to know what is it in people that would cause them to think that religion in and of itself makes sense to accept it in the first place. It can't be that most of us are such that we accept anything without thinking about it. For if that is so, then that would mean that most people are very easy to con and will believe anything, irrespective of whether or not it makes sense.

Do you agree or disagree?

[Greatis]

There is a simple ans to question #2 Xeno. NO, NO, NO.

Whether we use group experiences or our own to form opinions it just won't quantify. Ramesh said and i quote "Personal truth is all around us, but total truth may be inconceivable to the human mind. It would have to take in everything that has happened to every subatomic particle in this and every other Universe."

To make a sensible and informed decision you have to take into consideration all the variables and the human mind in it's current state cannot conceive that.