= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
InquilineKea comments on How would you respond to the Philpapers "What are your Philosophical Positions" Survey? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Comments (37)
What I'm finding particularly interesting here: There are lots of people here who respond "yes" to a priori knowledge, but "no" to analytic-synthetic distinction.
Yet, on the philpapers correlation site, it says this: "Analytic-synthetic distinction:yes A priori knowledge:yes 0.456". This is one of the highest correlations on that site.
0.456 isn't a terribly high correlation coefficient. It's not that surprising to find lots of people giving different answers to the two.
Ooh I did that. I assign ~70% to the statement that all knowledge could be derived without making observations, if one was sufficiently intelligent. Something Tegmarkish could be one way of making that statement true for example. However, I think it is more likely that the Tegmarkian stuff is wrong, but there is another way of deriving such knowledge.
Makes sense, but in order to locate yourself within the Tegmark totality you'll have to open your eyes.
Yes, obviously I would agree with that.