Comment on Skepticism about Probability

Sun, 02 Feb 2014 08:04:55 GMT

You believe that the world exists, your memories are reliable, etc. You argue that a system that does not produce those conclusions is not good enough because they are true and a system must show they are true. But how on earth do you know that? Assuming induction, that your memories are reliable etc to judge Epistemic rules is circular.

You must admit it is absurd that you know the world exists with certainty, therefore you must admit you believe it exists on probability. Therefore your entire case depends on the legitimacy of probability.

Before accusing me of contradiction, remember my posistion all along has a distinction between faith and rational belief.

Discuss