TheOtherDave comments on Stupid Questions December 2014 - Less Wrong

16 Post author: Gondolinian 08 December 2014 03:39PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (341)
Tags: stupid_questions

Comments (341)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 15 December 2014 06:54:19PM *  0 points [-]

I understand that this has no decision-making value. I'm only interested in the philosophical meaning of this point.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 16 December 2014 01:09:45AM 0 points [-]

Hm.
Can you say more about what you're trying to convey by "philosophical meaning"?

For example, what is the philosophical meaning of your question?

Comment author: [deleted] 16 December 2014 03:52:47PM 0 points [-]

That if we are to be completely intellectually honest and rigorous, we must accept complete skepticism.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 16 December 2014 09:36:12PM 0 points [-]

Hm.
OK. Thanks for replying, tapping out here.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 16 December 2014 08:35:21PM 0 points [-]

Maybe we could honestly accept than impossible demands of rigor are indeed impossible. And focus on what is possible.

You can't convince a rock to agree with you on something. There is still some chance with humans.

Comment author: [deleted] 28 December 2014 06:16:19PM *  0 points [-]

The Tortoise's mind needs the dynamic of adding Y to the belief pool when X and (X→Y) are previously in the belief pool. If this dynamic is not present—a rock, for example, lacks it—then you can go on adding in X and (X→Y) and (X⋀(X→Y))→Y until the end of eternity, without ever getting to Y.

This appears to be a circular argument.

Maybe we could honestly accept than impossible demands of rigor are indeed impossible. And focus on what is possible.

This is why I wrote this:

I understand that this has no decision-making value.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit