You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

AlexMennen comments on two puzzles on rationality of defeat - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: fsopho 12 December 2011 02:17PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (55)
Tags: epistemology defeat belief rationality evidence

Comments (55)

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

Comment author: AlexMennen 14 December 2011 06:33:27PM *  0 points [-]

at least one of your premises is logically inconsistent with he others -- that they cannot all be true.

Suppose I have three axioms: A, B, and C.

A: x=5

B: x+y=4

C: 2x+y=6

Which axiom is logically inconsistent with the others? (A, B), (B, C), and (A, C) are all consistent systems, so I can't declare any of the axioms to be false, just that for any particular model of anything remotely interesting, at least one of them must not apply.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit