= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Slider comments on Why I Reject the Correspondence Theory of Truth - Less Wrong Discussion
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)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (27)
Doesn't the advanced techonology of closing your eyes make it go away?
A demon would not be required to be consistent, but it appears we can detect patterns in sensedata. I could even argue or assume that we can detect these patterns before any pattern recognition rule is invented (ie that a theory need not be that sohisticated to use big wordy concepts such as time or space to get the patterns recognised). Sure we have deterministic function from sensedata to higher level abstractions but that doesn't mean the "being the case that (highlevel object)" would be somehow free to mean anything. Once you fix the meaning of your words you are not free to use them as you wish.
Closing your eyes isn't an act of "pure" will, it's always attended by other sensations. If you could will away the yellow disc without seeing black there instead and feeling your eyelids compress, then you could will it away by pure force of will.
It's possible that reality is just an infinite flux of random events, with rare islands where coincidence gives rise to the illusion of consistency, and we'd still be able to detect patterns if we were in fact dwelling on such an island.