Philosophy Book Club: Ribbon Cutting

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is SK pointing out that to conclude P about the world using logic requires starting with some premise that is not logically deduced and has to be taken on faith.


[/ QUOTE ]

DING!DING!DING!DING!DING!

Logic is a set of rules for making valid deductions from assumptions, i.e. premisses accepted on faith. This does not mean that faith is, or should be, immune to the judgments of logic, but there is a certain art to such endeavors ("What [doubting] those ancient Greeks . . . regarded as a task for a whole lifetime . . . . faith was a task for a whole lifetime").

I'm leaving for OSU in a couple minutes, but I'll get back to this after the game.

Scott

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you give an example of a premise used in logic that is based on faith?

[/ QUOTE ]
Its not a premise used in logic but a premise used in a logical argument.

If you conclude with a statement about the nature of the world then you sarted from at least one premise that is about the world. Where do the initial premises come from?

An example of an initial premise might be that you are observing a real external world. Try proving that you're not dreaming it all.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a vast epistemic middleground between accepting a premise on faith and proving the premise. Skepticism about the external world notwithstanding, it can be perfectly reasonable to believe that the external world exists. Meeting the challenge of philosophical skepticism about the existence of the external world may ultimately require some sort of proof, but reasonable belief in the existence of the external world does not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Before we get into the thorny paradise of reasonable belief, is KS talking about about reasonable belief or undoubted truth?

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what K is talking about, but I was responding to your statement that arguments are based on premises taken on faith. You gave the example of a belief in the external world, and said "try proving that you're not dreaming at all."

My point is that a premise that says there is an external world does not have to rely on faith but by contrast can be a reasonably held belief, and it does not have to be based on a 'proof' in order for it to be a reasonably held belief.

Hence a premise that says that the external world exists is not a premise that we must accept on faith.

[/ QUOTE ]
but not all our reasonable beliefs are true so either you have to have some doubt that your reasonable belief about the external world is one of the true ones or you need some faith.

btw what in the nature of the reasonable belief that gets you to your conclusion that the external world exists?

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

I would reject the dilemma you pose--that you either have to have some doubt that your reasonable belief is true or you have to take it partly on faith.

I agree that any belief 'about the external world' (not just the belief that there is an external world) is subject to some, however minute, degree of doubt, but that does not mean that we 'fill in' the remainder with faith.

As Hume said, the reasonable man proportions his belief to the evidence, which I take to mean that we can rationally hold beliefs to varying degrees. I am more sure that the sun will rise tomorrow than I am that the Colts will win the Super Bowl, because the evidence suggests that the former belief is on firmer ground. This does not mean that any element of faith is a part of my holding either belief, just that I hold one belief more strongly in terms of its likelihood of being true than the other.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm nearly very happy with stance, its the one I take as well. It doesn't contradict what I said at the beginning it just means that there are no conclusions about the world.

There's still a major problem though, does it just sound more reasonable to say that its is more likely your perception of the external world is not some sort of dream, or can you explain the reasoning? All the evidence you have will be the same whether its some type of dream or not.

chez