|
|
#21
08-14-2005, 07:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: One of the Basic Questions of Philosophy?
Being right.
|
|
#22
08-14-2005, 08:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One of the Basic Questions of Philosophy?
[ QUOTE ]
It seems like everybody is not exactly getting my question. Rephrased. How important is it to be right? What is worth giving up to be right? [/ QUOTE ] It sounds like your asking about some value of being right even if it gives no advantage. There cannot be any such value as if there is some value (including pleasure) in being right for its own sake then that becomes an advantage of being right. chez
|
|
#23
08-14-2005, 08:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One of the Basic Questions of Philosophy?
[ QUOTE ]
It seems like everybody is not exactly getting my question. Rephrased. How important is it to be right? What is worth giving up to be right? [/ QUOTE ] Being right or wrong is not important at all. Learning is important.
|
|
#24
08-14-2005, 09:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One of the Basic Questions of Philosophy?
[ QUOTE ]
It seems obvious that some people have better lives for being religous and this is independant of the truth of their beliefs. chez [/ QUOTE ] i concur. many forms of optimism about life are beneficial to the user regardless of how anchored their beliefs are in reality. as humans evolved, being oblivious to certain aspects of reality was most likely advantagous to survival.
|
|
#27
08-15-2005, 12:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One of the Basic Questions of Philosophy?
[ QUOTE ]
"Many people live under the mistaken belief that being correct is advantagous. This may or may not be the case. I think it is very possible, that certain incorrect views might have an advantage." [/ QUOTE ]Most of us learned at a very young age that it was to our advantage to believe in Santa Claus.
|
|
#28
08-15-2005, 02:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One of the Basic Questions of Philosophy?
It seems our culture and/or genetics ecourages us to come to many incorrect conclusions. Whether this is for the benefit of the individual or the group as a whole is unclear. i.e. Peoples ability to make themselves believe lies that if you asked them point blank would say are unbelievable. People leting others ahead of them when driving. The benign approach to the prisoners delima.
Not sure if this is off point.
|
|
#29
08-15-2005, 02:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One of the Basic Questions of Philosophy?
your questoin is exceedingly difficult to answer but I will try my bes tto do so. I think that it is clear that people value having true beliefs ( or put another way that having true beliefs increases our well-being). I think the clearest example of this would be the case of the artful deceivers. Say that we could choose between two lives, both of which the sensations/experiences one has are qualitatively identical. In the first case all that person;s friends do not actually like him but are merely acting, and althouhg that person believes them to be true, it is not actually the case that they are. In the second case a person has friends who genuinely like him. I think that most peeople would prefer the second life even though the two have identical expereinces throughout their life. At this point I think we can conclude that being right has some value, but it's impossible to say how much vaalue there is to being right. To ask how much value we should place on being correct is somewhat akin to how much value we place to having coffee with friends on sunday mornings, it's different for each person. If you're asking people's opinion, then mine is that being right is of small value, but it breaks close decisions between alternatives.
|
|
#30
08-15-2005, 04:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Problem with David\'s Question....
[ QUOTE ]
Define "correct", then we may be able to have a meaningful discussion. Edit: After re-reading the OP, we will need to agree on definitions for both "correct" and "advantagous". [/ QUOTE ] I was going to write a reply about this exact thing, but I reskimmed the thread to make sure it hadn't already be said, and there it was.... David's question is flawed (I realize he's quoting someone else, but for the purposes of this thread, it's his) because of the nature of 'advantage'. The obvious question is then, "advantageous to what end?" It looks like, given the last bit of his post, he is not interested in 'local advantages' - specific circumstances related to individual events - but some sort of overall, objective advantage, where it's not clear at all what that entails, if anything meaningful at all. I'm a bit disappointed in David here. I disagree with you slightly on the importance of defining 'correct'. Yes, there is some fuzziness, but for the purposes of this thread, I think it's pretty clear. [ QUOTE ] If I define "advantagous" as "that which is conductive to my goals" and "correct" as "the most accurate depiction of reality" then it follows that the more correct I am, the better I can achieve my goals. [/ QUOTE ] That doesn't follow at all. It is not an inherent property of 'correctness' that it helps you achieve your goals. You're just assuming your conclusion.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
