• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

To be right or to be wrong

Bodhi Dharma Zen said:
What is "to be right" or "to be wrong" In which circumstantes can one say that his/her opinions are on one side or the other? Am I right if I reach a conclusion (that later is proven correct) with a wrong induction? Am I wrong if the consensus believes Im wrong?

Im I right if what I say is verified by the evidence? What if the evidence change?

Anyway, questions, questions.
Click to expand...

I am equally right and wrong.

Some days are more equal than others.
 
Bodhi Dharma Zen said:
Anyway, questions, questions.
Click to expand...

Yes.

Stipulations are just that - stipulations.

And sorites are sorites, although at what point a vagueness becomes a sorite is, shall we say, subject to stipulation. ;)

True-false may very well be a "false dichotomy." But it would be kind of hard to prove...


Like, what dollar value won does it take to...

Win Powerball!!!
 
dglas said:
And sorites are sorites, although at what point a vagueness becomes a sorite is, shall we say, subject to stipulation. ;)
Click to expand...

Exactly. I find it astonishing that some people (specially in this forum) negates any value of philosophy as a needed step to do science! No assumptions, no science. Incorrect assumptions equals wrong experiments. Bad reasoning and you get incorrect conclusions.
 
Bodhi Dharma Zen said:
Exactly. I find it astonishing that some people (specially in this forum) negates any value of philosophy as a needed step to do science! No assumptions, no science. Incorrect assumptions equals wrong experiments. Bad reasoning and you get incorrect conclusions.
Click to expand...

Sadly, it's a somewhat-deserved backlash to the vague mystical metaphysics that assumed control over philosophy for so long, backed by religion that needed so hard to divide us from our humanity to prop up the idea that people should be cogs in a dogmatic machine. That backlash represents not carefully enough checking the targets before unloading the clip.

And, as you correctly pointed out, there are some (logical some, meaning at least one) who treat fact as Truth, making them dogmatic in exactly the same way the religious are. They think they are not engaging in anything philosophical when, in fact, they have become victims of the same mindset under a different name.

Orthodoxy is orthodoxy, after all.

Many do not realize where the boundary between rigorous examination-oriented philosophy and vague metaphysics lies. So they assume there is none. It'll take some work to help with that wet paper bag...

There was a glorious moment between the time of the past and the moment of the feminist movement's victory (for example) where, just for the merest hint of an instant, we had possibilities. And then that all-too-brief window of opportunity passed in the name of competing ideologies and we succumbed to the hardening of the grey matter again - back to orthodoxy.

Eons of stagnation punctuated by mere moments of potential. Sigh.


It'd all be so much better if we could just...

Win Powerball!!!
 
Last edited:
dglas said:
And, as you correctly pointed out, there are some (logical some, meaning at least one) who treat fact as Truth, making them dogmatic in exactly the same way the religious are.
Click to expand...

And that means dark ages! I agree, this is sad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom