:up: Maybe life is precisely about there being a (mighty) hole in your sub and limping safely back to port. Sophia is elusive.

Did you know?

Dance is therapeutic (as per Swiss psychologist Carl Jung). So, people, do you or do you not want a PM who's healthy in mind and body?

They covered it up :lol: probably the percentage is even higher — javi2541997

:lol:

trust in democratic practices — Banno

:rofl: Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman Banno.

truth ranges over propositions — Banno

Maybe you should rephrase that for Srap Tasmaner's benefit.

I don't know why I exist or what I was supposed to do. — TiredThinker

[ ... ]After that, I understood the rules, I knew what I was supposed to do, but I didn't. I couldn't. I was compelled to stay, compelled to disobey. — Agent Smith

:grin: and bear it!

I think it's just a post just going around in circles, making it seem complex, but it is the inevitable going around in circles when trying to claim not merely belief, but knowledge (except in the case of that which is presently perceived) that is the problem. Belief may consist in feeling certain, but we don't merely want to feel certain, since then it would be possible to be wrong, but aspire, futilely, to be certain; in other words to be able to claim knowledge that we, per impossibile, know that we know and know that it cannot be wrong.

Of course, for all practical, non-skeptical, purposes we have all kinds of "certain" knowledge. — Janus

Fallibilism springs to mind. Methinks we've set the bar so high that we can forget about 1^st, 2^nd, and 3^rd positions, there isn't even one who can make the jump.

I say we make do with what we got ... pray and hope for the best!

It's interesting that some people think this is about humans being "special". — baker

Muchas gracias! The data speaks for itself I'm told but true, the universe may be fine-tuned for something else entirely. We have on our hands a case to solve, oui monsieur?

A complex post; above my paygrade pal.

Anyhow, we're in Gettier problem territory as per my map. There seems to be an gap between truth and justification i.e. even if you have a proof for a proposition p, p can still be false. Go figure! From an induction perspective this makes complete sense of course but from a deduction point of view - the conclusion is necessarily true if the premises are and duely plugged into a valid argument form - it doesn't. You mentioned infinte regress, gold star for you!

Hence life swings like pendulum to and fro between pain and boredom, — schopenhauer1

Amazing stuff! Happiness isn't even among the options; it's just pain and/or ennui!

I was exploring the possibility of there being meaning in/to suffering. I recall coming across the expression "gratituous suffering" and that this is the worst-case scenario. What if we don't eliminate suffering (re transhumanism) but instead discover that suffering has a purpose, a good purpose? Would antinatalism lose its appeal then?

Indeed, if belief and truth were not different, then all we would need for knowledge would be justified belief. — Banno

I believe in mathematics truth is defined as provable i.e. knowledge is justified true belief (truth is redundant i.e. subsumed under justification).

You're not immoral just because you're factually wrong. — Hanover

Clifford's essay is chiefly remembered for two things: a story and a principle. The story is that of a shipowner who, once upon a time, was inclined to sell tickets for a transatlantic voyage. It struck him that his ship was rickety, and that its soundness might be in question. Knowing that repairs would be costly and cause significant delay, the shipowner managed to push these worries aside and form the “sincere and comfortable conviction that his vessel was thoroughly safe and seaworthy.” He sold the tickets, bade the passengers farewell, and then quietly collected the insurance money “when she went down in mid-ocean and told no tales” (1877, 70).

According to Clifford (who himself once survived a shipwreck, and so must have found this behavior particularly loathsome), the owner in the story was “verily guilty of the death of those men,” because even though he sincerely believed that the ship was sound, “he had no right to believe on such evidence as was before him.” Why did he have no such right? Because, says Clifford, “he had acquired his belief not by honestly earning it in patient investigation, but by stifling his doubts” (1877, 70). After making this diagnosis, Clifford changes the end of the story: the ship doesn't meet a liquid demise, but rather arrives safe and sound into New York harbor. Does the new outcome relieve the shipowner of blame for his belief? “Not one jot,” Clifford declares: he is equally guilty—equally blameworthy—for believing something on insufficient evidence.

Clifford goes on to cite our intuitive indictments of the shipowner—in both versions of the story—as grounds for his famous principle:

(Clifford's Principle) “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence.” — SEP (Ethics of belief)

What about ignorantia juris non excusat?

Desmet does not claim that this world view is particularly prevalent among scientists, nor is it meant to be an attack on modern science. I've tried to make that clear on multiple occasions in this thread. — Tzeentch

The title "the end of the [...]" was just plain and simple rhetoric then? Nevertheless, it does put the reader in the right frame of mind to process the rest of Desmet. Perhaps we're too enamored of the mechanistic world view, enthralled by it as it were, to see its flaws and hence the title had to be crafted (most carefully) to break the spell. Good job!

Natalism is militaristic as well... One person's enthusiasm becomes another person's burden.. And the post-facto excuses abound for this misguided notion! — schopenhauer1

How exactly is natalism militaristic? Can you furnish an example like the one I gave?

Antinatalism is a somewhat militaristic point of view. In this war movie - forgot the name, sorry - that depicted the allied landing in Normandy, the Germans on the hills above the beach aimed their guns on the boats (life) instead of the soldiers (suffering) in them! It's the same thing! :snicker:

The body is the prison of the soul. — Socrates

A Malus Deus building the perfect penitentiary colony for us hapless souls.

The Demiurge, one of those Aeons, creates the physical world. Divine elements "fall" into the material realm, and are locked within human beings. — Wikipedia

By the way kudos to the OP - s/he forced us to make some changes to the picture of God we have in our minds.

P. S. How do you know the universe isn't fine tuned for souls as well? Do you know something we don't? Spit it out ..
will you?

If true claims can be unwarranted and unwarranted claims can be true, then defining truth in terms of warrant seems unwarranted. — Pie

Consider the accepted though controversial definition of knowledge as justified, true, belief (JTB theory of knowledge). A proposition p is knowledge IFF

There's a knower K

a) who has the belief p
b) p is true
c) p is justified

If all conditions a, b, c are fulfilled K knows p and that's knowledge. Clearly, since p is true is a separate condition (b) to justification (c), the conclusion is obvious viz. that whether p is true or not needs to be determined independently of its justification. For that the first port of call is a definition of truth that has nothing to do with justification i.e. we can't say that a proposition p is true IFF there's proof of p. What might this definition (of truth) be and how are we going to verify/falsify the truths of propositions in a way that skips proofs/justifications?

$\begin{array} {|r|r|}\hline Pascal's \space Wager & God \space exists & God \space doesn't \space exist \\ \hline Theist & Big \space win \space (Jannat) & Minimal \space loss \\ \hline Atheist & Big \space loss \space (Jahanam) & Minimal \space win \\ \hline \end{array}$

:grin:

No links, unless pointing to texts like Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Ethics and Politics count as links.

Look at the relation and distinction between nature and custom or logos and nomos. — Fooloso4

No problemo!

The search for authenticity and knowing oneself may still result in the experience of the dungeon state, as described in the poem.

Yes, Jack.

By nature, “I” am very serious. At one time my approach might have been described as Teddy Roosevelt charging San Juan Hill. Smile! I thought this admirable too: ‘I take pride in this great wall’. After falling down the hill too many times to be counted, I saw that trying so hard was part of the problem. That is, I had not seen the extraordinary effort was: ‘I am ever busy building this wall all around…and for all the care I take I lose sight of my true being.’

There is something* driving me against which the walls are crumbling. There are glimpses of freedom sometimes only a brief moment, now hours, even full days. This makes it easier than before to continue to cooperate with that something. This is not to say there are no moments back in the dungeon state, and not suggesting you are trying too hard. All I can offer is my own experience.

*The reason I write about no self is because that something is not a self. — ArielAssante

Interesting stuff although I couldn't parse it to my satisfaction. Perhaps you identify with a future self - who you wanna be as a person - and finding your present self falls short of the mark, you deny that there's a self.

I don't want anyone to govern me — Yohan

It looks like you're forgettin' the part where a government does its thing for your benefit. No single individual is powerful enough to defend himself, his interests i.e. we need help (from the government).

This is not so true, because at the time of falling there are many possibilities open to the human being which the stone does not have. We can flail around, scream, grab for things, reach for a parachute, whatever. A stone doesn't have these options. — Metaphysician Undercover

Indeed, we may protest in all and sundry ways but the tug of gravity - the force acting on you and a stone with equal mass to yours - will be the same. Nevertheless we maybe able to reduce counter gravity by increasing our air resistance via maximizing our surface area either by simply stretching out our limbs and assuming a prone/supine position or with the aid of a parachute or a wingsuit.

I think Heidegger had a lot to say about fallenness. It appears like Dasein has fallen into the world, or something like that. I think this is the process whereby authenticity is replaced by inauthenticity, it has something to do with being present in time. — Metaphysician Undercover

What be dasein?

Yeah ok, I catch yer drift! 'am no even in it so ah cannae even win it by ra way' (the lotto that is, I tend to type in Scots dialect when I am being a little incredulous.) — universeness

:up:

Its called self-government. — Yohan

Detailed files on self-government, if you have 'em please.

It's just you. These things were discussed but by other names. — Fooloso4

Where? If it's not too much to ask I'd be grateful for a link. Muchas gracias.

Interesting percentages. I should've framed the question differently and perhaps the study is malapropos in re the issue at hand. I'll say no more.

That's not really relevant. I'm sure the average woman doesn't play chess either. Obviously chess playing women are devilish heathens. — Benkei

I see. Danke for the clarification.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. — Benjamin Disraeli?

Pardon the oversight monsieur.

That is all relative in the light of her position as someone else has allready mentioned. She tread dangerously considering who and what she is and which she should have taken into account before doing so. If she didnt she must have failed to overview the job description. Watching it all from afar makes for a shallow observation, up close it all must have seemed rather amateurish. — Seeker

You have a point but one has to consider the undeniable fact that Sanna Marin is a human and will want to do what humans want to do at that age.

Stay at home... I guess — javi2541997

We'll need to dig up stats on what 36 yr old (Finnish) women do.

Ok, ok! You'll need access to resources that you wish to acquire by luck and luck alone (perhaps you're the type of person who wins lotteries, etc.) and then with the resources so acquired you wanna help people! Bonam fortunam!

Are you insinuating she is still young to act as a drunk teenager? Despite the important fact that she is the PM I don't see her as "little girl" — javi2541997

What does the average 36 year old (Finnish) woman do after sunset?

:up:

One must be wary of "etymology-based" definitions. The definition employed by the logician will significantly restrict the word's usage in comparison to the common usage. However, the word still has all that baggage within the reader's mind, habitual associations. The dishonest logician (sophist) will employ that baggage (equivocation) to produce the appearance of valid conclusions which are really invalid. The conclusions are invalid because they require making associations outside of what is stipulated by the significantly restricted definition. — Metaphysician Undercover

Yeah, it can be misleading I hear - I came across an example or two which I can't recall at the moment (Memory Access Failure). Much obliged for the warning!

There's no "confusion" ...

How A involuntarily happens (i.e. changes).

Why B voluntarily decided and/or acted. — 180 Proof

Not sure what ya mean but going by your track record, you're probably right! :cool:

:nerd: Nerdview.

Sanna Marin forgot that she was the PM and people who've been hauling her over the coals forget that she's a 36 year old woman. :smile:

:fire:

There must be, there's got to be, a simple yet effective, as in beneficial to all, way to govern.

I don't want to be rich — universeness

:blush: Sometimes you don't know that you want. :wink:

If I had access to an excessive amount of resources [...] — universeness

To be in a position where you have "access to an excessive amount of resources ...", one has to become a tycoon; to become a tycooon one has to want to be one unless ... you're relying on pure luck to become obscenely rich.

Pray on my behalf too, because I don't use to pray myself. :smile: — Alkis Piskas

Dear Lord,

Please bless Greece and her people. Amen!

:pray: :pray: :pray:

Agent Smith & Alkis Piskas

:up: