On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:24:13 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 4/17/2013 6:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 16 Apr 2013, at 19:51, meekerdb wrote: > > On 4/16/2013 1:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > There is no knowledge as such in science. > > > That's contrary to all usage. It means I don't know the Earth is round > and I don't know there's a refrigerator in my kitchen. I understand these > are theories or models and that they are defeasible. > > > That's the point. That is important when we talk on science in science. > The usage is good for sending man on the moon, but in epistemological > research, we must be more cautious with the terming. > > > > But to say there is no knowledge because knowledge must be certain seems > perverse. > > > Knowledge must be true, not certain. Truth is anything but certain, in > most case. The only exception might be consciousness. > > > > > And it doesn't comport with your own formula that "knowledge = true > belief". My belief that there's a refrigerator in my kitchen can be true > without being certain. > > > Exactly. > > > Then you cannot assert that there is no knowledge in science. > > > Why? > > > Because I believe there's a refrigerator in my kitchen and that may be > true. If it is then I have knowledge and to assert there can be no such > knowledge is false. >
If you were some being made of neutrinos, there wouldn't be a refrigerator or a kitchen, maybe something more like a thin haze or vapor. If you were as big as a star, the whole country you live in would be an insignificant smudge on an orbiting pellet. Craig > Brent > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
