Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > What is reasonable to believe?      Home login  
Joined: 1/27/2009
Msg: 2
What is reasonable to believe?Page 1 of 1    

He said, to paraphrase, "some people believe in evolution with less knowledge of the subject than I do, why is that?”

Perhaps he is attempting to explore the world of science and philosophy, at his own admission- so he has already begun the heuristic/ scientific method of sorts. We don't all have the knowledge or scientific backgrounds to have a "sophisticated heuristic"
'method' of scientific or philosophical rote ideology, yet we can all contribute, and some will contribute more than others regardless of their method ( of reasoning).

My 'heuristic' of sorts:

Free Thinking/ Reasoning
(Experiment)/ Study
Shared Exchanges---> Add'l Thought/ Reasoning
Joined: 11/2/2007
Msg: 3
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 2/26/2010 6:38:01 AM
I would suggest you google "Saint Thomas Aquinas" and read his Summas is link...
Joined: 10/10/2007
Msg: 4
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 2/26/2010 7:34:46 AM
Great call on the Aquinas, by the way, even though he's a personal enemy of mie (after all his sudy he decided women don't have souls). Interesting thinker, though.

And that sort of illustrates the problem. One CANNOT accumulate data without bias--that is impossible. You always start somewhere, at a point where you just assume "knowledge" you have is fact. ou just assume your point of view is the way to come at it--even in "Learning thought techniques (philosophy) and logic", YOU [OP] are assuming that is the "right" course. Is it?
Joined: 6/18/2008
Msg: 5
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 2/26/2010 9:00:24 AM
For myself, ascertaining a position on any given topic is generally as rigorous as the topic itself. That is, does the topic easily lend itself to an answer?

For example, 2+2=4. I have developed a satisfiable knowledge of this statement. It is contestable on certain levels but those levels become so abstract as to not matter in terms of its everyday use. Even if I cannot abstractly prove 2+2=4, I can use it in my daily life to my advantage.

Then there are issues whose status as knowledge is not so easily ascertained. For example, the statement that man evolved from a sort of molecular, biological mush of sorts. Whereas the data is there to ascertain this perspective as knowledge, it requires much more effort from the individual to understand why that is so. Unlike 2+2=4, the use of the knowledge that we evolved is much less obvious and requires a more thorough investigation into many different fields. As such, I find I develop this type of knowledge, that is the knowledge which requires knowledge from many fields, very gradually until it turns into a sort of feeling.

I may take information from sources A-Z and the knowledge I obtain through those sources will not be committed to a perfect, photographic memory. However, it is turned into a sort of feeling premised on some certain facts which are memorized.

At the end of the day, though, the statement 2+2=4 and that we evolved are both equally difficult to absolutely prove. Which is, I suppose, what makes life so interesting.
Joined: 6/26/2009
Msg: 6
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 2/26/2010 9:08:43 AM

The things that are heavily debated are those things that lie outside our direct experience; who are the worst crooks, the Republicans or the Democrats? Is there a god? Did we really evolve?

Many of the heavily debated topics that your referred to are not actually outside our direct experience. We are always experiencing but our experiences are very individualized and filtered through our ego. Our reactions are tempered by who we are, what our values are, etc... These things are within our direct experience but there is no universal collective experience that is the same, hence the debate that can not be "won" by either side.
Joined: 11/20/2004
Msg: 7
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 2/26/2010 9:52:10 AM
The strange part of your discussion. In most cases people will accept things, in my example that people in government positions have power over them, up until a point. During the Clinton scandal I knew a lady that was greatly upset with Clinton's actions, not because he was a president, but because she believed he would get away with it due to his seat of power. That same lady will back down on just about anything if someone from a seat of power gave her any inkling of reason to do so, no matter if the reason has seat in fact or fiction. I noticed there are a lot of people like that since then, it's kind of scary how the things we take as fact, even believe, can be so easily disturbed.

I'm one of those people that tends to question everything, even if I don't do so aloud, to avoid such issues. But even with such an attitude it's time consuming to get down to the heart of matters in order to find the logic involved. Still it usually isn't to difficult, and majority of the time involves thought that could be done while performing repetitive task.

The case of 2+2=4 could be provided for any numeric system (and there are a lot of those, I regularly work with no less than 3 numeric systems). However those tend to boil back into the origination of the numeral system involved, and is a pointless spot to debate; the real debate comes in when we apply them to the world around it, sure it's nice when the numbers work to prove how a process plays out, but what about whether we are using the right scale to represent those processes numerically? I know in computer rendering if I use a 16-bit color it looks very bad, the lighting has noticeable steps instead of smooth fades; doubling the accuracy by using a 32-bit color looks a lot better, still it misses the detail provided by light in the real world; 64-bit color can allow such an accuracy as to come close to what the human eye's range is on a screen, but still falls short of the real things. All of those are just scales of the same numbers, unlike on a computer where the scale doesn't round to allow for a smaller scale, a lot of math performed in the real world rounds (ex 1.001 becomes 1), if I choose to round my numbers in computer rendering the results start to loose huge amounts of minute detail that can be the difference of fooling the human eye and showing just how cheaply done a visual effect is.
Joined: 1/27/2009
Msg: 8
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 2/26/2010 10:08:17 AM
One CANNOT accumulate data without bias--that is impossible

the idea is to collect enough data, expermentation, interpolations, etc to decrease the biased interpretations of usable data etc

this is what leads to theory

 Island home
Joined: 7/5/2009
Msg: 9
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 2/26/2010 5:45:03 PM
It is reasonable to believe something
if your are aware/acknowledge your belief is based on some assumption

It is unreasonable to believe something
If you believe your belief is unquestionable/absolute

In my not so humble opinion
Joined: 1/21/2007
Msg: 13
What is reasonable to believe?
Posted: 3/2/2010 5:07:22 PM
What is 'reasonable" to believe? Whatever I frikkin' well tell ya! So now ya know!

(Same answer goes to the kids...hehehehe....mean huh?)
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > What is reasonable to believe?