Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Can anything be known for certain?

Magicr
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2012 8:05:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've been thinking about this recently. Isn't everything merely a branch of an axiom of faith. I have faith that what my senses tell me is accurate, so I believe that a world exists, that other people exist, etc.

Thus, once we realize that other people or things must exist, we must ask ourselves if we exist. The cogito confirms this, however it makes a fundamental assumption as well, does it not? That assumption, of course, is the truth of logic.

Thoughts?
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2012 12:44:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/17/2012 8:05:16 PM, Magicr wrote:
I've been thinking about this recently. Isn't everything merely a branch of an axiom of faith.

Bingo

Every belief in the end links to faith.

I have faith that what my senses tell me is accurate, so I believe that a world exists, that other people exist, etc.


Thus, once we realize that other people or things must exist, we must ask ourselves if we exist.

How do we know other people/things must exist?

The cogito confirms this, however it makes a fundamental assumption as well, does it not? That assumption, of course, is the truth of logic.

Absolutely. Objective logic cannot be confirmed and Descartes doesn't establish it from my knowledge.

Thoughts?
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Magicr
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2012 5:43:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/18/2012 12:44:34 AM, phantom wrote:
At 9/17/2012 8:05:16 PM, Magicr wrote:
I've been thinking about this recently. Isn't everything merely a branch of an axiom of faith.

Bingo

Every belief in the end links to faith.

I have faith that what my senses tell me is accurate, so I believe that a world exists, that other people exist, etc.


Thus, once we realize that other people or things must exist, we must ask ourselves if we exist.

How do we know other people/things must exist?

Mistake on my part. I meant to say once we have questioned other's existince, we must question our own.

The cogito confirms this, however it makes a fundamental assumption as well, does it not? That assumption, of course, is the truth of logic.


Absolutely. Objective logic cannot be confirmed and Descartes doesn't establish it from my knowledge.

Thoughts?
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2012 5:56:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/17/2012 8:05:16 PM, Magicr wrote:
I've been thinking about this recently. Isn't everything merely a branch of an axiom of faith. I have faith that what my senses tell me is accurate, so I believe that a world exists, that other people exist, etc.

Thus, once we realize that other people or things must exist, we must ask ourselves if we exist. The cogito confirms this, however it makes a fundamental assumption as well, does it not? That assumption, of course, is the truth of logic.

Thoughts?

It follows then that the world is what we make of it.

Not a bad message.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2012 10:05:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've been thinking about this recently. Isn't everything merely a branch of an axiom of faith. I have faith that what my senses tell me is accurate, so I believe that a world exists, that other people exist, etc.

Isn't everything merely a branch of an axiom of faith?

Just the fact that your saying" everything" it follows by analytic necessity that not everything is faith. For it that was true then we would never have the word faith because there would never be way we could distinguish it from knowledge from faith in the first place.

Beliefs, faith, and other:

I have an Idea of a unicorn; it"s not a belief, because I don"t believe in unicorns.
But I my Idea of a unicorn is self-evident upon my very thought of one. Believe has another criteria. To believe in unicorns it must be that I think my idea corresponds to an actual self-subsisting unicorn external to my Idea of a unicorn. That is what is self-evident is not faith based at all. Belief or faith has magnitude. I can believe in something more or less. The more something is certain the less faith I have to rely on. And the more belief in it is justified. You have to say I more and less faith in axioms, which is problematic.

Secondly a true axiom is not taken by faith.
In fact they should never be. If an axiom has to be taken of faith then you should be worried that is not a true axiom.

True axioms:
-self-evidence
-elementary

Self-evident:
What is true by necessity/certain is any immediate experience. It has nothing to nothing to do with belief/faith. It"s completely involuntary; it"s the immediate consciousness. You could be wrong about whether it correspond to physical perception. (Vertical perceptions) But non-the less the fact that you are having a perception 100% certain regardless to its relation with anything else.

Law of identity (via Leibniz)
So a perception is itself something and so perception is self-evident and any of the parts within a perception is a Fortiori true by analytic necessity.

Elementary:
What I mean by this is that the particular must be reduced to the point that they cannot be reduced no more. If an axiom is composite it"s not a true axiom.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 4:11:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I agree with this topic so much. To question the existence of an axiom would be questioning existence itself. Which may not be a bad idea. What quantifies existence? Does existence mean we can see or touch an object? If you believe in a multi-verse, I would think the idea of existence would be harder to wrap you mind around. There are too many question man just isn't able to answer yet.