NationStates Jolt Archive

So what do y'all think?

Duh?? What are you asking? If thinking and theorisisng about how we know anything is good or bad?

Duh?? What are you asking? If thinking and theorisisng about how we know anything is good or bad?

That's not quite how I would have put it myself, but yeah.

So what do y'all think?
I don't know.
:D

Maybe!

Good seems to have a clear lead.

So what do y'all think?

Internalist or externalist theories?



Epistemology: Is knowledge knowable? If not, how do we know this?

So what do y'all think?

I try not to ... but you go right ahead!

Oh, I thought it said EPISIOTOMY, a procedure for which I am inelligible.

Neither. It simply is.

Internalist or externalist theories?



Epistemology: Is knowledge knowable? If not, how do we know this?

Either. This poll was designed in the likeness of the other "Good or Bad?" polls. Basically, it's ambiguous and useless as a mechanism for data collection, as are the other two polls. I just thought it might spark more interesting discussion.

By the way, which of the two (internalist or externalist) do you hold to? Perhaps you hold to some odd combination of both, but from my impressions of you I would guess you would be more in line with the externalist perspective.

Either. This poll was designed in the likeness of the other "Good or Bad?" polls. Basically, it's ambiguous and useless as a mechanism for data collection, as are the other two polls. I just thought it might spark more interesting discussion.

Are you going to be brave enough to make the Good or Bad: Good or Bad? pastiche thread?

By the way, which of the two (internalist or externalist) do you hold to? Perhaps you hold to some odd combination of both, but from my impressions of you I would guess you would be more in line with the externalist perspective.

Both of the schools have their failings: I have to say my interest in this corner of philosophy was well and truly quashed by a particularly incompetent lecturer. It just became an area which I have never really had a particular facsination with. Some of Kripke seems kind of interesting, but I just can't really fix my attention on it.

Are you going to be brave enough to make the Good or Bad: Good or Bad? pastiche thread?
I was about to do that, but then I remembered Karmabaijan's righteous mod wrath over last time...
And coupled with industrial mod power, wrath doesn't sound very appealing right now...

Are you going to be brave enough to make the Good or Bad: Good or Bad? pastiche thread?

There is a fine line between bravery and stupidity. I think I would be crossing it if I made that thread. :D

Both of the schools have their failings: I have to say my interest in this corner of philosophy was well and truly quashed by a particularly incompetent lecturer. It just became an area which I have never really had a particular facsination with. Some of Kripke seems kind of interesting, but I just can't really fix my attention on it.

That's unfortunate. I suppose I was lucky in having the professor I did for my Introduction to Logic class. His enthusiasm for the material engendered a similar response in me.

I was about to do that, but then I remembered Karmabaijan's righteous mod wrath over last time...
And coupled with industrial mod power, wrath doesn't sound very appealing right now...

We could probably get away with it if we took a Nietzschean slant on it and asked whether 'good' and 'bad' are actually the criteria by which we should judge people and the world, rather than 'Good' and 'Evil'... see Beyond Good And Evil for the lowdown.

There is a fine line between bravery and stupidity. I think I would be crossing it if I made that thread. :D

There is a thin line between clever and stupid.



That's unfortunate. I suppose I was lucky in having the professor I did for my Introduction to Logic class. His enthusiasm for the material engendered a similar response in me.

Yeah, I had a very enthusiastic introduction to logic as well from a Scottish lecturer who took great delight in including Partick Thistle is just about every syllogism and glorying in any opportunity to throw the 'no true Scotsman' thang into the equation at the slightest excuse, but to my shame my knowledge of it remains a somewhat historical one - covering your classical Aristotelian logic and propositional logic, but I never took the chance to really try and get to grips with predicate logic. I can generally follow it okay, but find that I'm just translating it back into the forms I am more familiar with, which is missing the whole point somewhat.

We could probably get away with it if we took a Nietzschean slant on it and asked whether 'good' and 'bad' are actually the criteria by which we should judge people and the world, rather than 'Good' and 'Evil'... see Beyond Good And Evil for the lowdown.
I was thinking more of taking a moral relativist stance...
"Is it right to judge people as "good" or "bad", when good differs between individuals?"

but I never took the chance to really try and get to grips with predicate logic. I can generally follow it okay, but find that I'm just translating it back into the forms I am more familiar with, which is missing the whole point somewhat.

My professor gave the class only very limited coverage of predicate logic. I've forgotten almost all of it by now. :( I remember the symbols striking me as being rather odd.

Alright, who voted for the "Bad" option?

That's unfortunate. I suppose I was lucky in having the professor I did for my Introduction to Logic class. His enthusiasm for the material engendered a similar response in me.
My introduction to epistemiology came through a girlfriend and we used to discuss this, and other things, after sex. And she was rather good at it... epistemiology and sex. So, it was a rather good introduction, although I'm far from an expert... in epistemiology, I'm better at sex.

By the way, which of the two (internalist or externalist) do you hold to?

not addressed to me, but i'm gonna answer anyway. i come down on the externalist side so far. mainly because it's so damn useful for dealing with justifying a whole bunch of things we'd like to think we know, things that internalism doesn't seem to be so good for.

Epistomology is good, as we all have theories as to how we know what we know. But it is worth noting that all epistemologies are ultimately either an infinite regress or circular logic. Granted, there are still some good ones and some bad ones, but the ultimate foundation is pretty shaky.

And I do know what I'm talking about. I'm a philosophy major.

Epistomology is good, as we all have theories as to how we know what we know. But it is worth noting that all epistemologies are ultimately either an infinite regress or circular logic. Granted, there are still some good ones and some bad ones, but the ultimate foundation is pretty shaky.

And I do know what I'm talking about. I'm a philosophy major.

I knew what you were talking about as well, and happen to agree with your assessment. I'm not a philosophy major, however.