Banno

Zos does not like critique. He takes it personally.

Hence the accusation of confirmation bias. Build a device that sucks stuff out of Twitter and reformats it, then if you ask it if it is conscious, of ...

The problem here is: what is the more that makes LaMDA a person, or not? If one maintains that there is more to mind than physics, one is under an obl...

Nothing in that post amounts to an argument. Can you do better? Perhaps we ought give LaMDA the benefit of the doubt...

Oh, and here's a case of a recognisable cognitive bias... the discussion mentioned in is clearly an example of confirmation bias.

Can one show that their posts here are not "just extremely skilful pretence"? Here's the conclusion we must make: the Turing Test is insufficient.

It's telling that such a core fact of neuroscience should be so badly misunderstood. @"praxis" is using the model displayed and dispelled at the start...

And yet, despite the misgivings of @"Skalidris"' op, and the the sceptical musings of @"Joshs", we know that we have cognitive biases... Again,

Definitions are imposed, not discovered. We decide what is human and what isn't. The sugestions: all pretend to be discoveries, as if being human had ...

Indeed, I do. I just finished Metaphysical Animals, and have become aware of a renewed interest in Austin, who of course I make some use of. So the cr...

~~

:roll: What a mess.

Indeed, there are some non-scientific psychological theories out there.

No. It means that metaphysics can inform ethics by setting up a framework, but that doesn't provide ethical answers. The problem is the same for relig...

I'm noncommittal. But I will go back to this: and point out that more interesting than the observation of patterns is the question of what we might do...

Cute. But it should be Physicalism: There a patterns in the world. But that's only an issue because of the error of dividing the world into the extern...

Now I think on it, I wonder if there being patterns doesn't imply some sort of conservation principle.

Yeah, it is. In any case the OP is ambiguous as to whether the topic. is, what were Collingwood's assumptions? And, what ought one assume in order to ...

Materialism was the view that the universe consists in bits of matter banging into each other in a void. It was rejected after Newton made such effect...

No need: you are quite adept at fooling yourself. :wink:

Any claim that physics provides an inadequate understanding of the way things work, made via the internet, is a laughable performative contradiction.

No, it isn't.

Are you proposing that because we do not understand everything, we do not understand anything? Of course you aren't. That there are things we do not u...

...and is the mainstay of detective and police shows everywhere. They decide who did it and then look for the evidence. Agatha Christy is especially g...

No. I think using it as a supposed counter to (1) is petty.

Another weird thread that starts with a slightly off OP and gets worse as it proceeds. Cognitive bias is not one thing. See List of Common Cognitive B...

A petty point. All Clarky need is that at least some of the universe is understandable. We don't need to understand everything in order to understand ...

Again, remove (6) and there is no need for a first cause. (2) says that there is stuff, so the issue is resolved.

See, this is where there is a miscommunication. What I said above does not imply that feeling certain does not require a justification. Knowing requir...

Ah, so we are free to "think" that such-and-such is true, free of the yoke of authority?

You are equating being certainty with knowing. That's not right. Knowing requiters having a justification. Certainty does not. If you wish to use the ...

Yeah, but you only think that because the power elites make you... :roll:

Simply by way of trying to make sense of your position. Yes, lots of things. Next.

I agree; cause is more misleading than helpful. So I wondered why it is included. Again, it seems to me that given obedience to physical laws, causati...

And again, your distinction of "feels certain" from "is certain" does not make sense. Wo else makes this distinction? Can you point to a source?

See Causality, Determination and such stuff. I think Anscombe's differentiation between causation and determination would serve your purposes well, in...

Seems to be Einstein's Principle of Relativity. If a proposed scientific law is found to work in one situation and not in another, then it needs modif...

Given (3), why do we need (6)?

As pointed out previously, here you seem to be vacillating between "is certain" and "is true", as you must do if you are to adopt a pragmatic theory o...

If you wish to discuss Kenny, have a read and get back to me.

Seems you are getting the idea.

Indeed, there alternate senses and uses. The purpose here is to present a grammar that displays the contradiction in @"Ken Edwards"'s OP.

Faith can be distinguished from certainty in that faith is that sub-class of certainty such that no evidence to the contrary will be sufficient to dis...

Knowledge, Belief, and Faith.

Then make your case.

If you could be bothered doing some reading we might continue this discussion.

Don't think so. Don't much care, either, unless you can cite some reliable sources or present more than your own opine.

As sited earlier in this thread. It's a commonplace. Same as used by Kierkegaard. The faith of Abraham when he bound Isaac. The submission in Islam.

Augustine. Via Kenny.

That's what I said. I'm sorry, but I still do not have a clear idea of what you are arguing, of what your stance, if any, might be.