A Christian Philosophy

Yeah I think I get what you are saying too, that in terms of total content that is existing in the real world and displayed in the illusory world at o...

Sure. Aside from mathematics and pure logic, we never reach certainty for any other sciences. In all other sciences (metaphysics and others), the acce...

Both. The witness testimony uses the PUP to determine the most reasonable story about the case. And that same rationale is used to determine the most ...

Let's call the two hypotheses as so: (1) for world as we perceive it; and (2) for brain in a vat. One formulation of Occam's Razor is: Entities should...

Haha! True that.

But the point of (sincere) debate is to find truth. Proper rules of reasoning and debate (which includes burden of proof) is part of epistemology. You...

Wait why is the illusion the simpler explanation? In both cases, true or false perception, some sort of universe must exist for us to have a perceptio...

Well I thought that since you were defending Hume's position, you agreed with him. My bad for assuming. Bonus, I didn't know about this Principle of C...

Hello. Fortunately, we have principles of reasonableness like the Principle of Parsimony, to keep us grounded in common sense, and prevent us from get...

So if I understand correctly, "belief" in our common language is a catch-all term which could mean either "guess", "estimate", "supposition" or "opini...

I'm not sure I understand your point. Let me try to summarize where I think we are. Problem 1: Either some perceptions are true, or else all could be ...

Well I am genuinely impressed. Nevertheless, this lack of trust, of assuming dishonesty until proven otherwise, is unreasonable. It fails the Presumpt...

Not necessarily wrong. It just means he has the onus of proof. Absurd, common sense, reasonable, status quo, all these are terms which serve to establ...

Precisely. A rainbow of wisdom.

So you claim that when we perceive an object, it is never the object in reality. And why would that be? If it looks, sounds, and feels like a duck, is...

Hello. Give it time. It will grow on you.

I think you are inconsistent. If you claim that all subjects for the PUP can lie, then all scientists can also lie. How do you know the Earth is round...

I cannot agree with you there. Have you heard of the "absurd"? Reductio Ad Absurdum? All valid philosophical terms which criteria of judgement is comm...

This is definitely a tangent, but... let's do it. I think I have a clear enough understanding of the distinction between belief and guess, supposition...

What problem would that be, that is not covered by the PUP? The Principle of Parsimony is flawed? Why is that? Something that might help in general: T...

Hello. If I understand your post correctly, you say the PUP fails against radical skepticism, because the explanation of collective hallucination alre...

The fact that is it possible for people to lie does not count against the PUP. It is like saying that the scientific method is flawed because scientis...

That I think you are applying the PUP when you say you are more inclined to pick scenario (1) over (2). We are in agreement that reasonableness does n...

Why is this claim the most reasonable one? Appealing to the Principle of Parsimony, you (or Hume) have the onus of proof to defend it.

No because it is abnormal (using common sense alone, the normal is to not hallucinate), and so we would need to further explain the cause of that abno...

Hello. Sounds good; I accept the correction on Hume's position. Then the PUP also solves that new problem; that the actual objects can reasonably be p...

Yeah sure. That "problem" line was more of an intro to present the principle.

It seems I have trouble clarifying to you what I think Hume is saying. But in a way it is not relevant, for the point of the OP is not to determine if...

This is admittedly nitpicky, but doesn't "knowing" imply certainty? Math is indeed certain. But for the horse story, there is the alternative possibil...

Hello. I think I understand your point, that to quantify the likelihood or probability of hallucination demands a reference that must be more certain....

That is some Sixth Sense stuff right there! You may relax and know you are real because Cogito Ergo Sum. Even Bruce Willis was real; just not visible....

No. He claims that you cannot draw conclusion about reality from perception.

Still missing the point. Let's tweet the story some more. Replace unicorn with horse; replace room with "field on the other side of the fence" (so tha...

I think he is in fact denying there is any connection between perception and reality. To him, making any claims about metaphysics is impossible.

Hello. But some things CAN be perceived. And the PUP connects the perception to conclusions about reality, which is metaphysics.

Hello. This is missing the point (which admittedly with hindsight is unsurprising when using the desert example). We could have used the perception of...

Hello. Yes, this "intersubjective agreement" is very much what I am trying to describe in the PUP.

Hey there. I am not sure if your post is intended to address my quote, but if it is, I must admit I don't understand anything you are saying. Sorry br...

Hello. This is not in the OP, but here is my answer. It does not claim that the mind is eternal (for I believe it begins to exist), but that it surviv...

So you claim that subjective topics, that is, matters of opinions, regard things for which we have little-to-no experience or knowledge, is that right...

That depends on the properties; but maybe the term "property" is confusing. It could be replaced with the term "predicate". Here are examples of subje...

I think this reductionist idea seems correct. If the cause of individuality is the particular matter, and no two physical things (which matter belongs...

That's right. This would be naming a particular, for which the main cause of its individuality is the particular matter that dog is made of. That's al...

If I don't reply to some of your previous paragraphs, it is implied that I agree with them. No; in the sense that I give, "two" things would be identi...

If by that you mean the original data must come from empirical observations, then I agree. If you mean that the concluding metaphysical claim must be ...

I don't understand why you are bringing knowledge and perception in a metaphysical topic. A thing is real/not real independent of our knowledge of it....

I think your understanding of my scenarios is correct. But now I'm thinking the example of snowball is not adequate, for its complexity creates tangen...

To be clear, by "identical", I mean not that they are similar, but that they have the same identity, that is, they are one-and-the-same. With that, tw...

If I may. This is a nice illustration, but how does it demonstrate that the second snowball is not identical to the first one? Let's call your scenari...

The term "nothing" is defined as "that which has no properties". Insofar that pre-existence is not nothing, then it has some properties. Or another wa...