The more I think about it the less I seem to be able to distinguish between these two options, except perhaps in the second option there are not only ...
There probably is always change in the thing even though we cannot perceive it. Again, though that is a matter of perspective —the 'for us' vs the 'in...
I can make no sense at all of "degrees of reality". Reality is not something that can be measured, the idea 'real' is the binary opposition to 'iimagi...
I already explained it. We can say something is true now about what would be in the future. Can we say it would be true in the future absent us? So if...
Are you sure the plate was exactly the same? Anyway my point was not that things must change, but rather that change itself does not change, just as t...
The mistake you are making is failing to notice the difference between "is true" and "would be true". It is true for us now that there would be gold e...
The way I see it time is change not the "representation" of change. You say change presupposes time, but I say that equally time presupposes change. Y...
Not saying you've done it deliberately but I think you have phrased that in a way that is misleading. The way I would put it is: "It is true that even...
It's not clear to me that is what @"Banno" is claiming. We can make truth-apt statements about what would be the case in the absence of any percipient...
If you think an objection is not valid the way to engage would be to explain why you think that. Having observed the way you participate here for a lo...
The OP does not mention the Evil Demon. In any case once such a ridiculous idea as an Evil Demon is allowed it could bring about a state of being fool...
What a strange question! Time is nothing more than change. Time as measured is a measure of change. The pendulum is constantly changing position when ...
To say it neither exists nor doesn't exist is meaningless. Existence is actuality, 'existence' is a concept and non-existence is a concept only, simpl...
You mean they are not defined until they are measured, which is tautologically true. We can only define them by measuring them, (or their effects, sin...
Of course, but the same applies to the things of this world. If the "in itself" is "meaningless and unintelligible, as a matter of both fact and princ...
The idea that doubt can, dialectically so to speak, lead to certainty, is dependent on a pre-established conceptual context, which is historically, cu...
I tend to agree. I see no reason to think that the apparent paradoxes in QM, which I believe come from attempting to understand it in terms of macro-w...
To be conscious is to be aware. So we can say that if anything is conscious it must be aware. Individuals are aware and are hence counted as conscious...
Sure, but that doesn't entail that the existence of the universe depends on a perspective. You seem to be confusing or conflating two different things...
You're just basically repeating what I said in slightly different words. So it seems you are agreeing with me despite your boredom. My take is that wh...
I agree it is a silly argument in the sense that it really doesn't matter. However, for the sake of clarity, how could it not be right to say that the...
Everything human could be said to be mind-dependent (not that I am enamoured of the terminology). If things existed prior to humans or any other perci...
Right, quantum mechanics is not intelligible if we try to understand it in macro-world terms and scientific explanations can never be certainties in a...
I think they already do explain their respective phenomenal fields, although perhaps not to the satisfaction of some who demand total unity and compre...
Quantum mechanics seems to be intelligible via mathematics and it certainly seems to be based on observations of phenomena. The fact that we cannot ap...
I don't see why it needs such a presupposition. Humans have found that nature is intelligible. Science has yielded a vast and coherent body of underst...
This. The problem is that such a form of knowing cannot ever be discursively justified. So it remains ever a matter of faith, even for the supposedly ...
Right, I had in mind conjectures like 'QM correctly models reality'. Or 'reality is mind-dependent' or 'reality is mind-independent'. As to your examp...
The problem is that no conjecture can be proven to be true or false, so on the antirealist view, assuming you have correctly outlined it, no conjectur...
If the antirealist says we can know whether or not there is a god or a multiverse then they should be able to give an account of how that would be pos...
And yet we obviously cannot know either of those. We cannot know whether there are multiple universes. Would you think a claim that our inability to k...
The antirealists must be wrong though because they cannot rule out the possibility that unbeknownst to us there might be unknowable truths. Just stipu...
There seems to be some sort of self-reference paradox going on here. So let's reframe the question in the hope of gaining more clarity. We know it is ...
There are really only two options. Try this: 1. The truth or falsity regarding "there are unknowable truths" is knowable 2. The truth or falsity regar...
I provisionally assume that "there are unknowable truths" is unknowable and then show that this leads to a contradiction, which shows it must be false...
I edited it while you were replying to avoid the contradiction. The first is merely a starting assumption which proves to be false. The point is only ...
You are not addressing the argument, I don't say as a starting premise that it is unknowably true that there are unknowable truths I say that at first...
What question is it begging? I have shown that we know there is at least one unknowable truth. The question is are there unknowable truths apart from ...
Answer the question I posed: It is obviously impossible even in principle. because no matter how many truths we know there could always be an unknowab...
I am only concerned with refuting the claim that all truths are knowable. As I've shown we know there is at least one unknowable truth. Sorry, I have ...
Comments