creativesoul

By the way... In order to be able to reasonably doubt, belief must already be had. All reasonable doubt is belief based. To doubt 'X' is to believe 'Y...

Jack knows how to get fed.

The difference here is one of existential contingency. The fire belief is not existentially contingent upon language. Fire exists and it does so indep...

Does Jack need to be able to think about his own belief in order for him to know that touching fire causes pain?

Why must Jack be required to be able to think about his own belief in order for him to be able to know that his bowl is empty?

I've nothing further.

Zettel

Banno, what do you know of the book entitled Kettel? Completely beside the current vein of thinking... Just acquired a copy. Gotta love used bookstore...

I thought we were unpacking that already. :s

X-)

Hm... Plato. I have a collection of his work. Volition is problematic. Quite, on my view. However, I want to keep going in the right direction here, s...

No Sam. That's unacceptable to me. Totally. I have no desire to argue, per se, with you. To quite the contrary, I'm wanting to understand you... build...

Aw Sam... Have I misattributed meaning to your words?

Aww. Thanks Meta. That's a nice thing to say. I'm not so sure that we are in agreement. I mean, I am currently unpacking Banno's notion of justificati...

I've never said otherwise. However, it must be the case that the content of a non-linguistic or pre-linguistic creature's belief is not propositional....

I've learned a lot from you Banno. (Y)

Your turn to answer Banno. That question already is answered above... in kind. I'll add more below. Please, do return the favor. I agree that 'justifi...

Maybe this will help... We agreed that Jack thought his bowl was empty. We agreed that Jack believed his bowl was empty. I then asked if Jack knew his...

I answered yours and asked my own. Is there a problem?

One author, one meaning... or else equivocation. What is a literal meaning? Typical rhetorical drivel.

No. That would be to say that Jack thought about his own belief. That requires written language. Jack has no such thing. Does knowing the bowl is empt...

Yes. That seems right. I mean, if justification is either equivalent to or necessary for being justified. Did Witt ever come up with an example of a h...

Nonsense? :-} Explain to me exactly what's being interpreted again? How about Anscombe??? When she translates Witt, she is interpreting what was alrea...

Does Jack know his bowl is empty?

I agree with the difference between a belief being unstated and it's being unstateable. I agree that Jack's failure to say that his bowl is empty does...

I like to use my old stand-by... the fire example. A non and/or pre-linguistic creature can learn that touching fire hurts. That is not to say that it...

The absence of an apple is. The difference here, of course, is that the absence of an afterlife is unverifiable. However, we can surmise what it would...

Didn't Witt use the notion of "well-grounded" as compared to "justified"? If a prelinguistic belief cannot be argued for, which by definition it canno...

You're more than welcome, my 'friend'... I would actually like to get into that part, if you'd like. I mean, I was offline when this thread was first ...

Nice OP Sam... Very similar to my own views, although I find that our ontology regarding belief is remarkably different, particularly with regard to t...

Not all ducks lay eggs. Do you agree or not?

I find it rather troubling for you to argue over interpretation in this case. Interpretation is nothing more than the attribution of meaning to someth...

I want to note here that by "fact" I mean events, happenings, the case at hand, the way things are and/or were, states of affairs... So, in that sense...

X-) I would say that you've put it on display for all to see. Philosophy is for figuring it all out.

I think of a mind exploring perspectives on a situation... Coming to acceptable terms with one's own experience?

I prefer acceptance over tolerance. Either we can can decide/choose a starting point or we cannot. You've said both here. I'm left wondering which you...

This is a nuanced discussion. I am always happy to bear the burden of my claims. Asking me what I am claiming without further qualification leaves me ...

When there is no conception of "generics", and in Aristotle's time there was not, then people could not understand that generics tolerate exceptions. ...

Nevermind...

Perhaps the inability to suffer those slings and arrows? ;)

Fair enough assessment. Not worth quibbling over what's wrong with it. Something was wrong with my own writing as well... :P

Where did I ever claim you had? I'm granting that you did not. If you agree that not all beliefs are false, then you also agree that some beliefs are ...

Alright Data...

You denied claiming that all belief are false. I asked then if you would agree that some belief is true. The above is not an appropriate response. I'm...

A particularly appropriate place to invoke the crucial distinction between belief in something or other and belief that something or other. The former...

Good. Some belief is true then. Agree?

An admirable aim. Holding false belief is something to avoid. Not all belief is false. Not all belief suffers the same issues as religious belief. Unr...

What is the criterion, which when met, counts as being a case of belief?

There is more than one 'kind' of belief. The OP is arguing against a particular kind of religious belief. One that is held in spite of overwhelming ev...

True. Could be the remnants of a belief system... On a more fundamental basis(pardon the pun)... In order to learn that that is called "a tree" one mu...