You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

creativesoul

Comments

Smith believes Jones owns a Ford. Smith believes that 'Jones owns a Ford' is true. Smith believes that 'Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcel...
September 12, 2017 at 01:26
Nothing less suffices Srap. Nothing.
September 12, 2017 at 01:13
Smith believes that the proposition "Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona" is true because Jones owns a Ford.
September 12, 2017 at 01:12
I'm saying that that is an inadequate description.
September 12, 2017 at 01:08
He believes that:the proposition "Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona" is true because Jones owns a Ford.
September 12, 2017 at 01:06
No. Salva veritate
September 12, 2017 at 01:03
He believes that the proposition "Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona" is true because Jones owns a Ford. QED?
September 12, 2017 at 01:00
You see my influences? O:)
September 12, 2017 at 00:56
He believes that 'Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona' follows from 'Jones owns a Ford'. He believes that 'Jones owns a Ford' is true. He belie...
September 12, 2017 at 00:55
He believes that 'Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona' follows from 'Jones owns a Ford'. He believes Jones owns a Ford. He believes that...
September 12, 2017 at 00:51
Smith believes Jones owns a Ford.
September 12, 2017 at 00:48
No. As soon as you start using quotes it changes things. As I said earlier, I've packed as much as possible within the belief statement. Leaving it ou...
September 12, 2017 at 00:47
He believes that the proposition is true if either statement is true. He believes the proposition is true because Jones owns a Ford.
September 12, 2017 at 00:41
He believes that 'Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona' follows from 'Jones own a Ford'.
September 12, 2017 at 00:40
Nevermind that last bit... :-*
September 12, 2017 at 00:36
If by "true" you mean being the result of a valid inference, then sure. He believes that at the moment he accepts Q. Otherwise, Smith's belief is C1. ...
September 12, 2017 at 00:34
I'm saying that: Smith's belief that Q is nothing less than belief that:((p v q) is true because (p))
September 12, 2017 at 00:29
If it can... great. That's the best I can do, and it is perfectly intelligible.
September 12, 2017 at 00:24
You're assuming that logical notation can properly account for belief.
September 12, 2017 at 00:10
That notation is as formal as it can be, as far as I know. I've packed as much as possible within the belief statement. Note that C1 leaves out "is tr...
September 12, 2017 at 00:06
I'm not even understanding what you're trying to say... I've put forth Smith's thought/belief process... p1. ((p) is true) p2. ((p v q) follows from (...
September 12, 2017 at 00:00
Do you understand that the argument I'm providing is an account of Smith's thought/belief process, as Gettier sets it out?
September 11, 2017 at 23:46
Fill out Smith's belief using modus ponens...
September 11, 2017 at 23:44
That's what I said... Smith holds the belief that:((p v q) follows from (p)). That is a true belief, not that it matters.
September 11, 2017 at 23:42
Why ought I need to show it? Smiths belief that:((p v q) follows from (p)) shows it.
September 11, 2017 at 23:34
Ah. There it is once again. The conflation of being true and being called "true" as the result of being the conclusion of a valid inference. Validity ...
September 11, 2017 at 23:30
Yes. I know what it is. The full text of Case II preceding his conclusion that Smith is justified in believing Q is below. It warrants very careful at...
September 11, 2017 at 23:06
No, it's not... It is wrong. It doesn't follow that thought/belief process...
September 11, 2017 at 21:59
Not like Gettier Case II. Again. Not like Gettier Case II.
September 11, 2017 at 21:56
That is Smith's deduction.
September 11, 2017 at 21:52
Yes?
September 11, 2017 at 21:51
p1. ((p) is true) p2. ((p v q) follows from (p)) p3. ((p v q) is true if either (p) or (q) is true) C1. ((p v q)) is true because (p))(from p1,p3) Fil...
September 11, 2017 at 21:47
:-O This coming from one who accused me of misreading... No. He didn't.
September 11, 2017 at 21:34
Don't get into it... ;) Thought/belief has not been adequately represented by the whole of philosophy. That's another thread in it's own right, althou...
September 11, 2017 at 21:28
That's not what Gettier set out.
September 11, 2017 at 21:26
It matters because the only way that Smith can arrive at belief that:((p v q) is true) is via belief that:((p v q) is true because (p)). The argument ...
September 11, 2017 at 21:23
As I've said, the justification aspect is not my kuleana...
September 11, 2017 at 20:48
He uses it to move justification from p to q. I think. It is the deduction in his formula, and he makes a point to note that Smith makes that deductio...
September 11, 2017 at 20:47
The argument I'm presenting isn't my argument per se. Rather, it's an adequate account of what Gettier says that Smith does, as compared/contrasted to...
September 11, 2017 at 20:41
:s Not following Srap...
September 11, 2017 at 20:38
Mirror mirror...
September 11, 2017 at 20:35
p2 accounts for the single deduction in Gettier's formulation.
September 11, 2017 at 20:34
p1. ((p) is true) p2. ((p v q) follows from (p)) p3. ((p v q) is true if either (p) or (q) is true) C1. ((p v q)) is true because (p))(from p1,p3) Fil...
September 11, 2017 at 20:25
Smith cannot arrive at belief that:((p v q) is true) with a single deduction. Gettier's formulation for Smith's arrival at belief that:((p v q) is tru...
September 11, 2017 at 20:23
Justification is not my concern. Smith holds false belief. False belief is not a problem for JTB. Gettier's Case II is not a problem for JTB.
September 11, 2017 at 20:03
On the way to belief that:((p v q) is true), Smith forms/holds belief that:((p v q) is true because (p)). That is a necessary step in the thought/beli...
September 11, 2017 at 20:00
p1. ((p) is true) p2. ((p v q) follows from (p)) p3. ((p v q) is true if either (p) or (q) is true) C1. ((p v q)) is true because (p))(from p1,p3) You...
September 11, 2017 at 19:31
Smith cannot arrive at belief that:((p v q) is true) with a single deduction. Gettier's formulation for Smith's arrival at belief that:((p v q) is tru...
September 11, 2017 at 19:23
Salva veritate
September 11, 2017 at 19:06
Salva veritate Smith cannot get to belief that:((p v q) is true) without ((p v q) is true because (p)). Belief that:((p v q) is true) is not equivalen...
September 11, 2017 at 19:04