zms11235
zms11235 t1_je386qo wrote
Reply to comment by WrongAspects in Scientism Schmientism! Why There Are No Other Ways of Knowing Apart from Science (Broadly Construed) by CartesianClosedCat
Reason is the precondition for knowledge. The real question is, how do you get knowledge without reason? It's not possible.
zms11235 t1_jduaec2 wrote
Reply to comment by WrongAspects in Scientism Schmientism! Why There Are No Other Ways of Knowing Apart from Science (Broadly Construed) by CartesianClosedCat
Yes, reason, which is the precondition for science itself.
zms11235 t1_jdk57z1 wrote
Reply to Scientism Schmientism! Why There Are No Other Ways of Knowing Apart from Science (Broadly Construed) by CartesianClosedCat
Can you prove science is the only way to truth via the scientific method?
Uh oh…
zms11235 t1_jche50v wrote
Reply to comment by HamiltonBrae in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
So it's okay if we contradict ourselves? We shouldn't strive to have coherent paradigms?
zms11235 t1_jcclz35 wrote
Reply to comment by HamiltonBrae in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
Thinking rarely involves predictive modeling.
Do you believe in the law of non-contradiction?
zms11235 t1_jc8fyur wrote
Reply to comment by HamiltonBrae in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
Then what does "truth" even refer to in your worldview?
You're arguing that predictive modeling is the best/only real standard for truth. That's a truth claim. So did you come to this belief via predictive modeling? If not, it's an invalid claim on your own grounds.
zms11235 t1_jc7fu1g wrote
Reply to comment by HamiltonBrae in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
That’s a truth claim. So what model did you use to construct it?
zms11235 t1_jc3gq7n wrote
Reply to comment by HamiltonBrae in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
Determining what is and is not the most accurate picture of the world, along with what philosophy can and can’t justify, both presuppose some standard of truth and epistemic justification which anti-realism makes impossible.
zms11235 t1_jbspdrp wrote
Reply to comment by bildramer in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
Why should I trust chemical reactions to unfold in a way that “references truth”? Reason requires a rational agent, not a biorobot.
zms11235 t1_jbqb39f wrote
Reply to No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
True, no empirical evidence is really possible for free will (as far as I know). However, we can show rationally how determinism leads to absurdity and the impossibility of knowledge. For example: if all of your thoughts are mere byproducts of electro-chemical reactions in the brain (which you yourself don't even understand), then so are the laws of logic that are preconditions for knowledge of any kind. Not only would these laws of logic be reduced to blind chemical reactions with no real reference to "truth" and no way to epistemically justify them, but your brain (and hence mind) could also be determined to believe false things outside of your control. Basically, determinism makes epistemology impossible. It's an absurd and self-contradictory belief.
zms11235 t1_jbqamer wrote
Reply to comment by fishy2sea in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
I've been experimenting with myself since I was 8.
zms11235 t1_jbqakgm wrote
Reply to comment by r2k-in-the-vortex in No empirical experiment can prove or disprove the existence of free will without accounting for the inadvertent biases surrounding both the experiment and the concept of free will. by IAI_Admin
Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Scientific evidence is not the only form of evidence.
zms11235 t1_je428ez wrote
Reply to comment by WrongAspects in Scientism Schmientism! Why There Are No Other Ways of Knowing Apart from Science (Broadly Construed) by CartesianClosedCat
By reasoning about ideas. Mathematics is a great example—you can gain knowledge with nothing more than first principles and numbers.