Continuation (With a Proof)
May 18 2006
I could go about proving the last seven, but I think all in all, those are pretty obvious.
8. My thought is fallible.
Proof: Given that 3 and 5 are true, and my cognition is based off of memory and perception and filter and extrapolation (indeed interpolation even), I believe this logically follows. You can't produce absolute truth based on partially false information, however miniscule the false part may be.
Disclaimer: While personal thought is fallible, it's the only direct source of information about the terms of existence and therefore, containing far less assumptions, it can be viewed as the most reliable source of information. This is not an arrogant statement--simply a statement of fact.
*Feel free to discuss the terms of this logic and other points.
8. My thought is fallible.
Proof: Given that 3 and 5 are true, and my cognition is based off of memory and perception and filter and extrapolation (indeed interpolation even), I believe this logically follows. You can't produce absolute truth based on partially false information, however miniscule the false part may be.
Disclaimer: While personal thought is fallible, it's the only direct source of information about the terms of existence and therefore, containing far less assumptions, it can be viewed as the most reliable source of information. This is not an arrogant statement--simply a statement of fact.
*Feel free to discuss the terms of this logic and other points.
Josh Morgan
May 18 2006
Hmmh... can thought be fallible? Logic is fallbile, so the productions of logic (assumptions, beliefs, etc) can be wrong, but thought itself is more of a process, I think. Can a process be wrong? I don't know... perhaps any process that can/does produce fallible results is flawed. If that's the case, though, it seems that thought, as any process, is not fallible or infallible but rather fundamentally flawed or not flawed. So I guess I think "My thought is flawed" is more correct than "My thought is fallible". Does that make any sense at all?
yourcandytears
May 18 2006
In saying that thought is flawed or wrong or whatever, are you then saying there is a definitive "right"? And how would anyone know what that right would be (or if it exists) in order to say that their perceptions might be wrong if all we have is our perception (that could be flawed according to your points) and our thoughts (which could be fallible according to your points)?
