I've posted the log as in-line text and also
as an attachment (better formatting).

Log file opened at: 12/9/02 8:11:56 PM
#epistemology_online: borrowdalej Julie
jimbomoa1
*** End of /NAMES list.
*** Mode change "+o borrowdalej" on
#epistemology_online by list.lanecc.edu
*** Channel Mode is +tnr
borrowdale: Alright, got it. Now I can log.
jimbomoa1: Cool, Can I access it?
borrowdale: I'll post it to the webboard as
soon as we're done.
borrowdale: Fire away.
Julie: My first question is - Are the 3
criteria that James has for believing
without sufficient evidence supposed to
be the living, forced and momentous
options?
borrowdale: Right.
jimbomoa1: What is epistemil humility?
or where can I find it?
jimbomoa1: I would assume that it
means that we don
borrowdale: That's in the notes on
Clifford, James and Kierkegaard.
borrowdale: Perhaps the best way to be
rational is to foster an attitude of
epistemic humility (humility with regard to
what we "know"). If we hold our
beliefs in a tentative fashion, as maps or
guideposts rather than part of who
we are, we can be more open to the truth,
whatever its relation to our present
belief system. If we were willing to admit
that we are wrong and avoid
attachment to beliefs, we would be less
likely to hold onto beliefs which run
contrary to the evidence and engage in
self-deception and rationa
jimbomoa1: cool, I don
jimbomoa1: cool, I don't think that I
downloaded the notes.
borrowdale: So it's humility with regard
what we know, holding our beliefs in a
tenative fashion not seeing them as part
of our identity.
jimbomoa1: I apologixe for the missed
typing
borrowdale: I should put another notice
reminding people to get those notes,
since I posted them over the weekend.
borrowdale: That's alright. I don't know
where I'd be without my backspace key.
jimbomoa1: to minimize the subjective
bias we would use an objective system
of knowlege gathering?
borrowdale: Right, try to be impartial, not
let our own desires and motivations
color our assessment of the evidence.
borrowdale: And not worry about "being
right" or "winning the argument."
jimbomoa1: Dialog vs Debate, dialog
would be looking for similarities, debate
punching holes?
jimbomoa1: but I am always right
borrowdale: lol
Julie: I had asked in an earlier posting
what you meant by Hume engaging in
circular reasoning. I never saw an answer
to that.
borrowdale: Hume says he's going to
prove miracles don't exist.
borrowdale: But assumes a definition of
natural laws which rule out their
possibility.
borrowdale: He says the laws of nature
are without exception, a miracle is a
supposed violation of a law of nature,
therefore a miracle can never occur.
jimbomoa1: Dialog versus debate, is that
people in agreement versus
disagreement in this context?
borrowdale: Hume just defines miracles
out of existence.
Julie: Is that what is meant by circular
reasoning?
borrowdale: Dialogue is when people
share their views without trying to prove
the other person wrong or convince them
of their error or of the truth of
one's own position.
borrowdale: When you assume what
you're trying to prove.
jimbomoa1: Unfortunatly I need to fly, I
will leave my computer logged on so
that I can benifit from the questions of
others, I will be back in 15 min to 1/2
hour
*** fruitbat
(fruitbat@XXXXX.cyber-dyne.com) has
joined channel
#epistemology_online
fruitbat: hi
borrowdale: For example, suppose I say
I'm going to prove the Bible is the Word
of God. As evidence I quote 1 Timothy
3:16 which says "All scripture is inspired
of God". You ask me why you should
believe that and I say, "Because it's in the
Bible and the Bible is inspired of God!"
That's circular reasoning.
borrowdale: Hi Fruitbat.
borrowdale: Similarly, Hume starts out by
assuming that the laws of nature
have no exceptions--that is like assuming
that miracles occur.
borrowdale: Pardon me, I mean miracles
CAN'T occur.
Julie: thanks-why is that in conflict with
his philosophy? Because he believes
only in ideas?
fruitbat: Hume assumes that the laws of
nature have no exceptions; that
miracles do not occur.
borrowdale: Hume gives no argument
why the laws of nature can have no
exceptions. He simply assumes it and
then concludes that miracles, which by
definition are such exceptions, can't
occur.
fruitbat: is it consistent for him to believe
in laws of nature when he doesn't
believe in cause and effect?
borrowdale: That might be a problem, too,
but what I'm looking for his his belief
in cause and effect.
borrowdale: right, fruitbat
borrowdale: In the section "Against
Miracles" he's treating the laws of cause
and effect as if they were real, as if there
was a "necessary connection"
between cause and effect.
borrowdale: But in the section on
causation, earlier in the Enquiry, he says
the
necessity in cause and effect is all in our
minds.
borrowdale: More questions?
borrowdale: You guys still with me?
Julie: just checking
borrowdale: OK, just wanted to make
sure I wasn't disconnected. Don't feel
rushed.
fruitbat: I didn't have any specific
questions, but sometimes something
comes up that I could use more
clarification on :>
*** dorothya
(java@XXXXX.client.attbi.com) has joined
channel
#epistemology_online
borrowdale: I could go over some of the
main points if you like.
borrowdale: Hi dorothy.
dorothya: hi
dorothya: what did i miss?
borrowdale: Some discussion on Hume
on miracles and dialogue vs debate.
borrowdale: I'll post the log to the
webboard after we're done.
fruitbat: oh, no fair! ;)
Julie: main points will work
borrowdale: Hey, you guys will get a
chance to ask your questions.
dorothya: how long is the final?
borrowdale: About 30 questions.
Julie: how often do you answer your
email?
borrowdale: Every day M-F.
dorothya: did you ever grade our extra
credit from the first test?
borrowdale: I got a couple of message
from you. Campus email system doesn't
like your address though, so sometimes
they bounce.
Julie: my firewall?
borrowdale: Not sure if it's that or just the
address.
jimbomoa1: I'm Back, I will review the
last few minutes
borrowdale: Yes, I've graded the extra
credit. I'm sorry I haven't emailed you
back with your score, dorothy. Lots of E.C.
from this and other classes in my
email box.
dorothya: ok
borrowdale: I can send it off tomorrow
some time.
dorothya: i had a hard time following the
pierce writing,,,,so i couldnt really
figure out the first part on the study guide
about peirce
borrowdale: You asked about more notes
and the class next term, right Julie?
Did you get any reply?
dorothya: all the other stuff was pretty
easy
borrowdale: Pierce's four methods of
fixing beleif are tenacity, authority, a
priori, and science.
borrowdale: In the method of tenacity, you
hold onto our pre-existing belief,
whatever it is.
borrowdale: In the method of authority you
choose some authority to
determine your beliefs and force them
upon others.
jimbomoa1: Wher do I find out what the
scientific principal is?
Julie: yes -notes got answered. I was
still wondering about next term.
borrowdale: In the a priori method, you
form your beliefs on the basis of your
personal tastes in a relativist sort of way
(a priori is a bad name for it)
fruitbat: using the a priori method, I could
assert that guacamole is yummy,
right?
borrowdale: the method of science,
according to Peirce is the best method.
borrowdale: yeah
dorothya: well it is yummy LOL
fruitbat: yabbut some people don't like it.
More for me ;)
borrowdale: Or that women should wear
veils or have equal rights with men.
fruitbat: One could also base beliefs
about women on sacred texts or
teachings. what would that fall under?
dorothya: maybe authority?
borrowdale: yeah
fruitbat: oh, right.
Julie: not tenacity?
borrowdale: Sometimes you might have a
combination of methods.
dorothya: woudlnt it depend on how you
looked at it
*** Signoff: fruitbat (Connection reset by
peer (TCP/IP connection broken))
jimbomoa1: Is the scientific
method,1)seeing something, forming a
question,
experimenting to solve the question,
reformulating the question and trying
agian?
borrowdale: Yes, that's about right.
*** fruitbat
(fruitbat@XXXXX.cyber-dyne.com) has
joined channel
#epistemology_online
fruitbat: stupid ISP
borrowdale: Excpet you experiment to
confirm or disconfirm your question or
hypothesis.
borrowdale: To make it more and more
probable or less and less probable.
borrowdale: The method of science is
based on an objective reality which
affects our senses according to natural
laws.
borrowdale: Peirce says that even though
it can't be *proved*, no one seriously
doubts such a reality exists.
fruitbat: supposedly objective. some
people say it's not. But I guess for
purposes of this class, we should
assume it's objective?
borrowdale: yes
borrowdale: At least from Peirce's
persepctive.
fruitbat: right
dorothya: ok sorry to cut this short,,,but
my migrane is insisting i go to
bed,,,good luck on the test everyone
jimbomoa1: What comes after science?
I went to a lecture by Chopra, and he
said some wild things about quantum
mechanics.
Julie: and this is his method of choice,
correct?
borrowdale: He sees the arguments of
people like Berkeley and Hume as non-
issues. He also says Descartes idea of
staring by doubting everything is
ridiculous.
borrowdale: night dorothy
fruitbat: Pierce might say that Chopra is
not a source of authority about
quantum mechanices
*** Signoff: dorothya (dorothya)
borrowdale: Peirce would probably say
that believing the things Chopra says
about medicine and spirituality are
believed chiefly through the method of
authority, not science, even though they
may seem "scientific"
jimbomoa1: He did not claim to be, but
he used some of the thinkings and
bounced them off of the teachings he had
as a youth in India
borrowdale: This would be because the
supernatural forces Chopra claims
operate in the universe cannot be
observed and quantified in empiracle
observations.
borrowdale: He might also see Chopra of
using the a priori method--he accuses
Philosophers like Plato of doing that,
simply spinning webs of theories without
empirical support.
borrowdale: On the exam, I'll just be
asking what the four methods are and
which Peirce thinks is best.
borrowdale: A lot of the exam is going to
be basic reading comprehension
(which isn't so basic with some of the
philosophers we're studying, I
understand!)
Julie: thats it for me. i cannot think of
anymore questions, except where
are my jammies
borrowdale: And don't forget you still get a
notecard.
borrowdale: haha
Julie: i will have my notecard! goodnite
borrowdale: For next term, Julie, just
show up for the orientiation or email me
with your ss number.
Julie: will do
borrowdale: good night
*** Signoff: Julie (Web Browser left the
chat web page)
borrowdale: Well, that covers Peirce
anyway :-)
borrowdale: I need to take a little break.
Been drinking coffee all night. I'll be
back in 5 mins or less.
jimbomoa1: One problem I have had with
philosophy in the past, is that they
seem to be trying to count life. Numbers
to everything and quantifications.
There seems to be very little to do with
quality.
borrowdale: OK, back.
borrowdale: Many philosophers have the
idea that critical and analytical reason
is the way to truth--that's one of the things
that distinguishes philosophy from
religion.
borrowdale: Kierkegaard in some ways is
rebelling against that tradition,
though he's still considered a
"philosopher".
jimbomoa1: I know the long pauses are
like shouting down a hole and waiting
for an echo, but...
borrowdale: no problem; it's the nature of
the beast
borrowdale: Shall I go over Clifford?
jimbomoa1: OK, if you want, but how
about the difference between good and
bad, how to decide which is which in the
duality.
jimbomoa1: easy questions like that
borrowdale: hehe, ok
borrowdale: Most modern philosophers
who believe in absolute morality think it
can be ascertained through examining
our moral intuitions.
jimbomoa1: what criteria do most
philosophers use, clifford seemed to
think
that allaying his conscous was bad of the
shipowner,
borrowdale: You go from clear cases of
evil, such as torturing babies for fun,
and clear cases of good, such as saving
a child from a burning house, and try
to see what they have in common.
jimbomoa1: other then the baby.
borrowdale: Then you attempt to extract
general principles and see how they
apply to particular cases and refine them
into a theory which fits most of our
intuitions.
borrowdale: Clifford would say the
shipowner engaged in rationalization and
self-deception instead of doing his duty
and making the financial sacrifice to
overhaul his ship.
borrowdale: He let his desire to avoid
paying for the overhaul affect his
judgement about the seaworthiness of
the ship.
borrowdale: And willfully suppressed his
doubts about its seaworthiness.
borrowdale: So one of Clifford's points is
that when you do that, it results in
bad consequences. But he also thinks
that having unjustified beliefs is wrong in
and of itself.
jimbomoa1: cost benifit, it is done all of
the time when a large construction
project is planned they plan how many
lives will be lost during the project. It
seems as if human life has had a price
put on it.
borrowdale: Yes, sometimes when a
company is thinking about replacing a
briddge, they calcuate how many will die
and how much they will face in lawsuits
if the bridge collapses vs. how much it
would cost to repair.
borrowdale: But with the Shipowner, he
wants his ship to stay afloat.
Fortunately, he is well insured and I
guess there's no maintenance clause in
his
contract.
jimbomoa1: so the bad is to beleave
anything upon insufficiant evidence, and
good to believe things with a sufficient
amount of evidence.
borrowdale: right
borrowdale: And believing on insufficient
evidence is wrong on two accounts:
not only does it cause harm to oneself
and others but it is intrinsically wrong
as well.
borrowdale: Clifford says even if the ship
didn't sink, the shipowner would be
just as guilty.
jimbomoa1: For most people I would
guess that subjective verses objective
would be good verses evil when they
disagree on the side of the objective
unless they were subjective
borrowdale: He should have had it
inspected and shouldn't have believed it
would
be seaworthy when that wasn't backedup
by the evidence.
jimbomoa1: the intrinsic wrongness
revolves around perpetuating wrongness
borrowdale: intrinsic wrongness is when
something is wrong regardless of the
consequences
borrowdale: I give the example of drunk
driving in one of the commentaries.
borrowdale: It's wrong to drive drunk even
IF you end up getting lucky and not
hurting anyone.
jimbomoa1: I misworded, the intrinsic
wrongness is from the perpetuation of
the thinking patern and the exporting the
patern. practice makes perfect.
borrowdale: I'm not sure I understand
what you mean.
borrowdale: The key thing to remember
about Clifford is that he thinks both
that unjustified beliefs tend to produce
bad consequences, but that they are
wrong even if they don't
jimbomoa1: Oh, and it is a roll of the
dice, I told the child that if she left her
bicycle in the driveway I would run it over,
or her mother would. At some point
she would leave it there and I would be in
a hurry and not see it. I had been in a
hurry sometimes, and the bicicle had not
been there. up to that point when I
saw the bicycle I could move it. But at
some time the confluence of events
would have the bicycle at the wrong plac
[msg cont
borrowdale: Also there is his view on the
idea that a person's beliefs are his
own and private. Clifford totally disagrees
with that and argues that a person's
beliefs always have the potential to
"explode into action" and are thus public
and fair game for critics.
jimbomoa1: e at the wrong timeand
then... [msg complete]
borrowdale: Yeah, Clifford says that
although you might get lucky on occasion,
eventually your unjustified beliefs are
going to spell disaster.
jimbomoa1: let's see about the quoat
from clifford, "Habitual want of care
about what I velieve leads to habitual
want of care in others about the truth of
what is told to me"
borrowdale: He also sees them as an
affront to human civilization. Human
civilization was built on the labor of
scholars and scientists who studied what
worked and adjusted their efforts
accordingly, and here YOU are believining
in
the superstitions your ancestors worked
so hard to overcome!
jimbomoa1: The individual versus the
society.
jimbomoa1: subjective versus objective,
well sort of Authority
borrowdale: I think Clifford's point there is
that if you go about your life
fostering pleasant delusions, other
people will see that you prefer them and
patronize you with more of the same.
borrowdale: Clifford sees it more as a
sign of disrespect of humanity to hold
unjustified beliefs.
jimbomoa1: I am a subjectiveist, not
quite into solipsm
borrowdale: Clifford's not really an
authoritarian, just thinks that people need
to be critical about what they believe.
borrowdale: Clifford would see the irony
of things like astrology and "creation
science" being spread via the internet.
jimbomoa1: At the base of his reasoning
is the level of justification, how much
is enough. As james put it there needs to
be some uncertanty to progress
jimbomoa1: justify your sources, I know
it well.
borrowdale: I think this quote sums up
Clifford's attitude towards belief quite
well:
borrowdale: Every rustic who delivers in
the village alehouse his slow,
infrequent sentences, may help to kill or
keep alive the fatal superstitions
which clog his race. Every hard-worked
wife of an artisan may transmit to her
children beliefs which shall knit society
together, or rend it in pieces. No
simplicity of mind, no obscurity of station,
can escape the universal duty of
questioning all that we believe.
jimbomoa1: I like it,
borrowdale: Clifford might admit that it's
OK to pragmatically pursue some
course of action with an educated guess,
similar to what James suggests.
borrowdale: But he wouldn't like at all
James suggestion that one go through
one's whole life with religious faith
without any evidence on the hope that it
will
some day pay off or the belief that it is
beneficial, even if a delusion.
borrowdale: And when you get to the end
of James, that's what he wants to
apply his theory to. The "religious
hypothesis" he says is a good example of
an
option which is living, forced and
momentous, and thus one where one
can
excercise one's "will to believe" without
sufficient evidence.
jimbomoa1: So clifford would be ok with
betting the ponnys if you had a sure
bet, but not going to the track every day
borrowdale: yeah, that sounds right
borrowdale: It would depend on your
purpose, too. If you're just enjoying
yourself, not trying to make money, then
he might have no problem with it.
borrowdale: What he would object to is
something like betting with some
superstitious "system" like picking a
horse who happens to have the name of
your dear departed Aunt.
borrowdale: Thinking that the horse is
therefore "lucky" for you and that you
have a better chance of winning because
of it.
jimbomoa1: A sure bet comes from your
cousin vinny or rocco
borrowdale: He would say that believing
in such omens is not only likely to ruin
you financially, but it an affront ot the
human intellect.
borrowdale: haha, yeah, he'd have no
problem with that
jimbomoa1: the same thing as a
religeon passed streight down from uncle
rocco
borrowdale: Gambling is a sort of funny
case because by its very nature the
outcome is (supposedly) uncertain.
Clifford is thinking more of beliefs where
certainty is possible and desirable, but
where people seem to prefer flights of
fancy or are apathetic and uncritical.
jimbomoa1: The thing about gambling,
or believing in things without proper
proof is that they become easier to do the
more often they are done. I thinki
that the damage is done in the aggragate.
jimbomoa1: Hey the house always takes
their cut. That is certain. It may be
only .5%, but it is there.
borrowdale: I avoid gambling in all its
forms myself. I like money too much to
put it at risk in that way.
borrowdale: So one main idea in Clifford
is that uncritical attitude is a
contagious thing, like a virus, and
spreads like wildfire. So, your beliefs ARE
my
business.
jimbomoa1: yes, carried to extreams
borrowdale: I'm sure if Clifford were
around today, he'd be railing against The
Art Bell Show and all the other related
paranormal, UFO, and Mysteries and
Prophecies of the Bible type shows on
cable.
jimbomoa1: I think that his system is
actually self limiting. A fool who deludes
himself will be deluded by others and so
become powerless
borrowdale: I dunno, a lot of fools on the
airwaves seen to be spreading a lot of
foolishness, imho.
jimbomoa1: The art bell show is an
example , only momma in her airstream
listens to him, well her friends and...
borrowdale: People love to listen to what
tickles their ears and stirs their
imagination, not necessarily what's real
or true.
borrowdale: Momma in her airstream?
jimbomoa1: Art pokes a stick at things
that can not be explaned. As long as
you know that most of what he is talknig
about is myth, lies and hopefullness...
borrowdale: At his height, Art Bell had
something like 15 million listeners, I
think.
jimbomoa1: a bad refference to coming
from a trailer
borrowdale: Yes, but because he
presents things in a serious fashion and
doesn't challenge his guests, it gives
them an air of respectability.
borrowdale: yeah, he lives in a
double-wide, but a very NICE one :-)
jimbomoa1: A trailer has wheels, a
mobile has wheels that come off, an RV
has
wheels that work.
borrowdale: It's in a big compound now,
with a hot tub, racketball court, his own
FM radio station. Probably won't be able
to play anymore racketball though,
with his back problems. He's retiring at
the end of htis year.
borrowdale: Well, it's 10:00. Got any more
questions before I go?
jimbomoa1: Most forlks live in a single
wide, the rich folks live in a doublewide,
Jesus lives in a triple wide
borrowdale: lol
jimbomoa1: no thanks, been fun an
informative
borrowdale: Glad you came.
borrowdale: Good luck on the exam.
borrowdale: I'll be in my office 2-3PM
every day this week.
borrowdale: But don't forget to take the
exam by Thursday at 5:00.
jimbomoa1: I am going to pull the plug
on my modem to log off so that I have
the info for tomorrow, later
borrowdale: In other words, you can come
by Friday, but Tu-Th would be better
to help prepare you for the exam. Or you
can always call during office hours.
borrowdale: I'm going to post the log on
the webboard now.
borrowdale: So you can get it there.
*** Signoff: jimbomoa1 (Connection reset
by peer (TCP/IP connection broken))
Log file closed at: 12/9/02 10:06:52 PM