14
votes
Did Logical Positivism fail because it simply denied human emotion?
Logical positivism does not deny human emotion. It simply reassigns its role. Ethical, aesthetic or religious judgements, for example, fulfil the role of expressing or eliciting emotion - and not, ...
- 35.4k
14
votes
If we say ignorance is bliss, why do we seek knowledge?
Err... The phrase 'ignorance is bliss' is sarcastic. 'Ignorance is bliss' in the sense that one actually believes that the ravenous bug-blatter beast of traal will not eat us if we put a towel over ...
- 18.5k
14
votes
Can we doubt all knowledge?
To answer the question in the title:
Yes. That's a key trait of any good scientist.
To answer your last question in the body:
Because we have no better option to depend on or behave according to.
- 275
12
votes
Why is belief necessary for justified true belief?
Your (1) and (2) are not enough. Here is an example: suppose I have excellent reasons to believe that the earth is round (I've seen photos, listened to lectures, etc.), and that it is in fact true ...
- 6,456
11
votes
Accepted
Are there any philosophers that argued for knowledge having intrinsic value?
Yes, there are, though the general question as to what might be an intrinsic good has been controversial.
In Plato's Philebus Socrates summarizes two views he is about to discuss with his ...
- 1,685
11
votes
How does Husserl's "bracketing" secure a truly presuppositionless study?
Husserl is perhaps the last truly classical figure in epistemology, he still believed in objective content of knowledge, the same for "angels and centaurs" as for humans, and the possibility ...
- 42.5k
11
votes
Accepted
How did Kant define knowledge?
Key text here may be On opinion, knowledge and belief, CPR B 848-859.
There is conviction [Überzeugung]. It is the subjective part necessary for knowledge:
Taking something to be true is an ...
- 13.5k
11
votes
Can we doubt all knowledge?
You can of course do anything you want... But to doubt all knowledge is to indulge in radical skepticism, is it not? If we were all radical skeptics, then we'd be living in a world in which knowledge ...
- 7,762
10
votes
Accepted
In what fundamental ways, if any, does Husserl break with Kant?
It should be said that Husserl was philosophically averse to Kant's "creative" transcendental subject, perhaps due to the dominance of absolute idealist interpretations of him at the time, and ...
- 42.5k
10
votes
Did Logical Positivism fail because it simply denied human emotion?
Logical Positivism did not fail because it denied human emotion. LP failed because it tried to reduce the concept of meaning to the process of verification, and it became increasingly clear that this ...
- 18.5k
9
votes
Accepted
What is the current state of the Correspondence Theory of Truth?
First, correspondence theories of truth are generally associated with realism, not idealism. The point of a correspondence theory is that there is a correspondence between mental or linguistic ...
- 5,830
9
votes
Accepted
Did Kant come to believe that we have access to things-in-themselves after all?
TL;DR: No, he did not!
To be precise, things-in-themselves may be objects of thought, i.e. abstract concepts of the realm of logic, and therefore concepts of transcendental philosophy as logically ...
- 13.5k
9
votes
Can knowledge exist that humans are incapable of understanding?
Yes! Not only is such knowledge possible, it is even reasonable to assume the existence of such knowledge.
My argument extrapolates from the evolution of species:
One cannot teach even the smartest ...
- 23.9k
8
votes
Accepted
Was Socrates of the belief that knowledge was attainable after death?
The answer lies in the Phaedo, not much after the passage on suicide, to which you referred. The issue of suicide arises in the context of the question, put to Socrates, why he seemed to favor death, ...
- 7,311
8
votes
What are the critiques of the "we might as well assume it" solution to the problem of induction?
Not all inductive inferences are temporal, so the future "resembling" the past can be moot, a more general idea would be that various parts of nature are "uniform", "resemble" each other. But it is ...
- 42.5k
8
votes
Why is belief necessary for justified true belief?
According to Eric Schwitzgebel,
Contemporary analytic philosophers of mind generally use the term “belief” to refer to the attitude we have, roughly, whenever we take something to be the case or ...
- 19.2k
8
votes
Can I know something but not be able to justify it to anyone else?
Yes. And this is true of most of what we know.
Almost everything we know, we learn thru first person empiricism. It may be possible to translate and detail at least some first person empirical ...
- 10.5k
7
votes
In what fundamental ways, if any, does Husserl break with Kant?
Husserl, Edmund: The crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology (1936) has some paragraphs dealing explicitly with the transcendental philosophy of Kant: See §25 about Kant's ...
- 23.9k
7
votes
Accepted
The non-existence of Gettier problems in Indo-Tibetan epistemology
Let me clarify what is not entirely clear from the OP quote but is apparent from the context of the paper: it is not that Indo-Tibetan thinkers do not consider what is known as Gettier cases, it is ...
- 42.5k
7
votes
Seeking the Source of an Aristotle quotation
Aristotle, 'In the case of objects which involve no matter, what thinks and what is thought are identical' ('De Anima', III, 430a, 3-4). (J.A. Smith tr., Oxford.)
- 35.4k
7
votes
Can a fact be ambiguous?
Ambiguity does not rule out truth. An ambiguous statement is one with two meanings. You may not know which meaning to apply but whichever it is the statement, given either or both meanings, may be ...
- 35.4k
7
votes
Did Logical Positivism fail because it simply denied human emotion?
Everybody knows nowadays that logical positivism is dead. But
nobody seems to suspect that there may be a question to be asked
here—the question “Who is responsible?” or, rather, the ...
- 3,686
7
votes
Did Logical Positivism fail because it simply denied human emotion?
Karl Popper refuted logical positivism in "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" (LScD).
One problem with the logical positivist position was that the positivists wanted to get rid of metaphysics in ...
- 7,420
6
votes
Accepted
Do machine learning algorithms have knowledge (if not justified true beliefs)?
The OP proposal is similar in spirit to the one in Farkas's paper Belief May Not Be a Necessary Condition for Knowledge. His primary example is Otto, a guy with severe memory loss, who keeps all ...
- 42.5k
6
votes
Accepted
If there is a difference between a priori knowledge and innate knowledge, what is it?
I think Jo's answer is right on, but I just want to draw out the differences a little.
innate = from birth <=> adventitious = arriving from outside
a priori = without experience <=> a ...
- 24.6k
6
votes
If there is a difference between a priori knowledge and innate knowledge, what is it?
All knowledge of mathematical propositions is a priori, i.e. you do not need to make experience to prove it. Such mathematical statements are "The sum of angles in a plane triangle is 180 degrees." or ...
- 23.9k
6
votes
Accepted
What is the relation between 'knowledge-that' and 'knowledge-how'?
The unit of knowledge-that is proposition, expressed linguistically in declarative sentences, the unit of knowledge-how is skill. The use of "knowledge" here refers to non-propositional uses like "...
- 42.5k
6
votes
Accepted
What is the difference between Theory of Knowledge and Epistemology?
In standard philosophical parlance 'epistemology' and 'the theory of knowledge' are convertible, interchangeable. A crack of light might, however, develop between them. 'Epistemology' as practised in ...
- 35.4k
6
votes
Did Logical Positivism fail because it simply denied human emotion?
Several good answers here. As Geoffrey Thomas points out, LP doesn't "deny" human emotion. It simply tries to remove emotion ("emotion" is used here in the most general sense of the word - i.e. ...
- 27.1k
6
votes
Accepted
Wanted references to the Phillip K Dick Total Recall (1990) paradox
In this piece which talks about similar questions about the nature of reality and his own quasi-mystical experiences, he mentions a number of pre-socratic philosophers (Heraclitus, Parmenides, ...
- 2,837
Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible