18 votes

Is knowledge non-physical?

"Knowledge" is an abstract concept. It is a convenient label, generally considered to apply to true beliefs (with considerable wiggle around what exactly that means, and how one might know ...
mattdm's user avatar
  • 394
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 judgments, for example, fulfill the role of expressing or eliciting emotion - and not, ...
Geoffrey Thomas's user avatar
  • 35.7k
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 ...
Ted Wrigley's user avatar
  • 19.6k
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.
TCooper's user avatar
  • 275
14 votes
Accepted

Is Romans 1:19-20 philosophically sound?

St Paul is referring to pagans who recognized God through natural theology, not to anybody indiscriminately, even if knowing God through natural theology is theoretically possible for anyone with ...
Mutoh's user avatar
  • 656
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 ...
E...'s user avatar
  • 6,506
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 ...
niels nielsen's user avatar
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 ...
Conifold's user avatar
  • 43.1k
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 ...
Ted Wrigley's user avatar
  • 19.6k
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 ...
Jo Wehler's user avatar
  • 31.5k
9 votes

Is Romans 1:19-20 philosophically sound?

Aside from a lack of philosophical argument in the verse you posted (which I’m sure someone else will answer), there is actually a philosophical debate about how God is hidden, rather than being “...
notwithstanding's user avatar
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 ...
Conifold's user avatar
  • 43.1k
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 ...
Frank Hubeny's user avatar
  • 19.4k
8 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 ...
Geoffrey Thomas's user avatar
  • 35.7k
8 votes

All we know is that we know nothing? Can we know anything?

Your question presents an example of a false dichotomy, namely the suggestion that knowledge is either absolute or it is 'just conviction, just convention, just ideology, just a badge of power, just ...
Marco Ocram's user avatar
  • 21.4k
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 ...
Dcleve's user avatar
  • 13.7k
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 ...
Jo Wehler's user avatar
  • 31.5k
7 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 "...
Conifold's user avatar
  • 43.1k
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 ...
Conifold's user avatar
  • 43.1k
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.)
Geoffrey Thomas's user avatar
  • 35.7k
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 ...
sand1's user avatar
  • 3,704
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 ...
alanf's user avatar
  • 7,834
6 votes
Accepted

What do atheists believe in? (in layman terms)

The conversation you refer to is not an easy one. What is difficult about it is that you have an individual who clearly believes in something (a religious belief), and they're going on the attack. ...
Cort Ammon's user avatar
  • 17.8k
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 ...
Geoffrey Thomas's user avatar
  • 35.7k
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. ...
Alexander S King's user avatar
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, ...
Hypnosifl's user avatar
  • 2,857
6 votes
Accepted

What does "true" mean in "justified true belief"?

This is slightly tricky as not everyone uttering that may have the same conception of truth, but generally speaking I think the definition only makes sense for some external/correspondence notion of ...
the gods from engineering's user avatar
6 votes

Can we doubt all knowledge?

This question resembles the "Can we reach certainty?" question, answering with "No" is self-refuting because that would render the answer itself as uncertain, since it is knowledge ...
Amin's user avatar
  • 61
6 votes

Is the temperance resulting from the socratic maxim "know thyself" always about knowing others?

As I see it, it's crucial to acknowledge the source of the maxim - from inscriptions on the Temple of Apollo at Delphi where this was 1st of 3 above the entrance, so held in the highest honour of all. ...
CriglCragl's user avatar
  • 21.7k
6 votes

Is Romans 1:19-20 philosophically sound?

From a philosophical point of view one may ask the following questions concerning soundness: How to conclude from observations in the world to a creator of the world? The author speaking about God ...
Jo Wehler's user avatar
  • 31.5k

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible