Our Daily Bread
Tuesday, February 16, 2021
Thursday, January 30, 2020
Plato's Cave
The Allegory of The Cave, or Plato's Cave, was presented by the Greek philosopher Plato in his work Republic (514a–520a) to "compare our nature in respect of education and its lack". It is written as a dialogue between Plato's brother Glaucon and his mentor Socrates, narrated by Socrates.
Plato's Allegory of The Cave is about the nature of thought of the philosopher, and the philosopher's understanding of perspective, which is what is required to escape the cave of what one falsely believes is real, the cave of indoctrination.
The allegory is about understanding perspective, in every matter.
One that understands perspective in the cave, understands that with two eyes they have three perspectives, therefore can build the three dimensional environment around them in their mind.
When they all exit the cave, one that understands perspective exits the cave without fear, being that they already understand the three dimensional environment around them.
It is also about the understanding of the perspective of words.
I understand universally immutable principles.
I am not of this world.
I am without sin.
All three sentences mean the exact same thing.
When it comes to one finding another that covers them in their good secrets, two engaged of the mind, make that one your mate.
When a lady grabs you by the private parts, cut off her hand.
The two sentences mean the exact same thing.
I'm going to teach a flat earther the earth is necessarily curved, in other words i'm going to put an end to a flat earther, and yet in other words i'm going to stone a flat earther to death. It's so the individual is no longer a flat earther, not that the individual is actually dead.
Two stones. One in each hand. One round stone and one flat stone.
Have the individual observe the movement of the horizons on the different surfaces as you move your hands around a bit.
As the horizon of the earth moves with the observer as it does on the round stone, the earth is necessarily curved.
Being that the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle was the height of flat earthers, no wonder it's included in the allegory of the cave.
Imagine Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle carrying stones in their pockets, teaching flat earthers the earth is necessarily curve. The government was crumbling.
Sunday, March 17, 2019
The Subset of Belief
Every Proposition fits into one of three Sets:
Set1) No Truth-Value - Opinion
Set2) Do Not Know Truth-Value - Belief
Set3) Know Truth-Value - Knowledge
As Set1, Set2, and Set3 form an all-inclusive trichotomy, so also does Opinion, Belief, and Knowledge.
Two Assertions About what Belief Is
1) Belief is the probabilistic subset of Set2.
- Know - Do Not Know - Opinion
2) Knowledge is a subset of Belief
- Set3 is a subset of Set2
Truth-values we Know - Knowledge
Set3 is NOT a subset of Set2, ergo Knowledge is NOT a subset of Belief.
Belief is the probabilistic subset of the Do Not Know Set(Set2).
As Set1 is not synonomous with Set2, it is impossible Belief and Opinion are synonyms.
Proper Terminology
Opinion: A proposition of which it is known the proposition has no truth-value. Eg: A waterfall is beautiful. Beautiful is not a quantifiable attribute of a waterfall.
Belief: A proposition of which the truth-value remains unknown that is to be rationalized based on probability.
Knowledge: A proposition of which the truth-value of a certain pattern in the matter of existence is understood with certainty.
What is truth?
Truth is a word.
What is a word?
A word is a certain pattern in the matter of existence.
Understanding with certainty a certain pattern in the matter of existence, such as a word, is Knowledge.
Friday, September 28, 2018
Philosophy
A Philosopher, being a lover of wisdom, understands:
In all matters, it is wise to properly separate things you Know, from things one does you Do Not Know, and also from Opinion. It is the fool that mixes them.The trichotomy of Know, Do Not Know, and Opinion is the foundation to all philosophical dialogue.
A Philosopher understands:
All objective terminologhy given to a certain system, is philoophical dialogue. In a different given certain system, the meaning of terminology may change.
For one to assert a thing they Do Not Know is a thing they Know, is irrational. It is not philosophical dialogue, it is arguing.
For one to assert a thing they Do Not Know is an Opinion, is irrational. It is not philosophical dialogue, it is arguing.
Things you Do Not Know are to be held as things to be questioned.
It is irrational to argue "No one can know any thing with absolute certainty.", as according to the dichotomy of certainty vs uncertainty, this would be in your list of things that remain uncertain, therefore it is you admitting to being uncertain if it is possible to know a thing for certain or not, therefore you are only asking "Is it possible to know a thing for certain or not?".
Philosophical skepticism is understanding there are things known for certain and there are things that remain uncertain, and understanding that with proof and reproof can a thing be known for certain.
The Philosophy of Knowing and Not Knowing
Know - Do Not Know - Opinion
1) No truth-value exists.
2) The truth-value is unknown.
3) The truth-value is known.
eg: the waterfall is boring
eg: if the lochness monster exists or not.
eg: if bigfoot exists or not.
eg: what time my clock displayed when I turned my coffee pot on to make coffee.
eg: my home address.
eg: my approximate height.
eg: every truth is singular.
eg: no word has an inherent meaning.
Deconstructing Justified True Belief
1. I know how to spell the word "know".
2. I know my dad is my biological father.
The first is known with certainty, therefore is knowledge. The second includes a degree of uncertainty, therefore is a justified true belief which may or may not be true.
The corrected statements:
1. I know how to spell the word "know".
2. I truly believe my dad is my biological father.
Epistemological Certainty - Knowledge and Justified True Belief are two completely different things.
Fixing Justified True Belief
Proposition P is an uncertainty.
An agent S "truly believes" that a proposition P is true if and only if agent S is justified in believing that P is true, else proposition P is not rational.
Justification
Justification must be that of a real system.
The real system of Mom, Dad, and you:
Mom: I know your Dad is your biological father.
Dad: I truly believe I am your biological father.
JTB: I truly believe my dad is my biological father.
The real system of Christopher Columbus:
I know of many sources.
JTB: I truly believe Christopher Columbus existed when it is said he did.<
The real system of the Gettier Problem:
President to Smith: Jones is getting the job.
Smith to self: I truly believe the President.
President to Smith: You got the job.
Conclusion
Justified True Belief is not sufficient for knowledge.