Re: Empirical Beliefs & Hypothesis; Do they terminate in some beliefs that need no further justification, go on infinitely - on belief being justified by other that then need justification, or circle back upon itself in some way - constituting a sort of 
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
Posted by John Jones on August 21, 2008, 2:21 pm
Please log in for more thread options Immortalist wrote: woof | ||||
|
Posted by John Jones on August 21, 2008, 2:31 pm
Please log in for more thread options John Jones wrote: > Immortalist wrote:
>> A central concept in science and the scientific method is that all
>> evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent >> on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. >> Empirical data are data that are produced by experiment or >> observation. >> >> "Empirical" as an adjective or adverb is used in conjunction with both >> the natural and social sciences, and refers to the use of working >> hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment. In this >> sense of the word, scientific statements are subject to and derived >> from our experiences or observations. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical >> >> 1. Suppose, that there are basic empirical beliefs, that is, emperical >> beliefs (a) which are epistemically justified, and (b) whose >> justification does not depend on that of any further emperical >> beliefs. >> >> 2. For a belief to be episemically justified requires that there be a >> reason why it is likely to be true. >> >> 3. A belief is justified for a person only if he is in cognitive >> possession of such a reason. >> >> 4. A person is in cognitive possession of such a reason only if he >> believes with justification the premises from which it follows that >> the belief is likely to be true. >> >> 5. The premises of such a justifying argument must include at least >> one empirical premise. >> >> 6. So, the justification of a supposed basic empirical belief depends >> on the justification of at least one other empirical belief, >> contradicting 1. >> >> 7. So, there can be no basic empirical beliefs. >> >> This seems to eliminate the possibility of emperical justification of >> any and all emperical beliefs. But it can lead to this untruthfullness >> of human beliefs in three ways which deal with the apparent "regress" >> of one belief depending upon another which depends upon another and so >> on: >> >> If the regress of emperical justification does not terminate in basic >> emperical beliefs, then it must either: >> >> (1) terminate in unjustified beleifs >> >> (2) go on infinitely (without circularity) >> >> (3) circle back upon itself in some way. >> >> If there is no way to justify emperical beliefs apart from an appeal >> to other justified emperical beliefs, and if an infinite sequence of >> distinct justified beliefs is ruled out, then the presumably finite >> system of justified emperical beliefs can only be justified from >> within, by birtue of the relations of its component beliefs to each >> other. Coherence theory is of the variey (3) seemingly circular if >> veiwed in an linear fasion, merely indicated by whatever >> "property" (or complex of properties) is requisite for the >> justification of such a system of beliefs. Degrees of justification >> emerge out of the relations of groups of beliefs. >> >> http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/TKno/TKnoHowa.htm >
> woof doublewoof | ||||
|
Posted by Immortalist on August 23, 2008, 2:51 am
Please log in for more thread options
> >>http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/TKno/TKnoHowa.htm
>
> > woof
>
> doublewoof http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gH9nSFa_WOc | ||||
> evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent
> on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses.
> Empirical data are data that are produced by experiment or
> observation.
>
> "Empirical" as an adjective or adverb is used in conjunction with both
> the natural and social sciences, and refers to the use of working
> hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment. In this
> sense of the word, scientific statements are subject to and derived
> from our experiences or observations.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical
>
> 1. Suppose, that there are basic empirical beliefs, that is, emperical
> beliefs (a) which are epistemically justified, and (b) whose
> justification does not depend on that of any further emperical
> beliefs.
>
> 2. For a belief to be episemically justified requires that there be a
> reason why it is likely to be true.
>
> 3. A belief is justified for a person only if he is in cognitive
> possession of such a reason.
>
> 4. A person is in cognitive possession of such a reason only if he
> believes with justification the premises from which it follows that
> the belief is likely to be true.
>
> 5. The premises of such a justifying argument must include at least
> one empirical premise.
>
> 6. So, the justification of a supposed basic empirical belief depends
> on the justification of at least one other empirical belief,
> contradicting 1.
>
> 7. So, there can be no basic empirical beliefs.
>
> This seems to eliminate the possibility of emperical justification of
> any and all emperical beliefs. But it can lead to this untruthfullness
> of human beliefs in three ways which deal with the apparent "regress"
> of one belief depending upon another which depends upon another and so
> on:
>
> If the regress of emperical justification does not terminate in basic
> emperical beliefs, then it must either:
>
> (1) terminate in unjustified beleifs
>
> (2) go on infinitely (without circularity)
>
> (3) circle back upon itself in some way.
>
> If there is no way to justify emperical beliefs apart from an appeal
> to other justified emperical beliefs, and if an infinite sequence of
> distinct justified beliefs is ruled out, then the presumably finite
> system of justified emperical beliefs can only be justified from
> within, by birtue of the relations of its component beliefs to each
> other. Coherence theory is of the variey (3) seemingly circular if
> veiwed in an linear fasion, merely indicated by whatever
> "property" (or complex of properties) is requisite for the
> justification of such a system of beliefs. Degrees of justification
> emerge out of the relations of groups of beliefs.
>
> http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/TKno/TKnoHowa.htm