Information is half the equation, having wisdom to use it properly is the other
2007-03-01 04:47:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do not operate on the basis of faith or belief. Logic and knowledge are far superior tools.
There are three things I hold as valid, but I do not consider them 'true'. In fact, because they are axiomic, that means they cannot be proven. They are simply the rules of the game, as it were:
1. Mathematics and logic are valid. Truth is an inherantly logical proposition. Without logic, the truth-value of any fact could never be known, there would be no way to distinguish between a true fact and a false fact. Without logic, knowledge would be unattainable.
2. Observations, unaided and aided, are valid. However, aided observations must be supported by prior observations and mathematics. For example, before the theory of optics was discovered, a microscope would have been invalid; but through study of unaided observations of lenses and beams of light, the theory of optics was mathematically formulated, so the microscope is valid. A crystal gazing ball is still invalid, but if a way to define the effect mathematically and in a way that could be verified with unaided observations was found, it would become valid as well. Without being able to trust our observations, we could aquire no data on which to operate, and thus knowledge would be unattainable.
3. The supernatural, if it exists (note: no statement is made of its existence or non-existence, just a conditional), does not in any way interact with the natural world. If a supernatural involvement can be had, then nothing can be assured as true. If the deity that oversees gravity decides to change the universal gravitational constant, for example, all things we know will suddenly be invalid, and thus knowledge could not be attained.
It is important to recognize that none of these things is considered true; they are axioms. An axiom is a statement that must be accepted or not accepted on its own merits. However, as each of them can be shown to be necessary for knowledge, one must either accept these three things, or, one must accept that nothing at all can be known, let alone known to be true or false. So these axioms must be 'accepted' or 'held' to attain knowledge, even though their axiomic nature means they themselves cannot be proven.
-------------
Hey, you asked what we secure ourselves on. You'd expect me to have secured myself on something so simple it could be summed up in a catch phrase? You should know me better than that. ;)
-------------
Christianity and faith don't make you stupid. Closed-minded Christianity and closed-minded faith do.
You don't have that closed-minded problem. You're pretty intelligent I've found, because you're pretty open-minded.
And yeah, I always figure that long winded answer is gonna get my chops busted up good. *g*
2007-03-01 12:38:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
None of the above. I have confidence in my ability, knowledge, and intelligence. I don't need any of the things you suggest.
2007-03-01 12:45:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋