there are three people_A, B and C_that are indivisually considering some proposition, P. A comes to the conclusion that P is true., B comes to the conclusion that P is fasle. and C suspends judgement abput P. Could all three of thembe rational in having the attitude they do? If not, why not? and if so, how?
2007-09-19 00:06:33 · 3 answers · asked by argentina 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
It may or may not be rational for all 3 to reach their respectively different conclusions. It depends upon the evidence they are considering.
If they are considering whether the earth is flat or spherical, it would be irrational to conclude that it is flat. In this case, it would also be irrational to suspend judgment.
If they are considering whether or not to find Phil Specter guilty of murder, it would be entirely reasonable to reach any one of the three conclusions based upon the evidence the jury has considered.
So then, it becomes a factor of the information which is available for consideration...in the cases mentioned above.
Another possibilty is that the three people do not have access to the same information. In this example, though, it still can be determined whether or not the conclusion reached by each individual is rational based on the evidence each one has available for consideration.
It all comes down to the data which is available for consideration.
2007-09-22 12:12:48 · answer #1 · answered by M O R P H E U S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The same thing may appear to be different from different vantage points, so all three can be completely valid.
I think you may be asking about "truth" and what is true. That would be omniscience which considers everything from all points.
2007-09-19 07:24:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes they do.
2007-09-22 23:05:08 · answer #3 · answered by secret society 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋