footprints
Well-Known Member
It’s true, you are intellectually dishonest: All your posts are the same: you twist and turn, change position and consistently refuse to back up your statements or answer questions (example below).
Simply put Descartes has been the closest to this knowledge than any other philosopher before or after. If you want to know what I mean by this passage, I would suggest you do some serious research. If you are not prepared to do this, then I am happy to leave you in your own knowledge.
You made this explicit statement, an assertion, actually:“Simply put Descartes has been about the closest to this knowledge than any other philosopher before or after” and you justified this by saying” “Knowledge is accumulated through the body senses, further knowledge is gained when this data is manipulated by human intelligence”, which is the very opposite of what Descartes wrote! And you comically continued to argue that point until you finally realised your error when it was pointed out to you. I'm finding now that I can even predict how you're going to back-track.
I will never back up your imagination. I find it distorted and dishonest at the best of times.
Read the paragraph again, don't put your own brain to it, just what is written. A full stop means I have stopped with that sentence and I am starting a new sentence. By saying Descartes was and is the closest, then putting a full stop, means end of sentence. That relationship of my thinking is over and a new sequence begins. I then go on to tell how humans derive knowledge, not how Descartes described it but how it is, I do not even say why Descartes was closest, this has come from your brain. Your imagination.
It was nothing of the sort. Here again is an exquisite example of your refusing to answer questions or give examples to support your claims. Where is your account of human perception and "how it works" It was your statement; so explain what you mean?
It was very self explanatory.
All you've done is to show your misunderstanding of the subject. Here's the chance for you to put it right.
I haven't missed the point at all, Faith is an absolute part in knowledge.
You just think I have missed the point because I will not align with distorted and dishonest knowledge.
Well then, if you disagree that is the ideal opportunity for you to challenge or question what I say. In fact, I expect you to do so!
I do not need to challenge what you say. I am very happy to leave you in your own knowledge.
That is not an answer!
Now kindly explain what is this ‘knowledge of knowledge’ that makes Hume’s analysis false?
That you will have to work out by your own intelligence.
A triangle has three sides by definition. If it doesn’t have three sides then it isn’t a tri-angle. And you’ve already agreed that in theory we could call a triangle a square and a square a triangle, and that could then be passed on to future generations without contradiction. But if an object’s three angles are equal to two right angles then that is what they must be, independent of any beliefs! It is demonstrably true, and a belief that it may be otherwise is demonstrably false. A triangle doesn’t have to exist, but where it does it will always be a three-sided polygon, even if we change the name to a ‘square’. This was Descartes’ fundamental point, if you read the Meditations.
Now that is blind faith. A triangle only has three sides by definition because somebody once gave it that made up definition. It has been held as a position of faith ever since.
You are just waffling. You said:
“Doubt is denial to a greater or lesser degree.” Denial is the dismissal or the refusal to accept a thing; scepticism is to doubt or to question it. (Surely you must know this!)
Only dumb sceptics, believe that sort of rubbish. It is their weak attempt to make themselves appear logical and rational. Of course if you talk to a sceptic long enough, you soon realise that they are only sceptical because they hold a counter belief, and it is there own belief, which makes them sceptical.
You never answer responses, you only give retorts.
A retort, response, answer, all amounts to the same thing. I don't know how many times I have to tell you this before it sinks in, I am happy to leave you with your own knowledge and intelligence. Some people even believe that the 1969 moon landing was false, I am happy to leave them with their own knowledge and intelligence too.
Last edited: