Is absolute certainty possible?

[max_freakout]

I find the deoxegenation of the blood and the ceasing of brain activity to be a prety good indicator of the end of life.

that does not account for the conscious experience of dying

 

[articul8]

I'm absolutely certain that a lot of bollocks has been uttered on this thread

 

[max_freakout]

I'm absolutely certain

how can you be certain?

 

[i-am-your-idea]

how can you be certain?

by being unaware of the impossible nature knowledge.

 

[articul8]

how can you be certain?

because there is a culturally operative understanding of what would count as "bollocks", and the comments here fulfil those criteria. There would be no conceivable context in which it would be useful to express doubt as to whether some of these comments were indeed "bollocks"

..and what there is no conceivable context to doubt is sufficient to meet the criteria of "certainty" (also a pragmatically operative cultural term, not a metaphysical supra-subjective insight).

 

[Dillinger4]

how can you be certain?

A slightly more sophisticated version of

"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"

And never interested in any answer. Because his mind is already made up. Cult behavior.

 

[jonH]

A slightly more sophisticated version of

"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"

And never interested in any answer. Because his mind is already made up. Cult behavior.

whhhiiiiyyyye

 

[i-am-your-idea]

A slightly more sophisticated version of

"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"
"why"

The last answer is either a stubborn 'because I said so!!'
or the humbler answer 'I don't really know.'

-why don't you know?
-i don't know.

the end

If you keep questioning you discover the cartwheeling quicksand of existence!

 

[Dillinger4]

Why is do you always say "because I said so" then?



Even when you say "I dont know" its just a mask for the "because I said so" answer.

 

[jonH]

Hitler, when asked why he wished to invade Russia, replied "becarse zit iz miy Vwill"

 

[ViolentPanda]

Hitler, when asked why he wished to invade Russia, replied "becarse zit iz miy Vwill"

All very well, but it was his will for a specific set of reasons, rather than because he had a brain-fart.

 

[stdPikachu]

because there is a culturally operative understanding of what would count as "bollocks", and the comments here fulfil those criteria. There would be no conceivable context in which it would be useful to express doubt as to whether some of these comments were indeed "bollocks" - so what there is no conceivable context to doubt is sufficient to meet the criteria of "certainty" (also a pragmatically operative cultural term, not a metaphysical supra-subjective insight).

Do you think if a particle of articul8 came into contact with a particle of max_freakout, the universe would be annihilated?

 

[gorski]

That depends solely on the speed of the collision - anyone aware of such cannons, CERN style?

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm absolutely certain that a lot of bollocks has been uttered on this thread

Me too, but nevertheless that is only my personal impression.
Do you have a method to make that a universally accepted conclusion?

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

What it shows, basically, is how far popular consciousness has departed from philosophical truth.

1. popular consciousness would not exist if it was bound to what you seem to define as "philosophical truth", since it would be consciousnesss of what is perceived as reality, universally. (which is not the same as popular)
2. the additional problem is that there exists no such thing as "philosophical truth". Hence if you want to have an argument, inevitably you must re-define it.

salaam.

 

[i-am-your-idea]

1. popular consciousness would not exist if it was bound to what you seem to define as "philosophical truth", since it would be consciousnesss of what is perceived as reality, universally. (which is not the same as popular)
2. the additional problem is that there exists no such thing as "philosophical truth". Hence if you want to have an argument, inevitably you must re-define it.

salaam.

why?

 

[gorski]

1) popular consciousness would not exist if it was bound to what you seem to define as "philosophical truth", since it would be consciousnesss of what is perceived as reality, universally. (which is not the same as popular)

2) the additional problem is that there exists no such thing as "philosophical truth". Hence if you want to have an argument, inevitably you must re-define it.

1) Wouldn't the world be much better off if that happened...?!? I.e. if the world put in the proper effort, became much more educated and thereby elevated itself... finally...

2) Sure, there wouldn't be just one truth but it would be immeasurably more rational to debate then!

 

[max_freakout]

It is pretty much absolutely certain that at some time or another I will die.

im not asking if being 'pretty much' absolutely certain is possible

and i dont think you can be certain that you are going to die, because you havent died yet