Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: average joe who wrote (68446)	11/26/2002 3:36:56 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Part of the problem is that one takes a fact, for example, that human beings are fallible, and blows it out of proportion, as if human being are never right. Then, you phrase it ambiguously:"there is no absolute knowledge", that is, nothing we know is beyond review or unconditioned by our situation. Finally, you get someone to take the bait: there is too absolute knowledge!(Meaning, we do know some things for sure). Then you can portray them as awfully naive, given that various things people were convinced were true proved to be false, including ideas that one had had. The problem is that most things one thinks one knows are true, for example, how to drive around, perform your job, cook, use a bank, etc. It is only those things where one did not have a well- founded idea, either empirically, through careful reasoning, or based on well- attested authority (like a textbook or encyclopedia) that are likely to be wrong, in other words, guesses.......