SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (294667)7/29/2024 11:36:26 AM
From: combjelly1 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 362717
 
This shows your attempts at epistemology are not well grounded. The fact of the matter is you can't know anything you can't prove. You can make assumptions, you can accept on faith, you can connect dotz and draw unicorns, but you can't know.

If you can't prove it to others, then you don't know it. If you can't provide even a sliver of evidence, you are just making shit up. Or dotz, if you prefer. It is a truism that a test of your knowledge of a subject is your ability to explain it to a child. If all you can do is spit out dictionary definitions, and especially if you can't even do that, then you don't understand it.

So I guess the word "know" and its derivatives and associated terms are yet more concepts you don't actually understand but are willing to wing it in the hopes that you can dazzle with your bullshit.

There are some things that have been studied for literally millenia by some of the smartest people on the planet. The limits of knowledge and what can be know and what cannot has been one of them. It didn't just pop up when Trump waddled onto the stage. Now I don't claim to be an expert, and a lot of epistemology strikes me as tail chasing and navel gazing as too much of philosophy does, but there is a significant amount of it is at least self-consistent. Unlike your feeble and hilarious attempts at doing the same.