Archive for May 27th, 2012

May 27, 2012

ID is making progress

by Neil Rickert

Seen in a comment at UD:

I.D. Is finally making some truly profound objections to evolution theory. Also, why are there still apes if we evolved from them?

Well, okay, that was only a comment.  Perhaps we can’t assume that all ID proponents agree.  But it does give us a moment of humor for this weekend.

May 27, 2012

by Neil Rickert

Neil Rickert:

This poem expresses very well how I see what is going on in politics.

Originally posted on Rebecca Rose Poetry:

Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee

Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee
Were voted in by you and me.
Each one argued different sides,
Then hammered out a compromise.
And afterwards they’d have a drink,
And talk and argue; reason, think.
And just because they disagreed
Neither one once felt the need
To call one side “unpatriotic.”
(A charge that’s clearly idiotic!)

Now, Tweedle Dee felt passionately
That all should have equality.
And so he fought for civil rights:
Equal treatment: blacks and whites!
Equal treatment: straight and gay!
For everyone! In every way!

But Tweedle Dum cried, “Lower taxes!”
And “Government, get off our backses!”
(Which really doesn’t make much sense
Since Tweedle Dum’s constituents
Walk around with hands outstretched
For monthly governmental checks.
Where’d they think the money’s from?
From taxes, people! Don’t be dumb!)
You’d think they’d give Dum second looks –
They vote against their pocketbooks!

Now…

View original 336 more words

May 27, 2012

What is knowledge?

by Neil Rickert

I have made no secret of my disdain for the idea that knowledge is justified true belief, as is often asserted in the literature of epistemology.  In this post, I want to say more about my own view of what constitutes knowledge.

I recently posted a parable, “The blind man and the cave” in to illustrate what is required in order to have knowledge.  To my surprise, one of the comments dismissed everything that I thought important in that parable, and insisted that knowledge is just facts.

All the blind man needs to know is WHAT he is measuring (a fact), and then know the measurement (a fact). Then the facts that he gains (height of the cave) will be the newly acquired knowledge because he understands the facts based on previous facts learned.

That leaves me wondering why philosophers seem to miss (or gloss over) what I see as important.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 119 other followers