Attempts at Understanding Fallibilism
#2620·Zelalem MekonnenOP revised 13 days agoFallibilism is the view that there is no criterion to say with certainty what’s true and what’s false. As a result, we inevitably make mistakes and all of our knowledge is tentatively true. Nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. It also means that no knowledge is beyond revision, even if it asserts itself to be so. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
… all of our knowledge is tentatively true.
This is still false, see #2603. You moved it from one place to another but I don’t see how that helped.
Fallibilism is the view that there is no criterion to say with certainty what’s true and what’s false. As a result, we inevitably make mistakes and all of our knowledge is tentatively true. Nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. It also means that no knowledge is beyond revision, even if it asserts itself to be so. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the view that there is no criterion to say with certainty what’s true and what’s false. As a result, we inevitably make mistakes and all of our knowledge is tentatively true. Nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. It also means that no knowledge is beyond revision, even if it asserts itself to be so. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
I didn’t want to just write what you have suggested, parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing. test edit
I didn’t want to just write what you have suggested, parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing.
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true, and nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. It also means that no knowledge is beyond revision, even if it asserts itself to be so. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the view that there is no criterion to say with certainty what’s true and what’s false. As a result, we inevitably make mistakes and all of our knowledge is tentatively true. Nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. It also means that no knowledge is beyond revision, even if it asserts itself to be so. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
I didn’t just want to write what you have suggested, as parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing. test edit
I didn’t want to just write what you have suggested, parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing. test edit
I didn’t just want to write what you have suggested, as parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing.
I didn’t just want to write what you have suggested, as parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing. test edit
You didn’t write my suggestions in your own words. You ignored them and instead wrote something else.
But you didn’t write my suggestions in your own words. You ignored them and instead wrote something else.
#2604·Zelalem MekonnenOP, 13 days agoI didn’t just want to write what you have suggested, as parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing.
You didn’t write my suggestions in your own words. You ignored them and instead wrote something else.
#2603·Dennis Hackethal, 13 days agoFallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true…
That isn’t true either.
I had already suggested replacements for the first sentence in both #2374 and #2589. At the time of writing, those ideas have no pending criticisms. You could have safely gone with either one.
Instead, you wrote something different for no apparent reason and introduced a new error in the process.
What are you doing man, come on
I didn’t just want to write what you have suggested, as parroting isn’t understanding. Writing it in my own words helps the growth of both my understanding and writing.
#2602·Zelalem MekonnenOP revised 13 days agoFallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true, and nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. It also means that no knowledge is beyond revision, even if it asserts itself to be so. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true…
That isn’t true either.
I had already suggested replacements for the first sentence in both #2374 and #2589. At the time of writing, those ideas have no pending criticisms. You could have safely gone with either one.
Instead, you wrote something different for no apparent reason and introduced a new error in the process.
What are you doing man, come on
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true, and nothing is obviously true but depends on what one understands about reality. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true, and nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. It also means that no knowledge is beyond revision, even if it asserts itself to be so. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true, and that nothing is obviously true but depends on what one understands about reality. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of which are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true, and nothing is obviously true but depends on what one understands about reality. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge contains errors, and that nothing is obviously true but depends on what one understands about reality. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of which are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
Fallibilism is the idea that all of our knowledge is tentatively true, and that nothing is obviously true but depends on what one understands about reality. This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth. Knowledge grows by addressing problems in our knowledge. We solve problems by guessing solutions and testing them. This also means we should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the things and ideas that correct errors and thereby create knowledge. Some of which are freedom, privacy, and free markets. We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
If you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, then there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew a certain part of your knowledge was true, but it turned out not to be after further inquiry.
If you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, then there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew some part of your knowledge was true, but it turned out not to be after further inquiry.
#2593·Zelalem MekonnenOP revised 13 days agoIf you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, then there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew a certain part of your knowledge was true, but it turned out not to be after further inquiry.
Now you’re using the word ‘certain’ with two different meanings, which is confusing. You could replace the second instance, “a certain”, with ‘some’ or just ‘a’.
If you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, then there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew that "that" part of your knowledge was true, but it wasn't true as it turns out after further inquiry.
If you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, then there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew a certain part of your knowledge was true, but it turned out not to be after further inquiry.
Still, I don’t see why you’d use quotation marks for that. They don’t seem to be scare quotes, and they’re not a literal quote either.
I meant to refer to anything that you know to be true.
I meant to refer to anything that you know to be true.
#2586·Dennis Hackethal revised 13 days agoTo rephrase what you said, you can tell fallibly that some knowledge is true, and what I said was "[i]t may solve a problem, but that doesn't guarantee that it’s true."
#2586·Dennis Hackethal revised 13 days agoTo rephrase what you said, you can tell fallibly that some knowledge is true, and what I said was "[i]t may solve a problem, but that doesn't guarantee that it’s true."
In that case, I would agree with the second part of #2544 – just because something solves a problem doesn’t mean it’s guaranteed to be true, yes – but the first part is still wrong, IMO: “So there is no way to tell the truth of our knowledge.” There is, just not infallibly.
It certainly (pun intended) does not follow that all our knowledge contains errors, as you originally wrote.
To rephrase what you said, you can tell fallibly that some knowledge is true, and what I said was "[i]t may solve a problem, but that doesn't guarantee that it’s true."
To rephrase what you said, you can tell fallibly that some knowledge is true, and what I said was "[i]t may solve a problem, but that doesn't guarantee that it’s true."
If you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, than there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew that "that" part of your knowledge was true, but it wasn't true as it turns out after further inquiry.
If you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, then there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew that "that" part of your knowledge was true, but it wasn't true as it turns out after further inquiry.
#2552·Dennis Hackethal, 16 days ago… there is no difference between what I said and what you said.
Unclear what “what I said” and “what you said” refer to. Quotes
To rephrase what you said, you can tell fallibly that some knowledge is true, and what I said was "[i]t may solve a problem, but that doesn't guarantee that it’s true."
#2554·Dennis Hackethal, 16 days ago"that"
Why is this word in quotes? If you mean to emphasize, use asterisks.
I meant to refer to anything that you know to be true.
#2550·Zelalem MekonnenOP, 16 days agoIf you're not certain which part of your knowledge is true, than there is no difference between what I said and what you said. Because you knew that "that" part of your knowledge was true, but it wasn't true as it turns out after further inquiry.
"that"
Why is this word in quotes? If you mean to emphasize, use asterisks.