Attempts at Understanding Fallibilism

Showing only #2598 and its comments.

See full discussion
  Log in or sign up to participate in this discussion.
With an account, you can revise, criticize, and comment on ideas.

Discussions can branch out indefinitely. Zoom out for the bird’s-eye view.
Zelalem Mekonnen’s avatar
Zelalem MekonnenOP revised about 20 hours ago·#2598

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.

Criticized1oustanding criticism
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Dennis Hackethal, about 13 hours ago·#2603

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

Criticism of #2598 Battle tested
Zelalem Mekonnen’s avatar
Zelalem MekonnenOP, revised by Dennis Hackethal about 11 hours ago·#2618

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.

Criticism of #2603Criticized1oustanding criticism
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Dennis Hackethal revised about 11 hours ago·#2610

But you didn’t write my suggestions in your own words. You ignored them and instead wrote something else.

Criticism of #2618