subjective science

Originally posted by @dj2becker
What then would convince you that someone 'knows' something?

We had this conversation before. You asked me this question. I gave you my response. And my response has not changed in the meantime.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I just find it odd that you seem to think that someone who offers an explanation for something is less of a thinker than someone who just sits back and says they don't know.

But this is not what I said. You are either mistaken or you are being deceitful.

Originally posted by @fmf
But this is not what I said. You are either mistaken or you are being deceitful.

You said "I think admitting that one does not know what the correct "explanation" is can be evidence of being a thinker. I think somebody insisting that they are absolutely certain about what the "explanation" is, is not necessarily much of a thinker."

So do you or don't you think that someone who says I don't know is just as much a thinker as someone who actually attempts to give a probable explanation for an observation?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So do you or don't you think that someone who says I don't know is just as much a thinker as someone who actually attempts to give a probable explanation for an observation?

I have already responded to your claims about "actual thinkers" and "backbone" etc.. I have no need to repeat what I said. Go back and look.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I just find it odd that you seem to think that someone who offers an explanation for something is less of a thinker than someone who just sits back and says they don't know.

Is this mischaracterization of what I said clearly on page 21 deliberate?

Originally posted by @fmf
I have already responded to your claims about "actual thinkers" and "backbone" etc.. I have no need to repeat what I said. Go back and look.

So if you ask a tricky question to your students you will give the students that attempt to answer the question the same grade as those that say they don't know?

Originally posted by @fmf
Is this mischaracterization of what I said clearly on page 21 deliberate?

No you have the chance to give me an unequivocal answer.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So if you ask a tricky question to your students you will give the students that attempt to answer the question the same grade as those that say they don't know?

Students need to learn how to think and they need to accumulate knowledge.

If a student of philosophy is asked a question about both school of thought A and school of thought B, they would get a poor grade if they were unable to demonstrate their knowledge about what school of thought A or school of thought B were.

I would not be grading them on whether or not they personally wish to subscribe to school of thought A or school of thought B.

I would, of course, accept their answer if they said they didn't know which school of thought provided the better explanation.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
No you have the chance to give me an unequivocal answer.

Was your mischaracterization of what I said on page 21 you being a bit dimwitted (exacerbated perhaps by haste) or was it an example of you being a charlatan?

Originally posted by @fmf
Students need to learn how to think and they need to accumulate knowledge.

If a student of philosophy is asked a question about both school of thought A and school of thought B, they would get a poor grade if they were unable to demonstrate their knowledge about what school of thought A or school of thought B were.

I would not be grading them on whether ...[text shortened]... ir answer if they said they didn't know which school of thought provided the better explanation.

What if one student argued that school of thought A is more probably true than school of thought B? Would you give them a worse grade than the student who simple says he doesn't know?

Originally posted by @fmf
Was your mischaracterization of what I said on page 21 you being a bit dimwitted (exacerbated perhaps by haste) or was it an example of you being a charlatan?

I simply asked you a question that you continue to dodge.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
What if one student argued that school of thought A is more probably true than school of thought B? Would you give them a worse grade than the student who simple says he doesn't know?

It would depend on their writing. I might set them a task where they had to justify the side of the argument that they personally don't agree with. I might set them a task where they are asked to evaluate both sides of an argument without reaching a conclusion or choice. Even if I invited them to reach a conclusion or choice, I would accept an abstention; the argumentation and writing would be the determinant of the grade, not the so-called "backbone" thing you were talking about earlier.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I simply asked you a question that you continue to dodge.

I have not dodged. You already know what I think about "actual thinkers", the "backbone" thing, and the "I don't know" stance on supernatural things. You just asking me about it over and over again, regardless, is not a genuine conversation, it's just some of kind of mode you drop into.

Originally posted by @fmf
It would depend on their writing. I might set them a task where they had to justify the side of the argument that they personally don't agree with. I might set them a task where they are asked to evaluate both sides of an argument without reaching a conclusion or choice. Even if I invited them to reach a conclusion or choice, I would accept an abstention; the a ...[text shortened]... the determinant of the grade, not the so-called "backbone" thing you were talking about earlier.

Obviously you would accept an abstention because that fits in neatly with your agnosticism.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Obviously you would accept an abstention because that fits in neatly with your agnosticism.

With students, it's about their thinking and their knowledge and about how they manage and present it. Of course abstentions are acceptable if asking them to attempt to make personal or value judgements, especially about metaphysical or supernatural things. They would be graded on how they arrive at that abstention. You sound like a person who was brainwashed for decades, which - of course - you are.