We know nothing

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, it isn't. It is justified belief that is also true, as I stated multiple times (at least I thought I did).
Its odd that you think I said something else.

If the justification must be true, then infinite regress. As I said. Are you doing this on purpose, or instead are trying to figure out your own stance.

Originally posted by twhitehead
OK, not of your own making. You copied it off someone else. Nevertheless, it is not inherent in what I said, but injected there by you.

You have yet to be coherent on this subject. Your [original] claim is a problem that is already known to exist. You are not dealing with it well.

Originally posted by apathist
If the justification must be true, then infinite regress.

Why are you having such a hard time understanding this?

1. Knowledge is justified belief that is true.
2. The justification is not necessarily knowledge.
3. No infinite regress exists.
4. We cannot ever be sure that our justified beliefs are in fact knowledge. I am OK with that.

As I said. Are you doing this on purpose, or instead are trying to figure out your own stance.
My stance has been clear from the beginning. You just seem to have difficulty accepting it, probably because you want to insist on a different definition for some reason - or just your usual desire to be obnoxious.

Originally posted by apathist
You have yet to be coherent on this subject. Your [original] claim is a problem that is already known to exist. You are not dealing with it well.

I have been very coherent. You have just been trying to insert into my posts what is not there and draw conclusions based on something you read on Wikipedia, not something I actually said.
My claim has no problem of any kind. The problem is something you introduced and is not inherent in my claim.
You are not dealing with it well.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I have been very coherent. You have just been trying to insert into my posts what is not there and draw conclusions based on something you read on Wikipedia, not something I actually said.
My claim has no problem of any kind. The problem is something you introduced and is not inherent in my claim.
You are not dealing with it well.

The problem is that the iterative skeptical line of questioning can always ask "Well, how do you know that?"

Whatever you explain it could always be asked ad infinitum - "But how do you know that?"

The reason -
"But how do you know that?"
The next reason.
"But how do you know that?"
The next reason.
"But how do you know that?"
etc.
etc.

An infinite regress.
It is annoying and argumentative to the extreme.
But it is a line of questioning which logically sets up an infinite regress.

Originally posted by twhitehead
1. Knowledge is justified belief that is true.

How do we determine it is true?

Oh, per you, we don't. thx

Look, this is a fun, interesting, useful subject but you bring nothing to the table. I'm embarrassed for you.

Originally posted by twhitehead... - or just your usual desire to be obnoxious.

Now my heart is broken. Oppose tw, then it follows that you are insincere.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Why are you having such a hard time understanding this?

1. Knowledge is justified belief that is true.
2. The justification is not necessarily knowledge.
3. No infinite regress exists.
4. We cannot ever be sure that our justified beliefs are in fact knowledge. I am OK with that.

[b] As I said. Are you doing this on purpose, or instead are trying to ...[text shortened]... ant to insist on a different definition for some reason - or just your usual desire to be obnoxious.

I claim that knowledge is justified belief. You agree. So where is the the battle line.

tw hates a. working on civ v btw.

Originally posted by apathist
I claim that knowledge is justified belief. You agree. So where is the the battle line.

tw hates a. working on civ v btw.

He also hates changing or even tweeking words, somehow implying that words don't change over time.
Given the internet and the largest population ever, the language has more potential to continue to change than ever before

Originally posted by sonship...
An infinite regress.
It is annoying and argumentative to the extreme.
But it is a line of questioning which logically sets up an infinite regress.

Annoying, argumentative, and legitimate. How do you resolve it? What is your work-around.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
He also hates changing or even tweeking words, somehow implying that words don't change over time.
Given the internet and the largest population ever, the language has more potential to continue to change than ever before.

Bugger tw. He is a locked-in ai machine, no ability to adapt. You though, far from perfect, are worth listening to.

Originally posted by sonship
Whatever you explain it could always be asked ad infinitum - "But how do you know that?"
An infinite regress.

It only leads to an infinite regress if you answer is always to say you know something because of something else you claim to know.

Originally posted by apathist
How do we determine it is true?
Oh, per you, we don't. thx

Talking to yourself I see.

Look, this is a fun, interesting, useful subject but you bring nothing to the table. I'm embarrassed for you.
That's all you've got? Pretense that I bring nothing to the table and feigned embarrassment on my behalf?
What was I supposed to 'bring to the table'? Why? Looks like the real problem is you didn't like my definition and you can't stand the fact that it held up to scrutiny.

Originally posted by apathist
Now my heart is broken. Oppose tw, then it follows that you are insincere.

It is obvious that you are insincere:

Look, this is a fun, interesting, useful subject but you bring nothing to the table. I'm embarrassed for you.

Bugger tw. He is a locked-in ai machine, no ability to adapt.

All because you found yourself with nothing sensible to say about the actual topic and aren't man enough to admit I was right.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
He also hates changing or even tweeking words, somehow implying that words don't change over time.

Please provide evidence of this false claim about me (or withdraw the claim and apologize). I have most definitely stated the exact opposite many many times on this forum.