13
   

Why do people care about absolute certainty?

 
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Jun, 2014 02:58 pm
@JLNobody,
You make a valuable point. Philosophy threads in particular seem to attract rhetoric rather than informed response. I plead guilty to overkill against those who put tend to put rhetoric before reference to acknowledged informed sources.
The phrase "absolute certainty" is in common use and extensive literature exists on discourse analysis which throws light on the contextual difference between semantics and logic associated with such a phrase. We can even imagine religious waverers "losing sleep" over this type of emphatic phrase since a variant of it is contained in the Christian burial ceremony.
Quote:
...in the sure and certain hope of the resurrection.....
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Jun, 2014 03:17 pm
@JLNobody,
I feel just fine whenever I see your posts, JL.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Jun, 2014 05:42 pm
@fresco,
fresco wrote:

You make a valuable point. Philosophy threads in particular seem to attract rhetoric rather than informed response. I plead guilty to overkill against those who put tend to put rhetoric before reference to acknowledged informed sources.
The phrase "absolute certainty" is in common use and extensive literature exists on discourse analysis which throws light on the contextual difference between semantics and logic associated with such a phrase. We can even imagine religious waverers "losing sleep" over this type of emphatic phrase since a variant of it is contained in the Christian burial ceremony.
Quote:
...in the sure and certain hope of the resurrection.....



A person is either certain...or not certain.

To be not certain...and use "certain" rather than "absolutely certain" in an attempt to pretend a type of certainty...is dishonest.

You should be able to see that...but your ego is making you myopic, Fresco.

Rise above it.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Jun, 2014 08:59 pm
@fresco,
Don't loose sleep over it. Frank was looking for a spanking and you provided it to him...
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jun, 2014 03:07 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Don't loose sleep over it. Frank was looking for a spanking and you provided it to him...


You have this thing about "spankings", Olivier. But this thread is not about your sexual preferences...it is about any difference that exists between "certainty" and "absolute certainty."

Try to sublimate your sexual fantasy...and stick to the issue.

Certainty...is certainty.

Not "absolutely certain" is simply uncertain...not certain.

But your ego is getting in the way of acknowledging that obvious point.


0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jun, 2014 05:37 am
Quote:
For much of the history of linguistics and the positivist philosophy of language, language was viewed primarily as a way of making factual assertions, and the other uses of language tended to be ignored, as Austin states at the beginning of Lecture 1, "It was for too long the assumption of philosophers that the business of a 'statement' can only be to 'describe' some state of affairs, or to 'state some fact', which it must do either truly or falsely." He was one of the first people who made a systematic account for the use of language. Latter Wittgenstein came up with the idea of "don't ask for the meaning, ask for the use." showing language as a new vehicle for social activity. Speech act theory hails from Wittgenstein’s philosophical theories. Wittgenstein believed meaning derives from pragmatic tradition, demonstrating the importance of how language is used to accomplish objectives within specific situations. By following rules to accomplish a goal, communication becomes a set of language games.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jun, 2014 11:29 am
@fresco,
fresco wrote:

Quote:
For much of the history of linguistics and the positivist philosophy of language, language was viewed primarily as a way of making factual assertions, and the other uses of language tended to be ignored, as Austin states at the beginning of Lecture 1, "It was for too long the assumption of philosophers that the business of a 'statement' can only be to 'describe' some state of affairs, or to 'state some fact', which it must do either truly or falsely." He was one of the first people who made a systematic account for the use of language. Latter Wittgenstein came up with the idea of "don't ask for the meaning, ask for the use." showing language as a new vehicle for social activity. Speech act theory hails from Wittgenstein’s philosophical theories. Wittgenstein believed meaning derives from pragmatic tradition, demonstrating the importance of how language is used to accomplish objectives within specific situations. By following rules to accomplish a goal, communication becomes a set of language games.



When you find an authority that claims one can assert "certainty" by use of "absolute certainty" that is different from "certainty" using just "certainty"...be sure to post it, Fresco.

Almost everyone here recognizes your constant need to argue from authority...so it will fit nicely.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jun, 2014 12:20 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Your tedious game suggests that I find an "authority" daft enough to indulge in ridiculous semantic cheese paring with respect the unlikely event of a non-contextual juxtaposition of "certainty" versus "absolute certainty". Sorry, but nobody seems to be stupid enough to play that game, because thinking people automatically understand the nuances of the emphatic term "absolutely" as used in context, and don't waste their time with logical pedantry. The best I can do is this:
Quote:
“Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality.”

Bertrand Russell. (Pioneer in Logic and Author of "A History of Western Philosophy").
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jun, 2014 12:30 pm
@fresco,
fresco wrote:

Your tedious game suggests that I find an "authority" daft enough to indulge in ridiculous semantic cheese paring with respect the unlikely event of a non-contextual juxtaposition of "certainty" versus "absolute certainty". Sorry, but nobody seems to be stupid enough to play that game, because thinking people automatically understand the nuances of the emphatic term "absolutely" as used in context, and don't waste their time with logical pedantry. The best I can do is this:
Quote:
“Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality.”

Bertrand Russell. (Pioneer in Logic and Author of "A History of Western Philosophy").


Well that was a pretty poor try, Fresco.

By the way, you still seem to be stuck in the mode of using as many words as possible to say as little as can be said with lots of words.

Why that?

And you seem to be stuck on taking yourself and your guesses much too seriously.

Why that also?
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jun, 2014 12:40 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something that he can understand.

Russell, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy. 1945.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jun, 2014 12:54 pm
@fresco,
fresco wrote:

Quote:
A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something that he can understand.

Russell, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy. 1945.


Well I do not consider you stupid...but if you are translating what I am saying into what you can understand...that is just fine with me...the opinion of your authority figure, Bertrand Russell notwithstanding.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.01 seconds on 06/17/2021 at 03:38:03