| ▲ | antisthenes 7 days ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It's crazy to read this, because by writing what you wrote you basically show that you don't understand what an axiom is. You need to review the definition of the word. > The smartest people I have ever known have been profoundly unsure of their beliefs and what they know. The smartest people are unsure about their higher level beliefs, but I can assure you that they almost certainly don't re-evaluate "axioms" as you put it on a daily or weekly basis. Not that it matters, as we almost certainly can't verify who these people are based on an internet comment. > I immediately become suspicious of anyone who is very certain of something, especially if they derived it on their own. That's only your problem, not anyone else's. If you think people can't arrive to a tangible and useful approximation of truth, then you are simply delusional. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | mapontosevenths 7 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> If you think people can't arrive to a tangible and useful approximation of truth, then you are simply delusional Logic is only a map, not the territory. It is a new toy, still bright and shining from the box in terms of human history. Before logic there were other ways of thinking, and new ones will come after. Yet, Voltaire's bastards are always certain they're right, despite being right far less often than they believe. Can people arrive at tangible and useful conclusions? Certainly, but they can only ever find capital "T" Truth in a very limited sense. Logic, like many other models of the universe, is only useful until you change your frame of reference or the scale at which you think. Then those laws suddenly become only approximations, or even irrelevant. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | JohnMakin 7 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> It's crazy to read this, because by writing what you wrote you basically show that you don't understand what an axiom is. You need to review the definition of the word. Oh, do enlighten then. > The smartest people are unsure about their higher level beliefs, but I can assure you that they almost certainly don't re-evaluate "axioms" as you put it on a daily or weekly basis. Not that it matters, as we almost certainly can't verify who these people are based on an internet comment. I'm not sure you are responding to the right comment, or are severely misinterpreting what I said. Clearly a nerve was struck though, and I do apologize for any undue distress. I promise you'll recover from it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||