We live in uncertain times. Everything is being questioned or qualified as "fake news". You hear people proclaim the craziest things as if they were the truth.
How should we find our way in this? When can we say "That's just not true" or not let ourselves be pushed aside by the argument "That's just your opinion".
In other words: when can we present someone with clear language and hard facts that cannot simply be dismissed as "just an opinion" or "fake news"?
Perhaps the biggest problem is the concept of "truth". When can you assert with certainty that something is true and not just an opinion, belief, assumption or supposition?
That is of course one of the most important questions that philosophers have delved into. For centuries, there has been reasonable agreement about the answer to that question.
Of course, the Ancient Greeks, in the person of Plato, once again take credit for the preparatory thinking, resulting in the following proposition.
If someone says "It's raining outside... really" then the following three points are important: 1. The statement must be true. 2. The person making the statement must of course also believe in it,
and 3. the person making the statement has good reasons to believe in it. To describe it in technical terms "proposition p is a Justified True Belief".
The first question is of course: how do you determine that a statement is true? In the case of that rain shower the answer is: just look outside and you will see that it is raining.
In other words there must be a correspondence between the statement and the actual state of affairs in the real world. This is the most common and accepted view: the correspondence between the statement and the concrete, actual state of affairs in reality.
Of course all kinds of criticism can be leveled at this: hallucination, imagination, personal interpretation, biased view, etc. So more is needed to justify the truth of the statement.
That means that the one making the statement must have good reasons or evidence for believing that it is raining outside. And here the discussion starts again: what are good reasons?
Here we have reached the limit of what is humanly possible in determining the truth, because with "good" we can only mean, reasonable, logical and rational.
The question of "evidence" brings us back to square one, because this evidence is again formulated in statements, such as "What falls from the sky is water", "This water falls down on the other side of the window", etc.
The most interesting thing in this situation is that when we speak of reasonable, logical and rational, this adds an ethical dimension to the whole. As a human being, you must be prepared to debate in all reasonableness and rationality.
We will therefore have to use norms and values to agree with each other on what we find reasonable and rational in an argument. To begin with, you will have to accept the rules of logic.
These are therefore the conditions for accepting that the statement "It is raining outside" is true and obliges you to uphold moral standards regarding reasonableness and rationality in the debate.
This is why we consider, for instance, the denial of the Holocaust not only as false but also als immoral.
Thank you for your attention....
Main Sources:
MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition
TABLE OF CONTENT -----------------------------------------------------------------
1 - 100 Philosophers 9 May 2009 Start of
2 - 25+ Women Philosophers 10 May 2009 this blog
3 - 25 Adventures in Thinking 10 May 2009
4 - Modern Theories of Ethics 29 Oct 2009
5 - The Ideal State 24 Febr 2010 / 234
6 - The Mystery of the Brain 3 Sept 2010 / 266
7 - The Utopia of the Free Market 16 Febr 2012 / 383
8. - The Aftermath of Neo-liberalism 5 Sept 2012 / 413
9. - The Art Not to Be an Egoist 6 Nov 2012 / 426
10 - Non-Western Philosophy 29 May 2013 / 477
11 - Why Science is Right 2 Sept 2014 / 534
12 - A Philosopher looks at Atheism 1 Jan 2015 / 557
13 - EVIL, a philosophical investigation 17 Apr 2015 / 580
14 - Existentialism and Free Will 2 Sept 2015 / 586
15 - Spinoza 2 Sept 2016 / 615
16 - The Meaning of Life 13 Febr 2017 / 637
17 - In Search of my Self 6 Sept 2017 / 670
18 - The 20th Century Revisited 3 Apr 2018 / 706
19 - The Pessimist 11 Jan 2020 / 819
20 - The Optimist 9 Febr 2020 / 824
21 - Awakening from a Neoliberal Dream 8 Oct 2020 / 872
22 - A World Full of Patterns 1 Apr 2021 / 912
23 - The Concept of Freedom 8 Jan 2022 / 965
24 - Materialism 7 Sept 2022 / 1011
25 - Historical Materialism 5 Oct 2023 / 1088
26 - The Bonobo and the Atheist 9 Jan 2024 / 1102
27 - Artificial Intelligence 9 Feb 2024 / 1108
28 - Why Am I Here 6 Sept 2024 / 1139
The Discussion
[13:15] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman
[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:16] herman Bergson: I hope this came across.....
[13:16] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): thought you were about to review the laws of logic
[13:16] herman Bergson: That did Aristotle already, Gemma :-)
[13:17] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i mean for us!
[13:17] Max Chatnoir: But you can't just look out the window to judge the truth about the holocaust.
[13:17] herman Bergson: Would take another lecture.... the basics of logic and why we have to stick to it
[13:18] herman Bergson: No Max, that is not what I meant....
[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and tho they have proof positive at the site of the deaths people stiilldont believe it
[13:18] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): still its obvious it happened, at least if u attended the history class in school
[13:18] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): + learn from history in genral
[13:18] herman Bergson: for that you have to go to Auswitsgh and look around
[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): they just had an event there and were still protested
[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): as not true
[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): sigh
[13:19] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): never happened
[13:19] herman Bergson: and that I would call immoral
[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): VERY immoral
[13:19] herman Bergson: and I even believe that this can be proven
[13:19] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true
[13:20] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:20] herman Bergson: just based on what I just have said in the lecture
[13:20] Max Chatnoir: Yes, I believe it because I've read about it, and there must be records about the camps.
[13:21] herman Bergson: The mountains of shoes and glasses are there....the photographs..the German reports.. and so on
[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and then we have the ones believing in the likes of Trump, believes everything he says and everything else as fake news and lies, when the total opposite is actually true
[13:21] herman Bergson: Please n T in the debate today please Bejiita
[13:21] herman Bergson: no
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but thats the biggest issue i think in general, people completley disregarding facts
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): that was just one example
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): like the moonlanding is fake, earth is flat ect
[13:23] herman Bergson: My idea is that a human being is npt primairely a being that is defined by knowing the truth but by knowing that he is a moral being
[13:23] herman Bergson: The basis of our existence is not the truthvalue of statemens but our ability to discriminate between god and evil, good and bad
[13:23] Stranger Nightfire: My personal take. . Is that nothing is 100% certain.
[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hmmm
[13:24] Stranger Nightfire: maybe? ninety nine point. string of 100 nines. certain. but never 100%.
[13:24] herman Bergson: Certainty is an equivalent of truth Stranger...same rules apply to it
[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aaa i can agree to that i guess
[13:25] herman Bergson: is a statement true or certain....?
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): can we know a thing to 100% to be true?
[13:25] Stranger Nightfire: Perhaps when you looked out the window and saw the rain that. particular window had been tampered with and had equipment put above it that made it look like it is raining outside That would be almost insanely unlikely. But not 100 per cent impossible. .
[13:25] herman Bergson: it is a tautology
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yes, indeed
[13:25] herman Bergson: That is th epoint Stranger....
[13:26] herman Bergson: that tampering canbe exposed....
[13:26] herman Bergson: there has to be a correspondence between reality and statements
[13:26] Stranger Nightfire: We cannot even be certain about the ultimate nature of reality itself.
[13:27] 0rd: to have 99,999999% of certainty, is the same as to have no certainty
[13:27] herman Bergson: true
[13:27] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed, like if u walk outside u shoud see inside the house, unless u have a screen showing the inside perfect as well too
[13:27] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a bit complex for anyone to attempt
[13:27] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): not practical
[13:27] herman Bergson: In that sense we better can follow Popper's idea....
[13:27] Max Chatnoir: As far as the Holocaust goes, why would anybody want to invent it?
[13:27] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i think it has always been true that facts have been presented by some as lies but the internet makes it worse by moving information so much faster
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): Denying the holocause is a way for neo nazis to justify their hate
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i thunk
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): think
[13:28] herman Bergson: yes, flooding the scene, is the strategy.....
[13:29] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:29] herman Bergson: But I'd rather stick to Karl Popper
[13:29] herman Bergson: say All swans are white....
[13:29] Max Chatnoir: and then find a black one?
[13:29] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): we have black swans too
[13:29] herman Bergson: if you want to proof the truth...you come up with another white swan...
[13:29] herman Bergson: No says Popper....that makes the truth only more probable....
[13:30] herman Bergson: that you can demonstrate with 100% certainty is the falsehood of the statement by showing me a black swan
[13:30] herman Bergson: and that is how our scientific method works
[13:30] Max Chatnoir: Yes, that's why scientific propositions may change over time.
[13:30] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yes
[13:30] herman Bergson: ]right Max
[13:31] herman Bergson: And if you add to that Thomas Kuhn;s structure of scientific revolution, the circle is round
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i know CERN uses something called Sigma6 that when it is like 99.9999995% it is confirmed
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): like the higgs boson
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): 5 signma it is called
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): found it
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a significance of five sigma is the 0.00006% chance the data is fluctuation.
[13:32] herman Bergson: SO, thuth and certainty are in this context equivaltn concepts
[13:33] herman Bergson: and only falsification leads to a next step
[13:33] herman Bergson: If you wna the truth...falsify the statement
[13:34] Stranger Nightfire: I like how people who are so called skeptics like to throw out occam's razor. As if it were some kind of proof that they are right.
[13:34] herman Bergson: Ihope there is no brain overload...?!
[13:34] Stranger Nightfire: when in fact sometimes It is the less likely explanation that turns out to be the correct one.
[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:35] herman Bergson: yes entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate...
[13:35] 0rd: I think this debate divides in two major subject: one is to verify is if what you say you are perceing is actually true or a lie; and the other, is that if what you perceiving is actually what you are perceving (like the "matrix" kind of debate)
[13:35] herman Bergson: A goood point of Ockham
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): Rabbits are smart
[13:36] 0rd: XD
[13:36] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:36] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:36] herman Bergson: Yes, Ord.... in fact the basic debate between empiricism and rationalism....as old as history
[13:37] herman Bergson: the basics of epistemology, in fact :-)
[13:38] herman Bergson: Has kept me busy since I was 20
[13:38] 0rd: for the first, i think it is possible to verify, you just have to go and perceive the same thing the person is saying that they are perceiving
[13:38] 0rd: for the second, then that is something that can make someone go crazy haha
[13:39] herman Bergson: Yes Ord but verification increases only the probablility of the truth of a statement
[13:39] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): closer to 5 sigma but never 100%
[13:40] 0rd: but for the one that is verifying for themselves, they can verify. for example, they can see it is raining. that is 100%. now, if they are really seeing what they are seeing, if it is all an illusion and so on, then that is another thing
[13:40] Max Chatnoir: But you can also have a kind of interlocking consistency of our understanding of different phenomena.
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): here comes perception
[13:41] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): perception of reality
[13:41] 0rd: you can see with 100% certainty "i am perceiving it is rainning", but you cant say for sure that "it is rainning"
[13:41] 0rd: you can say*
[13:41] Max Chatnoir: For example, when the first genomes were sequenced, it was supportive of the evolution hypothesis.
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): if its raining outside and i go outside i feel im getting wet
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): might be some other chemical falling from a plane
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): another proof
[13:42] herman Bergson: oops two things here
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hahaha the infamous toilet dump
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:42] herman Bergson: Max intruduces the coherence theory of truth
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but planes dont do that
[13:42] 0rd: but gettiing wey is another perception, you can say you are getting the feeling of getting wet, but maybe it is an matrix illusion of a virtual world, and you are not really getting wet in real life
[13:43] herman Bergson: And Ord seems to make knowledge a subjective matter
[13:43] 0rd: but getting wet*
[13:43] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): well
[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): sigh
[13:43] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): then my Unreal 5 worlds and also here is just a simulation within a simulation,
[13:43] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ir what is it called
[13:43] herman Bergson: The coherence theory of turth is accepted theory...
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): an in game game
[13:44] herman Bergson: Yes Gemma it is getting complicated :-)
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but again, can a computer percieve feeling?
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): its just 1 and 0
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and we are analog beings
[13:44] 0rd: we can doubt everything, but we cant doubt that we are doubting
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): it can simulate them but
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): well
[13:45] herman Bergson: Ok...let's wake up Descartes too :-)
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): YAY! (yay!)
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): lol
[[13:46] herman Bergson: But Ord, you are right....there are paradoxes deep down....
[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aha,
[13:46] herman Bergson: I guess we have had enough for today...
[13:47] herman Bergson: Unless you still have a hot issue....:-)
[13:47] 0rd: it was great! i love i have found all of you!
[13:47] Max Chatnoir: OK, for example, I'm pretty sure that most of you are backed up by a different human.
[13:47] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aha
[13:47] Lukkie Sands: True...most of us are :-)))
[13:48] 0rd: i need to run! see you all! ❤
[13:48] Max Chatnoir: I haven't had enough interaction with Ord yet to be sure he isn't an alt.
[13:48] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): not all...
[13:48] herman Bergson: Bye Ord...nice to meet you
[13:48] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): bye Ord
[13:48] Lukkie Sands blushes......
[13:49] Stranger Nightfire: i suppose there there might be that 0.0000000000000000000000000000000001 percent thance that one person is runnin a lot of alts here
[13:49] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): ツ
[13:50] herman Bergson: Well...thank you all again for the nice debate....
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aaa
[13:50] herman Bergson: Clas dismissed ...
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): this was good
[13:50] herman Bergson: Well Stranger...
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and now some cards i guess
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:50] Max Chatnoir: That was intriguing!
[13:50] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): it was very interesting as usual Herman
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yes good topic
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed what is truth
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ?
[13:50] herman Bergson: the nationalities here present are American, Dutch, Swedish and Austrian at least :-)
[13:51] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:51] herman Bergson: Thanky you, Beertje
[13:52] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): graag gedaan
[13:52] bergfrau Apfelbaum: that was very interesting again and I am 100% sure that i am here with you
[13:52] bergfrau Apfelbaum: :-)
[13:52] bergfrau Apfelbaum: yay
[13:52] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
