these debates remind me of...
 

when i was a young child i had the following thought:

say there is a question which has a definite answer. the answer must be either yes or no, and there is argument about which is answer is correct.

a young child or simple-minded person might answer "yes," using overly simple, incomplete, or unreasonable logic.

a slightly older/smarter person might answer "no", using slightly better logic.

another person, even smarter, might again answer "yes" using even better logic.

another, even smarter, "no", with even better logic
etc. etc.

each is unaware of his own ignorance - each is confident he is correct - each has an approximately equal chance of actually being correct.

this was kind of an epiphany for me at the time, and to this day amuses me. the hopelessness of having logic and ignorance at the same time! being human!

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

you just essentially described poker

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

which debates?

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

And then there is this thing about 'smarter'.

I met a couple once, and the husband in the relationship drove a septic truck. Per all definitons amongst intellectuals this was not your classic 'smart' guy. However, he did work only 2-3 days a week, he did make around 70-80k US a year - which isn't a ton but when you get 4-5 days off a week its kinda cool - and he was very funny and he did have a beautiful and very funny wife. All in all I think I'll have to admit he is probably one of the smartest people I have met in my life.

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

does free will exist?
is ____ immoral?

another trigger for this memory is the scene from The Princess Bride where the short bald guy is trying reason out which glass the hero put the poison into

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

All well and good, except for:

<font color="blue"> each is unaware of his own ignorance - each is confident he is correct - each has an approximately equal chance of actually being correct.
</font>

Rarely do two propositions have an aproximate equal chance of actually being correct.

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

[ QUOTE ]
you just essentially described poker

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly what I thought while reading the OP.

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Rarely do two propositions have an aproximate equal chance of actually being correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

so then, in my example, which is more likely to be correct? "yes" - which the level 1, 3, and 5 logics supported, respectively - or "no" - which the level 2,4, and 6 logics supported? there could be infinite levels of logic.

that one is in reality "more likely" is beside the point. according to my definition of the question, in reality, 1 answer is 100% right and one is 100% wrong. we just don't know which. therefore, to ignorant thinkers like us, the probability is essentially 50-50.

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rarely do two propositions have an aproximate equal chance of actually being correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

so then, in my example, which is more likely to be correct? "yes" - which the level 1, 3, and 5 logics supported, respectively - or "no" - which the level 2,4, and 6 logics supported? there could be infinite levels of logic.

that one is in reality "more likely" is beside the point. according to my definition of the question, in reality, 1 answer is 100% right and one is 100% wrong. we just don't know which. therefore, to ignorant thinkers like us, the probability is essentially 50-50.

[/ QUOTE ]
The ones using the better logic are more likely to be correct but your whole post is misdirected. Clever, wiser people are aware of their ignorance. Its mainly stupid people who are convinced about beliefs without good reason.

chez

Re: these debates remind me of...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rarely do two propositions have an aproximate equal chance of actually being correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

so then, in my example, which is more likely to be correct? "yes" - which the level 1, 3, and 5 logics supported, respectively - or "no" - which the level 2,4, and 6 logics supported? there could be infinite levels of logic.

that one is in reality "more likely" is beside the point. according to my definition of the question, in reality, 1 answer is 100% right and one is 100% wrong. we just don't know which. therefore, to ignorant thinkers like us, the probability is essentially 50-50.

[/ QUOTE ]

The likelihood that a belief is true is measured relative to the justification one has for believing it. I might believe that Mt. Everest is the tallest mountain on earth because I think the name "Everest" sounds like it would be a tall mountain. That is a poor justification for the belief, and therefore my belief is not likely to be true given my reason for believing it.

Someone else may believe that Everest is the tallest mountain on earth because they have read that careful efforts to measure the height of the mountain indicate that it is the tallest mountain on earth. The belief is more justified in this case, and hence we would evaluate the belief in the second case as more likely to be true.