Can someone check this to see if it follows
- telnaria
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: June 25th, 2018, 11:42 am
Can someone check this to see if it follows
p1) I know p is false.
p2) I can not then know p is true. (by contradiction of p1)
p3) Knowledge is a subset of belief.
p4) If can not know p is true, then I can not believe p is true (p3,p2)
p5) if can not believe p is true, then i do not believe p.
Conclusion: I do not believe p is true
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
-
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
If knowledge is true belief, and we definetelnaria wrote: ↑June 25th, 2018, 11:44 am Can someone check this to see if it follows:
p1) I know p is false.
p2) I can not then know p is true. (by contradiction of p1)
p3) Knowledge is a subset of belief.
p4) If can not know p is true, then I can not believe p is true (p3,p2)
p5) if can not believe p is true, then i do not believe p.
Conclusion: I do not believe p is true
s: I believe p is false
t: p is false,
then s&t is true only if s is true.
- telnaria
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: June 25th, 2018, 11:42 am
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
-
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm
-
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
p2 is a false conclusion. The correct one is "I know p is not true."telnaria wrote: ↑June 25th, 2018, 11:44 am Can someone check this to see if it follows:
p1) I know p is false.
p2) I can not then know p is true. (by contradiction of p1)
p3) Knowledge is a subset of belief.
p4) If can not know p is true, then I can not believe p is true (p3,p2)
p5) if can not believe p is true, then i do not believe p.
Conclusion: I do not believe p is true
p4 is also false. "Peter I believed married Mary". I have no clue if this is true; I don't even know Peter and Mary. But I am at a liberty to believe Peter married Mary. Nothing contradictory about that.
p5 is a semantic truism. "I can't do x therefore I do not do x". It has nothing to do with the foregoing.
To give teeth to this example, substitute a truism for p, such as "I am Peter and I am not Peter." This you know to be false. For sure. NO arguments can be brought up to prove this to be true.
Can you then not know p is true? Of course you can. P is not true. YOU KNOW P is not true.
The entire argument is fragmented, full of false conclusions, and disparate, incongruent logical connections.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
Streamlined it for you.
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
May as well have said something like:
P1) p cannot be q
P2) p can be q
Conclusion is that this is a contradiction.
So if you start by saying “I know p is false” when in logic the tendency is to simple say “p is false.” Then you go on to say “knowledge is a subset of belief” without any explantion, yet trying to tag this “knowledge” onto the proposition of “true/false.”
Really are you simply saying if p is p, then p is p? No argument there.
P3 is setting out the idea of belief prior to knowledge, but you fail to note that knowledge can precede belief too. Again an endless circle (not that you’ve taken the time to define either - hence the hodgepodge of P4 and P5)
Recognise the use of belief and believe, and the use of knowledge and know. They are obviously related yet they are not always working within the same frame depending on the context they are applied in.
You may find it useful to employ other terms such as “apodictic knowledge,” “scientific fact”, “logical truth/validity/contradiction”, and such. At the moment it looks like you’re conflating several different approaches and coming up with a rather confusing and messy approach to presentig a logical proposition (not that I’m an expert!)
-
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
If believing is an essential part of knowing, then if I know p is false, I also believe p is false, and therefore (1) I cannot know p is true and (2) I cannot believe p is true. But (2) does not follow from (1).
-
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
That is how logic works. Alias is correct to the extend he tried to point out that premises in logic need not be true or believed, they are what we determine truths from.
Don’t confuse logic with reality.
Example:
P1) If it is raining I will turn into a pumpkin.
P2) It is raining.
Conclusion: I have turned into a pumpkin.
The above is true if the logic is followed through. The OP is suffering from a lack of semantic distinction. I can say Alias doesn’t exist because “Alias” is not that persons name therefore if the name is false then “Alias” is not a person and doesn’t exist (in that strict sense.)
I am no expert on logic. It’s a very tricky and delicate business to learn the machinations of it. I’ve tried a little, but find it difficult to shake loose from concepts of arithmetic when it comes to combining and moving things around.
-
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
Burning ghost wrote: ↑June 28th, 2018, 10:58 am The OP is suffering from a lack of semantic distinction.
I see no problem with semantics. The only problem is that the conclusion does not follow from p3 and p2, but from p1 and p3: I know p is false -> I believe p is false -> I do not believe p is true.telnaria wrote: ↑June 25th, 2018, 11:44 am p1) I know p is false.
p2) I can not then know p is true. (by contradiction of p1)
p3) Knowledge is a subset of belief.
p4) If can not know p is true, then I can not believe p is true (p3,p2)
p5) if can not believe p is true, then i do not believe p.
Conclusion: I do not believe p is true
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Can someone check this to see if it follows
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023