Big Think

African Wisdom on January 17, 2008, 3:24 AM

Yes, fallibalism, a kind of knowing that you can be wrong, is a useful orientation when it comes to the question what we claim to know for certain. But at the same time, there is a tension that exist between "meta" certainty and "physical" certainty. On the meta plane I cannot be certain if there is a God or not, however, on the physical plain I can be certain about what my belief in God does for giving me purpose in my life. So, in many instances, it appears that "meta-certainty" does not matter when it comes to getting along with finding some kind of meaning in our lives or handling our daily affairs.

African Wisdom on January 17, 2008, 8:24 AM

Yes, fallibalism, a kind of knowing that you can be wrong, is a useful orientation when it comes to the question what we claim to know for certain. But at the same time, there is a tension that exist between “meta” certainty and “physical” certainty. On the meta plane I cannot be certain if there is a God or not, however, on the physical plain I can be certain about what my belief in God does for giving me purpose in my life. So, in many instances, it appears that “meta-certainty” does not matter when it comes to getting along with finding some kind of meaning in our lives or handling our daily affairs.

Dan Steenwyk on January 17, 2008, 5:07 PM

Saba, you make a good point about the tension between "meta" certainty and "physical" certainty, but you then proceed to contradict that point by implying that the two types of certainty are mutually exclusive. You say, "'meta-certainty' does not matter when it comes to getting along with finding some kind of meaning in our lives." But if the meaning you are so physically certain of necessarily hinges on a belief in God (a meta-certainty), then it seems to me that it does indeed matter very much. If a meta-certainty is crucial in first providing you with meaning or purpose, it follows that the same meta-certainty is a crucial step to your physical certainty about the effects of that meta-certainty upon your life. So your initial statement that there is tension between the two certainties is on firmer ground than your concluding statement.

Dan Steenwyk on January 17, 2008, 10:07 PM

Saba, you make a good point about the tension between “meta” certainty and “physical” certainty, but you then proceed to contradict that point by implying that the two types of certainty are mutually exclusive. You say, “‘meta-certainty’ does not matter when it comes to getting along with finding some kind of meaning in our lives.” But if the meaning you are so physically certain of necessarily hinges on a belief in God (a meta-certainty), then it seems to me that it does indeed matter very much. If a meta-certainty is crucial in first providing you with meaning or purpose, it follows that the same meta-certainty is a crucial step to your physical certainty about the effects of that meta-certainty upon your life. So your initial statement that there is tension between the two certainties is on firmer ground than your concluding statement.

Zachary Wolk on February 2, 2008, 3:01 AM

George Berkeley and Subjective Idealism

Zachary Wolk on February 2, 2008, 8:01 AM

George Berkeley and Subjective Idealism

Jen Something on February 14, 2008, 2:11 PM

The State Department reported that Paulson was dead and never retracted that report, which we have sourced and referenced.

www.worldreports.org

Is it true? If not why would it not be shut down?

Jen Something on February 14, 2008, 7:11 PM

The State Department reported that Paulson was dead and never retracted that report, which we have sourced and referenced.

www.worldreports.org

Is it true? If not why would it not be shut down?