Re: Memetics - Blank Slate Liberals vs Hobbes

From: Immortalist (Reanimater_2000_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 02/15/05 

Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:16:55 -0800

"John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1108255953.360483.211590@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> The theory of memes fails completely. There is nothing in 'electrical
> potentials' that can point out a thought. Let me tell you what is
> happening here because it is clear that you do not know what is
> happening here. We have a thought. Then we look in the brain for an
> electrical potential associated with that thought. Therefore, and pay
> attention, the electric potential is associated with our arbitrary
> definition of what counts as a particular thought. The electric
> potential does not 'outline a particular thought'. Therefore, and pay
> attention please, it is impossible to distinguish between electrical
> potentials for the purpose of telling us which electric potential is a
> thought and which is not.
> All the idea of a meme does for us is to elaborate upon the confusions
> already inherent in a model that pretends to unite mind and matter.
> JJ
>

There exists the problem of the agreed criterion. It seem your just claiming
one an suggesting I accept it?

The Problem of the Criterion

A general argument against the invocation of any standard for knowledge has
come to be known as "the problem of the criterion." As we have just seen,
there have been disputes about standards of knowledge. Some are about
particular kinds of arguments that provide evidence for knowledge claims. As
we will see shortly, others are about the degree of evidential support or
reliability required for knowledge. The Pyrrhonian skeptics used an argument
designed to instill doubt that any such standard can be established.

Suppose there is a dispute about a standard of knowledge. If the dispute is
to be settled rationally, there must be some means for settling it. It would
do no good of each side simply to assert its position without argument. So
how would a standard of knowledge (or "criterion of truth," in the language
of the Stoics) be defended? It could only be defended by reference to some
standard or other. If the standard under dispute is invoked, then the
question has been begged. If another standard is appealed to, the question
arises again, to be answered either by circular reasoning or by appeal to
yet another standard. So either the process of invoking standards does not
terminate, or it ends in circular reasoning, and in neither case would the
dispute be settled rationally.

Lehrer takes on the problem of criterion in the guise of the question
whether he can justify his acceptance of his own theory of justification. He
rejects the appeal to a higher-order theory of justification as well as
dogmatic acceptance of the theory (p. 228). This leaves only circularity, or
a "loop" of justification. Lehrer defends the loop of justification as being
virtuous.

http://hume.ucdavis.edu/phi102/tkch9.htm
http://hume.ucdavis.edu/phi102/lecmenu.htm

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gettier Problems (answers)
    ... potential damage made me jump even for a low probability event but my ... If the standard under dispute is invoked, ... A minimum condition on justification, then, will be ... > Given the equal probability that any one of the tickets will ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Gettier Problems (answers)
    ... >> What verifies the verification of the verification? ... > potential damage made me jump even for a low probability event but my ... If the standard under dispute is invoked, ... A minimum condition on justification, then, will be ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Destructor: not gauranteed to be called?
    ... >> justification when VS C++.NET violates the standard whenever it sees ... >> they said this couldn't bechanged since it would violate the standard ... ToString is not part of the C++ standard! ... >> Changes, IMHO, violate the concept of UPGRADE. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc)
  • Teaching "The Soul Standard" 11-11-81
    ... "The justification does not absolve the participants ... permit the immorality, ... "THE SOUL STANDARD" ... People talk about the gold standard. ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: The definition of the Standard variation of British English
    ... What you see reflects fairly well old and deep divisions of opinion, ... so much as to what standard English is (though, as you see, there is ... for dispute there, too) as to whether there really is such a thing as ...
    (alt.usage.english)