this post was submitted on 28 May 2024
364 points (93.8% liked)

Comic Strips

12597 readers
3583 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
364
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by nifty to c/comicstrips
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] afraid_of_zombies 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ok? You don't need consensus to determine truth. It is about model making and evidence building.

Is it hot?

Touch it, have someone else touch it, use an IR gun on it, smell it, feel the warmth air around it, put a thermometer on it, get a witness account of how it got warm....

Each piece of data builds confidence. Eventually you get a wonder theory about how it got warm and a model from how it returns back to normal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yes it's quite an ok basis for the scientific method, but op was referring to objective truth. Shared subjectivity might be the best approximation, however it's no basis for objective ontology

[–] afraid_of_zombies 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How can an IR thermometer have a shared subjectivity with me?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How can you be sure it's not a Cartesian ghost trying to fill your senses into seeing one?

[–] afraid_of_zombies 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If you think there is a ghost it is up to you to provide evidence for it. And after you do that please explain how your ghost interacts with the real world in a perfectly consistent manner.

Remember it is always up to the person claiming something exists to advance evidence

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

real world

Ontology is about how we would objectively prove there is such a thing as the real world. There is a reason in science we're not talking about truth finding, but falsification.

Basically we can only come up with theories and try to disprove them. Objectively proving existence is an unsolved problem.

But that's a tldr of the entire history of philosophy, there's plenty of there to explore.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 0 points 5 months ago

We got it backwards from the beginning. It is all these weird brain in the jar arguments that need to prove themselves not the physical world that does.