Truth

You raise the question whether using earlier theories, which are superseded by newer theories, one can (or even could ever) access knowledge? (I am not a physicist, but I do not think that physicists have junked Newtonian theories. I think that Newtonian physics retains its validity in the macroworld we live in and is not considered false. As far as I remember, I have not come across writings that …

Of course, you can use Kant (or anyone other philosopher of your liking) to talk about what experience is. But if you use these thinkers (of the last 1000 years or so) to think about experience, you will be trapped in a set of problems: (a) you will have to talk about sensory input (no matter what technical term you use here), which cognition works on; (b) the world as something that provides …

I want to respond to three of your points Claus. First you are not talking only about the Greeks and the Romans because all the problems arising with respect to the phenomena of non-Western societies and culture are/were equally the problems in the frameworks of different varieties of culture. You not only talk about the Greeks and the Romans, you gave examples about the French and the English as …

Why understanding bullshit is important? Three reasons: (a) there is a very frequent use of the word ‘bullshit’ (mostly in my posts); (b) bullshit has been tied directly to truth in the literature on the subject, (c) far more important is the fact that it is much more connected to knowledge than has so far been acknowledged. In this post, the focus is on the third reason. I First, an …

Speaking about the ‘use’ or the ‘results and effects’ of theories has a very venerable ancestry in the western philosophy. It is called “pragmatism”, if the ’truth’ is coupled to the ‘uses’ and ‘results and effects’; it becomes “instrumentalism”, if the notion of truth is dispensed with. So, it might be useful if you were to familiarize with their arguments. (There is nothing specifically …