Here's how it is, and this goes back to Socrates

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

You can take the Socrates out of it, Sky, if you like.

phew..oh thanks I will.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Now, in my middle ages, I see that this is a nice thing to have, like being good looking, or being coordinated, or getting good genes, or having rich parents. It's a little advantage you get, right out of the box. But A) it entitles you to exactly jack shit; like all the other advantages, it only matters what you do with it. And B) you wind up terribly wrong and utterly confused about a shitload of things, just like everybody else.

Truth!

My son knows this so well.

You have set certain moral standard for yourself that is personal and deep.

It is more important that being smart or right.

Thank you for sharing UT

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Now, in my middle ages, I see that this is a nice thing to have; like being good looking, or being coordinated, or getting good genes, or having rich parents. It's a little advantage you get, right out of the box. But A) it entitles you to exactly jack shit; like all the other advantages, it only matters what you do with it. And B) you wind up terribly wrong and utterly confused about a shitload of things, just like everybody else.

So, as I get older, I find that I pay more attention to people with a certain humility. (And not Rk's fake humility, as Clod pointed out, where at the end of the day he's still utterly self-absorbed and it's still all about him.)

I can't agree more. The more I learn the more I learn about what I don't know and on that note that I will never learn it all. I think the key is to stay engaged and take in as much as I can. In the end I will die.

[Cicero]

It's funny UT brought this up. I've been thinking for weeks, about how I can't really know anything.

This is a horrible thought process as I try to job search and try and convince others to hire me. The marketable person does not think: I think I know a lot, but what can be truly known really?

It really isn't about being smart per se. It's about the impossibilities of truly knowing anything in a Universe full of mystery, and as-yet unknowns.

Pride goes before the fall?

We can examine the differences between being informed, and truly knowing.

[Shawnee123]

An unexamined life is not worth living.
--Sew-crates. (Me knowed him)

"...as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."
-- the world according to + E

Originally Posted by Redux

"...as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."
-- the world according to + E

Actually the epistemic skeptic would claim that no one can obtain knowledge and by my measure they are correct. The best that anyone can do is form a justified true belief- not knowledge. Knowledge requires absolute universal observation and of course this is impossible via DesCartes' "madman deceiving" principle.

Not only this, but in order to even form a justified true belief one must escape the infinite regression problem that we find in foundationalist claims.

[glatt]

And yet, if Chuck Norris punches you in the nose, you will absolutely know it.

[Griff]

Glatt, you are amusing.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by glatt

And yet, if Chuck Norris punches you in the nose, you will absolutely know it.

Which updates Samuel Johnson's "Thus I refute. . ."

Who was that unfortunate refutee?

I seem to have recast the phrasing from Johnson to Collier: Bishop Berkeley, arguing how material things, er, weren't.

[Shawnee123]

BacardiE? :p

[lumberjim]

RUMMY?

[jinx]

Humility is commendable, willful ignorance is not.
We can only know what we know today, with the understanding that tomorrow may bring information that changes what we know.
This is a common theme in the topics we discuss for home schooling. Lots of what we learn now is compared to what I learned way back when, so we can see, with this one generation, how knowledge changes over time. We are standing on the shoulders of giants, and at the same time, we become the giants.

[lumberjim]

Originally Posted by jinx

Humility is commendable, willful ignorance is not.
We can only know what we know today, with the understanding that tomorrow may bring information that changes what we know.
This is a common theme in the topics we discuss for home schooling. Lots of what we learn now is compared to what I learned way back when, so we can see, with this one generation, how knowledge changes over time. We are standing on the shoulders of giants, and at the same time, we become the giants.

this is why she is so hot.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Jinx, did you know the tongue map, different areas of the tongue taste sweet, sour, etc, is bullshit?

http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/science...s-a-taste-map/

http://www.paulspond.com/index.php?entry=212

[skysidhe]

Great thoughts on critical thinking Jinx.
There is no better gift to give our children than the tool of critical thought.

I'll take a critical thinker any day over a sophist.
( philosopher/politician)

The statements but me at a conundrum.

If I chose think I am smart then I am not wise.

If I say I know nothing then it is false humility in order to seem wise.

Critical thinking is beyond a persons ability to use language in order to manipulate.

...as I type my mind keeps wanting to put political flavors on it.
There are no greater sophists than our political leaders.