[Gary Wassner]

There is a philosopher named Wittgenstein who wrote a short book called On Certainty. He said something very profound - his first statement:
1. If you know that here is one hand, we'll grant you all the rest.
2. From it seeming to me - or to everyone - to be so, it doesn't follow that it is so.

My conclusion: Ask. Always ask. Don't just accept. The process that conviction suffocates is what carries us from here to there.

[Hereford Eye]

Yes, learned sir, but those of us on the side of Popper still wield the poker.

[Gary Wassner]

I don't disagree at all. Truth is an endless quest! What more could I say to agree with critical rationalism? You know that my book series is titled GemQuest, and I am not searching for diamonds!

[alison]

But it is not fear, but the blind conviction of these people that stifles any contrary opinion. Fear can lead to denial, but conviction is almost angelic, and therefor it cannot be criticized or questioned.


Yes; but which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Blind conviction seems to me deeply an expression of fear. The aggressive mindset of neocons is also extremely paranoid. (They're the big believers in the Noble Lie, btw)

Relativity in truth questions seems to me extremely important. But there is a point where it becomes bankrupt, an excuse for hollowing out an argument. Like that idea that evolution is "only an opinion", a very bad misunderstanding of what "theory" means in scientific thought.

(My favourite quote from On Certainty is: "One has to begin somewhere". That's what I say to myself every morning :))

[Gary Wassner]

You make a good point about fear leading toward conviction instead of questioning meaning and opening the door to doubt. But regardless of what leads one to believe as opposed to question, still I think conviction is the greater of the evils when it comes to the effects it might have upon any search for truth. The liar may be the more noble of the two after all.

[JRMurdock]

Truth is an endless quest! What more could I say to agree with critical rationalism?

You've just proven my point once again. Complacency means you no longer wish to be on that quest and have accepted whatever truth is at hand be it right or wrong.

Yes; but which comes first, the chicken or the egg?
I think I asked that in another thread. :)

I agree with Gary that truth is a quest. On the point that one religion has a different truth that another, each is still a person's desire for greater understanding. When you stop questioning and accept 'all' on blind faith, you've stopped seeking the truth. In regards to religion, once you stop seeking God it doesn't mean you've found him. It only means you've accepted the answer at hand.

[Archren]

According to Harry Frankfurt, B***S*** is truth's greatest enemy - and it is different from lying.

On B***S*** (http://www.jelks.nu/misc/articles/bs.html) A little long, but really wonderful. :D

[Gary Wassner]

It seems to me that it might be a combination of the two. But I think that Hereford's example of her sister's faith precluding any other options really clarifies how stultifying belief can be when it comes to the learning process. And the process is hopefully one which desires truth in the end or clarity at the least, if any of these things exist in a way that could really be satisfying.