Premium Only Content

Metaphysics 12. Facts & Logic Redo
This is a redo of part 11 of this series on metaphysics. In it I attempt to better clarify the four main points in the first video. In review they are:
1. It is much harder to prove a proposition than most people realize. A philosophical skeptic is a person who, for philosophical reasons, believes absolute certainty to be strictly impossible.
2. Even logic can't fully resolve a feud between interlocutors over whether a proposition is true or not. No matter how carefully we apply logic, our logical conclusions (both deductive and inductive) are only as true as our premises. And logic cannot help us determine if they are true. For that we rely on testimony and observation, which are imperfect. If one is being consistent (has no contradictions) one is being logical, but that doesn't establish that one's opinions are true, only that one's opinions are logical. One can have a completely false system of beliefs that has no contradictions.
3. Philosophical skepticism is meant to keep us undogmatic in our beliefs, i.e. to help us maintain an open mind as we seek the truth. However, if one adopts the hardened view that knowledge is impossible, one ironically winds up contradicting himself, by making a knowledge claim while at the same time claiming we can have no such knowledge. This contradiction implies a logical error somewhere. I present an alternative form of skepticism that I call "positive skepticism." In short, positive skepticism is the prescriptive attitude that, in the face of our uncertainty about things, all things remain possible. This is in contrast to the descriptive form of skepticism that declares certainty that knowledge is impossible. I call that "negative skepticism." I assert that positive skepticism (the prescriptive attitude that, until we know otherwise, all things remain possible) allows us to maintain a very open mind, and yet does not lead us to make a contradiction, or to sink into an unjustified cynicism about knowledge all together.
4. Finally, I go over a form of logic that I introduce in my 2022 book "The Evolution of Perception Re-Explained." I believe this unique application of deductive logic leads to real epistemological certainty about at least one class of beliefs, if used properly.
-
4:58:51
Steven Crowder
15 hours agoLIVE: No Kings Day - Following The Money w/ Guest: Data Republican | Louder with Crowder
810K430 -
1:11:45
Man in America
13 hours ago🚨 America Descends Into CHAOS—Are You Prepared?
76.5K61 -
2:23:54
Badlands Media
1 day agoDevolution Power Hour Ep. 363: Lawfare, Psyops, and the Great Narrative Reversal
98.1K24 -
2:32:48
Tundra Tactical
8 hours ago $9.66 earnedSilencers, Senators, and Survival: Roasting Lies and a Security Breakdown of The MN Shooting
60.7K7 -
10:45:48
Spartan
11 hours agoPro Halo Player | !politics Halo Infinite Ranked Arena into SWTOR and/or Gears Beta
67.5K3 -
40:25
The Connect: With Johnny Mitchell
1 day ago $10.65 earnedBlackwater CEO Erik Prince Gets HONEST About The Israeli Invasion Of Lebanon
52.5K52 -
2:14:37
BlackDiamondGunsandGear
8 hours agoAfter Hours Armory / Is the World ENDING?
71K3 -
4:21:28
cosmicvandenim
10 hours ago[NEW] FIVE NIGHTS AT FREDDY'S - SECRET OF THE MIMIC - Horror Game
83K1 -
2:14:37
DLDAfterDark
9 hours ago $1.43 earnedThe After Hours Armory - WWIII - The World Is Melting - Feat. Gideon Optics
42.1K3 -
5:52:04
Right Side Broadcasting Network
5 days agoLIVE REPLAY: President Trump Honors U.S. Army's 250th Anniversary With a Grand Military Parade - 6/14/25
456K227