5 ms·
You can't and we aren't. What is considered rational, is often cultural and builds on very different epistemological systems. Thus all you can do in a collabor
by Kialo 8y ago
You can't and we aren't. What is considered rational, is often cultural and builds on very different epistemological systems.
Thus all you can do in a collaborative reasoning platform like ours, is give everybody the tools to portray their reasoning as well as they can.
E.g. an underlying reason for somebody's arguments might be the existence of God. An atheist would consider this irrational, but the logic, given the underlying thesis, might be sound. So in the end, we are going to debate epistemology. Something, I feel, we don't do enough.
Nor are we taught in school enough how (utility vs happiness) to evaluate the different epistemological systems.
- sethrin 8y agoPerhaps I'm missing something, but are epistemological systems directly comparable?
- Kialo 8y agoOn our site, or in general? They broadly fall into, "science is knowledge" vs "whatever I want / feels right" is knowledge. We have perspectives, with which you can look at a believers vs a non-believers voting, other than that we are still waiting for the world to build AIs that can distinguish those....enough are working on this :)
- sethrin 8y agoIn general. Again, I may be missing a trick here, but I don't see how there can be any objective way to evaluate different truth-finding systems against each other.