HOW DO YOU KNOW YOUR REASONING IS NOT TOTALLY INVALID?
Prerequisite: Necessity Vs Truth, The Problem With Knowledge
One can surely be unreasonable or illogical (invalid) to some degree, however this question attempts to examine the absolute depth of ones skepticism regarding their own mind. The key word in the question is "totally", which we can define as "without exception".
The act of "reasoning" is defined as "thinking in a logical way", therefore, by definition, it can not be "totally" invalid, since it's "logical". We will need to modify the question in order to avoid it being the case by definition. First, we can remove "know" and concentrate only with the justificatory condition of knowledge in order to avoid a problem of "having" truth. Next, we can replace "reasoning" with "thinking", so we can describe the process of the brain without definitionally assuming a specific type of outcome. Lastly, we can be more precise with the words "totally invalid" and substitute "any logical way" in its place.
After this, we can pose the question as, "How do you justify that you are thinking in any logical way?". The answer is: because A=A is necessary. If I am performing the action of "thinking", which is conceded in the question, and A=A is necessary, then by necessity my "thinking" can not be "totally" invalid.
August 2019
One can surely be unreasonable or illogical (invalid) to some degree, however this question attempts to examine the absolute depth of ones skepticism regarding their own mind. The key word in the question is "totally", which we can define as "without exception".
The act of "reasoning" is defined as "thinking in a logical way", therefore, by definition, it can not be "totally" invalid, since it's "logical". We will need to modify the question in order to avoid it being the case by definition. First, we can remove "know" and concentrate only with the justificatory condition of knowledge in order to avoid a problem of "having" truth. Next, we can replace "reasoning" with "thinking", so we can describe the process of the brain without definitionally assuming a specific type of outcome. Lastly, we can be more precise with the words "totally invalid" and substitute "any logical way" in its place.
After this, we can pose the question as, "How do you justify that you are thinking in any logical way?". The answer is: because A=A is necessary. If I am performing the action of "thinking", which is conceded in the question, and A=A is necessary, then by necessity my "thinking" can not be "totally" invalid.
August 2019
Comments
Post a Comment