Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Let's work out precisely where we disagree:

1. Do you agree that it is rational to think that burning hydrogen in oxygen will produce water and heat (prediction A), and irrational to think that it will produce a juicy stake that can play tennis (prediction B)?

2. If yes to 1, do you agree that A is correct (or at least closer to being correct), and B is incorrect (or at least further from being correct)?

3. If yes to 2, do you agree that there must be something against which A and B are both measured that makes one right and the other wrong?

4. If yes to 3, do you agree that the thing against which A and B are measured must be independent of them both?

5. If yes to 4, do you agree that there is a reality independent of our observations, and which our observations presuppose and are caused by?

I think you're saying that we can reasonably think that our sensual perceptions and ideas are all we know, and that we can reasonably doubt that they ever refer to reality, but I want to confirm this.

> And if you say "but there is still a reality, none of those people would just know it", then I can ask, how do you know we don't fit that same bill, where some other observer could look at us and say "those guys are all seeing an illusion, its actually this way"

See point 1, above. I suggest that nobody really systematically doubts their observations. But if you honestly disagree with point 1 then let me know.

> But what determines who is right? That is my question.

Obviously that is sometimes impossible to answer, depending on the situation. But sometimes (more often) it's not. Again, do you disagree with point 1 above?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: