You're "certain"? What kind of fallibilist are you? xP
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
It strikes me that fallibilism seems to be hard to formulate consistently, because it seems deceptively trivial, yet naive formulations run into axiomatic problems. The simplest problem is whether fallibilism is itself fallible.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @EvanOLeary and
Fallibilism is fallible. It doesn’t rule out foundationalism (the concern for “axioms” you’re expressing) but, FWIW, many of us are also anti-foundationalist. Again, this is subtle, but many of us are interested in *fundamental* theories yet we reject foundationalism.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @ToKTeacher @Plinz and
(The difference is: focus on problems & solutions or a focus on starting points (axioms, etc). Fallibilism isn’t a foundation. It’s a critique of infallibilism/dogmatism/authoritarianism/etc. A 3rd plank in this is rejecting justificationism; also a consequence of Fallibilism).
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @ToKTeacher @EvanOLeary and
Is the mixing of normative (eg anti authoritarian) and epistemological claims part of your philosophy or just part of a social club you have built around a shared interest in critical inquiry?
4 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @ToKTeacher and
Authoritarian is only bad in the first place because it's an irrational way to treat ideas: It's prioritising some ideas over others not because of their merits, but some dogmatic decision.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
The goal of projecting authority is not to improve models but behavior.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.