Observation, logic, folklore and presuppositions
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2021 6:29 pm
Help me out. I'll benefit from hearing people's basic reaction to if somebody (whose intelligence they respected very much) said something like,
"Okay, so we all know that a slug dies when you pour salt on it that comes from a blue container. I've studied this very seriously and I can explain why the blue kills the slug. You see...."
And imagine we live in a culture in which there is a tradition of believing slugs die because of the color blue and there even used to be ritual 'games' where people used blue containers to pour salt on slugs.
If you have seen that slugs die equally well with salt poured on them from any color container, and if you know of a fairly good explanation as to why the salt kills the slug, and if you also have a fairly good understanding of why the color has nothing to do with why the slug dies, how do you relate to the opening words, "Okay, so we all know that..."
Is it possible for you to still respect the intelligence of your friend even as you have a fairly clear understanding of what the truth in this context is? For me it isn't a problem to still see all the ways my friend is 100 times smarter than I am. But I think some people struggle with this.
Would you be surprised that your friend said this if they typically didn't simply take folklore for granted?
This relates to Kastrup only in the sense that I think he is a master at pointing out exactly where logical and observational errors take place.
"Okay, so we all know that a slug dies when you pour salt on it that comes from a blue container. I've studied this very seriously and I can explain why the blue kills the slug. You see...."
And imagine we live in a culture in which there is a tradition of believing slugs die because of the color blue and there even used to be ritual 'games' where people used blue containers to pour salt on slugs.
If you have seen that slugs die equally well with salt poured on them from any color container, and if you know of a fairly good explanation as to why the salt kills the slug, and if you also have a fairly good understanding of why the color has nothing to do with why the slug dies, how do you relate to the opening words, "Okay, so we all know that..."
Is it possible for you to still respect the intelligence of your friend even as you have a fairly clear understanding of what the truth in this context is? For me it isn't a problem to still see all the ways my friend is 100 times smarter than I am. But I think some people struggle with this.
Would you be surprised that your friend said this if they typically didn't simply take folklore for granted?
This relates to Kastrup only in the sense that I think he is a master at pointing out exactly where logical and observational errors take place.