How do you know you're right?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Rhonda Huntress wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Rhonda Huntress wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I don't understand why the OP described it that way. It doesn't make sense to me.

---

 It depends on which word you emphasize.

"I

think

we should act now."

"

I

think we should act now."

---

Very true. I was only considering the written words - without any italics, bolding or underlining

---

I think I understand.

---

I would say it as "I think WE should act now", with an inflection on the "WE" that conveys the scare quotes that imply I'm not actually going to act, but just observe the rest of you make fools of yourselves.

;-).

[Pamela Galli]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

A correction: According to a Franklin biography I recently read, he emulated Socrates by asking questions, which is of course what is meant by the Socratic Method.

---

In his early days, Franklin routinely expressed certainty in his political and philosophical positions. He was not satisfied with the level of discourse that resulted, nor with his limited progress in advancing his agenda. It was after reading Socrates that he realized that his certainty, even if justified, was turning people off or backing them into corners. By expressing uncertainty he didn't necessarily possess, often by asking questions to which he already had the answers, he found others willing and able to more deeply discuss things of importance to him.

And it was through those deeper discussions that he was able to move others in his direction. He also discovered that those discussions were changing his own direction, and that wasn't a bad thing. Although asking questions was, at first, a way of revealing potential uncertainty, he had an epiphany. Asking questions is also a wonderful way to... learn! Some of Franklin's realization was just plain ol' growin' up, but some of it was the hallmark of the "scout mindset".

In Franklin's autobiography, he also describes discovering that asking people for favors made them more likely to do him favors in the future. A political foe of his had an impressive personal library. Franklin asked to borrow a rare book from it and thanked the man earnestly upon returning it. The man's demeanor towards Franklin changed, and the two of them became friends. This is now called the "Ben Franklin Effect".

If I ever set down roots in SL again, I may ask to borrow furnishings or a house from your wonderful collection.

;-).

ETA:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Kierkegaard says there is no faith without doubt.  Otherwise the choice to believe is no choice, and faith is a choice, one of the few truly free choices available to us.

---

I've not read Kierkegaard since taking a college philosophy course, during which I developed a substantial antipathy towards philosophers. I (currently;-) think that free will/choice is probably an illusion, albiet an extremely comforting one. Thinking about thinking without thinking about neurochemistry and evolution is perilous.

 

---

 

Christianity teaches that God chooses which of us will choose to have faith. Faith is both a choice and a gift. IOW a paradox, not unlike other questions about fundamental reality.

Yet for K and other existentialists, these were not academic questions, as they are for most people, but central to existence. There is a reason K named his books things like Fear and Trembling and Sickness Unto Death, and Sarte, Nausea. 

I would be happy to lend whatever you like :-)

[Solaria Goldshark]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

---

Solaria Goldshark wrote:

I know of a personal acquaintance who colors most of his discourse with the certain phase,  "I think..."  which always leaves me feeling that there is no room for thoughts from other perspectives.

---

Many linguists interpret "I think" in quite the opposite way, at least in written expression. In fact, it's a qualifier that's been part of a whole academic industry identifying supposed gender differences in English language usage, at least since a study by Robin Lakoff in the 1970's.  

Here's a more recent article in the Guardian

with a similar idea of "I think" being relatively overused by females.

(Also, the "I think" qualifier may discourage defamation lawsuits, but I am not a lawyer, your mileage may vary, except where prohibited.)

---

I always use "I think" to indicate that I'm not absolutely certain about something, which is quite opposite to the way the OP described it. E.g. I think that the ToS specifically states....

I don't understand why the OP described it that way. It doesn't make sense to me.

---

The impression I get when talking to this person is that the "I think" phrase used before his thoughts is a type of defense against confronting the information he has just received, like an instant delete function of the brain.  More often than not what is being said to him is not directly responded to, but discarded almost immediately with and opposing point of view.  When you used the words "I don't understand" you left the door open to another possibility.  Often when we speak from a place of imagined self confidence in our own understanding, we can never be sure that the other person has heard us correctly given the filter of their experiential view the world or even the emotional response to the person in front of them.  This makes communication a real **bleep**.  Thoughts, Beliefs, Feelings inform our sense of certainty.  

[Phil Deakins]

It sounds like he emphasises the word 'I' - I think, which would mean that he's saying that what he thinks is the right view, and that what the other person says is wrong. If there is no emphasis on either word, it means that he has a different opinion, but not an absolutely definite one. When the emphasis is on 'think', it means the same except that the opinion is far from definite. At least that's how I understand the spoken language, and it's stood me in good stead for quite a long time .

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Rhonda Huntress wrote:

My parents did

everythng they could

* to instill their beliefs in me.  However

I think

** Kevin Smith movies make more sense to me.

---

I'll have to watch a Kevin Smith movie. I'm nearly ready to debut my new outdoor theater.

---

Can i cast a vote for Dogma?

[Bree Giffen]

Solaria, this person you are talking about might certainly be talking in the manner you describe, using 'I think' as a qualifier that he is absolutely right. None of us has heard any of your conversations with that person. If your gut tells you that he is not open to other people's opinion then that might certainly be the case.

In my experience, 'I think' is used by many in the opposite manner of what you describe as other posters have said. I've had conversations where other people question my certainty because I used 'I think' in my statements.

I like that TeD talk. It sounds like the Israeli military's doctrine to have a group that 'challenges prevalent assumptions'. It's described as the 10th man doctrine in the movie Word War Z. 

[Pamela Galli]

I like this question better: how does one know what is true?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

I like this question better: how does one know what is true?

---

I don't.

I find that motivating.

[Solaria Goldshark]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

I like this question better: how does one know what is true?

---

I like that question too, and as Madelaine said following that, "I find that motivating,"  I have to say I agree with her.

Motivating in the sense that new information may come to light that alters our beliefs, or truths of our experience... and by truth of our experience I mean, the things we agree to.  For example:  I do not understand all the eqautions of special relativity, but when explained to me in simple terms of something like, "ok, so you're standing still and you measure the speed of light, you get 186,000 miles per second, and you then take that same measurement while moving at half the speed of light, well, you still measure light at 186,000 miles per second"   ...and I say "wow!  That's pretty awesome" (as my brain implodes) and I agree with it, because some smarter people than I, that I agreed were smarter than I, did all the science, and since I'm too lazy or too busy worrying about a great many other things to do all the research myself, I made a decision to absorb that into my world view as the way that part of the universe works.........and there is stability, and peace in the valley, until....stop the presses!   Some more smart people, doing more mind boggling experiments are hinting at...."well, that whole speed of light thing you've been making your models with for so long, uhm, that might not be true after all."

Excuse me!  What?

 .....I love the idea of what is true, but I do not think we can point to a thing and hang our hat on it with any certainty that the hook will remain fixed to the wall..  Truth seems to be an idea only, or only what an individual or a group of people consent to agree with. Given enough time and motivated seekers, our understanding of the way we think things to be will certainly change....but only if you decide to agree with it.

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Solaria Goldshark wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

I like this question better: how does one know what is true?

---

I like that question too, and as Madelaine said following that, "I find that motivating,"  I have to say I agree with her.

Motivating in the sense that new information may come to light that alters our beliefs, or truths of our experience... and by truth of our experience I mean, the things we agree to.  For example:  I do not understand all the eqautions of special relativity, but when explained to me in simple terms of something like, "ok, so you're standing still and you measure the speed of light, you get 186,000 miles per second, and you then take that same measurement while moving at half the speed of light, well, you still measure light at 186,000 miles per second"   ...and I say "wow!  That's pretty awesome" (as my brain implodes) and I agree with it, because some smarter people than I, that I agreed were smarter than I, did all the science, and since I'm too lazy or too busy worrying about a great many other things to do all the research myself, I made a decision to absorb that into my world view as the way that part of the universe works.........and there is stability, and peace in the valley, until....stop the presses!   Some more smart people, doing more mind boggling experiments are hinting at...."well, that whole speed of light thing you've been making your models with for so long, uhm, that might not be true after all."

Excuse me!  What?

 .....I love the idea of what is true, but I do not think we can point to a thing and hang our hat on it with any certainty that the hook will remain fixed to the wall..  Truth seems to be an idea only, or only what an individual or a group of people consent to agree with. Given enough time and motivated seekers, our understanding of the way we think things to be will certainly change....but only if you decide to agree with it.

---

Solaria, (call me Maddy, I can't spell Madelaine) this is more or less how I see things. Two of my philosophical heroes are RIchard Feynman and Mark Twain.

"The first principle (of science) is that you must not fool yourself – and you are the easiest person to fool". - Richard Feynman

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

Certainly I become harder to convince of some things as I get older and more deeply entrenched in my world view. But I do try to keep my mind open to challenges. It's exciting to wake every morning to the possibility that everything I know is wrong. My three favorite words are "I don't know".

Regarding hanging your hat on a hook, I once taught an evening division engineering course. The chalkboard at the front of the room was comprised of two panels with a seam in the middle. Before class one day, I hammered a small black nail into the wall between the panels, wiggled it loose, set it again and tested it, then put the hammer back in my purse and left the room. I returned after the students filed in, walked to the front of the room, drew a hook on the chalkboard, removed my blazer and hung it on the "hook". I ignored the chuckling and went about my business.

At the end of class, I removed my blazer (taking the nail with it), from the chalkboard, put it on, and erased the hook. Although a few looked at the chalkboard when leaving, nobody asked how I'd done it. Perhaps they'd not been impressed. I prefer to believe they knew I'd say "I don't know".

;-).