Why are people religious
Great, we're moving forward.
Where's your evidence that aliens or life on other planets doesn't exist? In fact, they've recently found amino acids - building blocks of life - on comets. This evidence suggests that in all likelihood we will find life elsewhere. So where's your evidence to the contrary?
You are assuming that life is precious, just as people once assumed that the sun spun around the earth and that the earth was in the middle of the universe. People tend to be conceded in this way.
What kind of dumb a** question is that? Human life is human life no matter color, religion, status, sexual preference, ect ect. Mine is no more important then theirs or vice versa.
And trust me, I aint mad or offended by you. You make me laugh if you want me to be honest. You cant get under my skin...that I promise.
And trust me, I aint mad or offended by you. You make me laugh if you want me to be honest. You cant get under my skin...that I promise.
Great, we're moving forward.
Where's your evidence that aliens or life on other planets doesn't exist? In fact, they've recently found amino acids - building blocks of life - on comets. This evidence suggests that in all likelihood we will find life elsewhere. So where's your evidence to the contrary?
Have we found intelligent life like life we have on earth? Yes or No? If yes then that would be evidence for Aliens. If No then that would be evidence that aliens do not exist.
I am not debating the fact that Alien life might exist elsewhere, in fact given the enormity of the universe and the fact that we have some 200 billion galaxies with each some 200 billions stars with each having planets , I'd say it would be pretty unlikely that we are alone in the universe.
What I am debating though is that you can't get your head around the fact that NOT all knowledge is based on assumptions.
Answer these questions before I go any further.
I'll explain again. Right now is it an assumption that Aliens exist? Y/N.
If we find Aliens is it still an assumption that aliens exist? Y/N?
You are assuming that life is precious, just as people once assumed that the sun spun around the earth and that the earth was in the middle of the universe. People tend to be conceded in this way.
Are you saying that if we find life all over the universe that I'll change my mind and NOT think life is precious anymore?
Look how life formed here on earth. It took some 5 billion years here on earth to finally give birth to intelligent life. It took 5 BILLION YEARS of evolving and what's most bizarre and unexplained is that for some of that time the earth was dead. Yet somehow life comes into existence and we do not know how this happens. It can't even be reproduced in the lab.
Not saying that we are alone but I do think that a lot of things have to go right in the universe for intelligent life to come to life.
A humans life is more important than ANY animal.
Do you feel the same about for example an angel, is his life more important than yours?
Or another being(Alien) that has evolved to a greater extent than yourself.
Or another being(Alien) that has evolved to a greater extent than yourself.
Now you're just spewing personal subjective opinion. If you and my dog were trapped in a burning building, I would save my dog first, and go back to rescue you if there were time.
You're not even more important than a non living inanimate thing like money. If you were being held hostage by kidnappers who demand I turn over my net worth or they'll kill you... You're gonna die.
I'm assuming you're human, which mean you're sense of self worth is demonstrably inflated.
You're not even more important than a non living inanimate thing like money. If you were being held hostage by kidnappers who demand I turn over my net worth or they'll kill you... You're gonna die.
I'm assuming you're human, which mean you're sense of self worth is demonstrably inflated.
I have a dog but I would not hesitate to save any person ahead of my dog. I would take some personal risk to save another person but would take very little risk for my dog.
Frankly, I have very little regard for anyone who would take the stance that you have in your comment. Virtually no respect for that person at all. But I would still save them ahead of my dog.
Really? Is that actually true or just a rhetorical ploy?
I have a dog but I would not hesitate to save any person ahead of my dog. I would take some personal risk to save another person but would take very little risk for my dog.
Frankly, I have very little regard for anyone who would take the stance that you have in your comment. Virtually no respect for that person at all. But I would still save them ahead of my dog.
I have a dog but I would not hesitate to save any person ahead of my dog. I would take some personal risk to save another person but would take very little risk for my dog.
Frankly, I have very little regard for anyone who would take the stance that you have in your comment. Virtually no respect for that person at all. But I would still save them ahead of my dog.
I'm sorry, but what I said is absolutely true. What I didn't say is that I would save a stranger whom I was ambivalent towards before my dog. I'd also save an unknown 80 year old woman. I'd certainly save a 6 year old girl first. In fact, I like to think that I'd give my own life for any 6 year old child.
But from what I know of the posts I've read from KC Young, he seems pompous, self important, and frankly, I don't like him. I'm not going to pretend that his life is more important to me than that of my dog. It simply isn't.
You could give me reasons that would change my mind. Such as maybe he's the father of a small child, or taking care of an elderly mother or sick loved one. But if he's not already a parent, it's all the more reason to save my dog first, because I don't relish people with his mindset becoming parents.
That might sound cold, but I'm just being honest. I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't think I'm good for the world to save me above a pet they love either.
We've corresponded on here for years and I would think you know me well enough by now. And you should know that if I'm anything, I'm honest with myself and others regarding my philosophies (and I try to correct myself when it's pointed out that I'm wrong).
I'm sorry, but what I said is absolutely true. What I didn't say is that I would save a stranger whom I was ambivalent towards before my dog. I'd also save an unknown 80 year old woman. I'd certainly save a 6 year old girl first. In fact, I like to think that I'd give my own life for any 6 year old child.
But from what I know of the posts I've read from KC Young, he seems pompous, self important, and frankly, I don't like him. I'm not going to pretend that his life is more important to me than that of my dog. It simply isn't.
You could give me reasons that would change my mind. Such as maybe he's the father of a small child, or taking care of an elderly mother or sick loved one. But if he's not already a parent, it's all the more reason to save my dog first, because I don't relish people with his mindset becoming parents.
That might sound cold, but I'm just being honest. I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't think I'm good for the world to save me above a pet they love either.
I'm sorry, but what I said is absolutely true. What I didn't say is that I would save a stranger whom I was ambivalent towards before my dog. I'd also save an unknown 80 year old woman. I'd certainly save a 6 year old girl first. In fact, I like to think that I'd give my own life for any 6 year old child.
But from what I know of the posts I've read from KC Young, he seems pompous, self important, and frankly, I don't like him. I'm not going to pretend that his life is more important to me than that of my dog. It simply isn't.
You could give me reasons that would change my mind. Such as maybe he's the father of a small child, or taking care of an elderly mother or sick loved one. But if he's not already a parent, it's all the more reason to save my dog first, because I don't relish people with his mindset becoming parents.
That might sound cold, but I'm just being honest. I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't think I'm good for the world to save me above a pet they love either.
Anyway, you have answered my questions with your response. Thanks.
We've corresponded on here for years and I would think you know me well enough by now. And you should know that if I'm anything, I'm honest with myself and others regarding my philosophies (and I try to correct myself when it's pointed out that I'm wrong).
I'm sorry, but what I said is absolutely true. What I didn't say is that I would save a stranger whom I was ambivalent towards before my dog. I'd also save an unknown 80 year old woman. I'd certainly save a 6 year old girl first. In fact, I like to think that I'd give my own life for any 6 year old child.
But from what I know of the posts I've read from KC Young, he seems pompous, self important, and frankly, I don't like him. I'm not going to pretend that his life is more important to me than that of my dog. It simply isn't.
You could give me reasons that would change my mind. Such as maybe he's the father of a small child, or taking care of an elderly mother or sick loved one. But if he's not already a parent, it's all the more reason to save my dog first, because I don't relish people with his mindset becoming parents.
That might sound cold, but I'm just being honest. I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't think I'm good for the world to save me above a pet they love either.
I'm sorry, but what I said is absolutely true. What I didn't say is that I would save a stranger whom I was ambivalent towards before my dog. I'd also save an unknown 80 year old woman. I'd certainly save a 6 year old girl first. In fact, I like to think that I'd give my own life for any 6 year old child.
But from what I know of the posts I've read from KC Young, he seems pompous, self important, and frankly, I don't like him. I'm not going to pretend that his life is more important to me than that of my dog. It simply isn't.
You could give me reasons that would change my mind. Such as maybe he's the father of a small child, or taking care of an elderly mother or sick loved one. But if he's not already a parent, it's all the more reason to save my dog first, because I don't relish people with his mindset becoming parents.
That might sound cold, but I'm just being honest. I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't think I'm good for the world to save me above a pet they love either.
And how am I pompous, because I think I am God is an idiot, or because I think humans are more important than animals? You've read a couple of posts of me giving I am God sh** and you judge me from a handful of posts? haha Don't worry, I don't need your approval, your validation, or anything else to be honest. Just think its funny you make all these judgements, enough to say you would let me die over a few posts I have made. haha But don't worry, I hold no ill will towards you...or your dog.
OP, in the context of knowledge and beliefs (epistemology), an assumption, also called an axiom, is defined as follows:
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
Knowledge is often defined as a justified belief that is true. There are problems with this definition, and other ways to define knowledge.
An assumption, or axiom, is a starting points in reasoning about anything. They are things that are held to be self-evident, and their acceptance is uncontroversial for anyone. On the one hand, they cannot be proven to be true. On the other, they cannot be disproven, since they have to be accepted in order try to disprove them. Some of the most basic axioms might include your own existence, that there is an external reality that we are able to interact and learn about, that our senses provide accurate information about this external reality, that we are capable of reasoning about the sensory input we receive and our own thoughts. I think the laws of logic are also axioms. Another basic assumption that all of science rests on is the uniformity of nature.
(I'm not a philosopher, so lmk if these definitions need some adjustment)
Every belief you have rests on accepting these most basic assumptions at least. Does the Earth revolve around the Sun? Given the assumption that there is an external reality that includes such objects, and ONLY after accepting these assumptions, can we say yes. In fact, as the topic gets more complicated, we end up accepting more assumptions. e.g. in that same example, we are also assuming things like gravity etc.
Perhaps this can clear up some of the earlier posts.
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
Knowledge is often defined as a justified belief that is true. There are problems with this definition, and other ways to define knowledge.
An assumption, or axiom, is a starting points in reasoning about anything. They are things that are held to be self-evident, and their acceptance is uncontroversial for anyone. On the one hand, they cannot be proven to be true. On the other, they cannot be disproven, since they have to be accepted in order try to disprove them. Some of the most basic axioms might include your own existence, that there is an external reality that we are able to interact and learn about, that our senses provide accurate information about this external reality, that we are capable of reasoning about the sensory input we receive and our own thoughts. I think the laws of logic are also axioms. Another basic assumption that all of science rests on is the uniformity of nature.
(I'm not a philosopher, so lmk if these definitions need some adjustment)
Every belief you have rests on accepting these most basic assumptions at least. Does the Earth revolve around the Sun? Given the assumption that there is an external reality that includes such objects, and ONLY after accepting these assumptions, can we say yes. In fact, as the topic gets more complicated, we end up accepting more assumptions. e.g. in that same example, we are also assuming things like gravity etc.
Perhaps this can clear up some of the earlier posts.
So... if a scientist needs to have some degree of belief in a hypothesis, in order to choose it over alternative hypotheses, then please stop referring to science as "having nothing to do with faith".
Everything in your life has something to do with faith, as much as it fears you to acknowledge it.
Everything in your life has something to do with faith, as much as it fears you to acknowledge it.
Always nice to know I have a fan. And I do have a child, and I do take care of an elderly parent. But, don't save me. I don't need you to. Save your dumb dog...Ill take care of myself.
And how am I pompous, because I think I am God is an idiot, or because I think humans are more important than animals? You've read a couple of posts of me giving I am God sh** and you judge me from a handful of posts? haha Don't worry, I don't need your approval, your validation, or anything else to be honest. Just think its funny you make all these judgements, enough to say you would let me die over a few posts I have made. haha But don't worry, I hold no ill will towards you...or your dog.
And how am I pompous, because I think I am God is an idiot, or because I think humans are more important than animals? You've read a couple of posts of me giving I am God sh** and you judge me from a handful of posts? haha Don't worry, I don't need your approval, your validation, or anything else to be honest. Just think its funny you make all these judgements, enough to say you would let me die over a few posts I have made. haha But don't worry, I hold no ill will towards you...or your dog.
You still did not answer my last question. Do you think an angel who is more evolved or an alien who is more evolved can do as he pleases with you no questions asked. Is his life much more important than yours or do you feel their is a moral injustice being done against you?
OP, in the context of knowledge and beliefs (epistemology), an assumption, also called an axiom, is defined as follows:
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
Knowledge is often defined as a justified belief that is true. There are problems with this definition, and other ways to define knowledge.
An assumption, or axiom, is a starting points in reasoning about anything. They are things that are held to be self-evident, and their acceptance is uncontroversial for anyone. On the one hand, they cannot be proven to be true. On the other, they cannot be disproven, since they have to be accepted in order try to disprove them. Some of the most basic axioms might include your own existence, that there is an external reality that we are able to interact and learn about, that our senses provide accurate information about this external reality, that we are capable of reasoning about the sensory input we receive and our own thoughts. I think the laws of logic are also axioms. Another basic assumption that all of science rests on is the uniformity of nature.
(I'm not a philosopher, so lmk if these definitions need some adjustment)
Every belief you have rests on accepting these most basic assumptions at least. Does the Earth revolve around the Sun? Given the assumption that there is an external reality that includes such objects, and ONLY after accepting these assumptions, can we say yes. In fact, as the topic gets more complicated, we end up accepting more assumptions. e.g. in that same example, we are also assuming things like gravity etc.
Perhaps this can clear up some of the earlier posts.
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
Knowledge is often defined as a justified belief that is true. There are problems with this definition, and other ways to define knowledge.
An assumption, or axiom, is a starting points in reasoning about anything. They are things that are held to be self-evident, and their acceptance is uncontroversial for anyone. On the one hand, they cannot be proven to be true. On the other, they cannot be disproven, since they have to be accepted in order try to disprove them. Some of the most basic axioms might include your own existence, that there is an external reality that we are able to interact and learn about, that our senses provide accurate information about this external reality, that we are capable of reasoning about the sensory input we receive and our own thoughts. I think the laws of logic are also axioms. Another basic assumption that all of science rests on is the uniformity of nature.
(I'm not a philosopher, so lmk if these definitions need some adjustment)
Every belief you have rests on accepting these most basic assumptions at least. Does the Earth revolve around the Sun? Given the assumption that there is an external reality that includes such objects, and ONLY after accepting these assumptions, can we say yes. In fact, as the topic gets more complicated, we end up accepting more assumptions. e.g. in that same example, we are also assuming things like gravity etc.
Perhaps this can clear up some of the earlier posts.
OP, in the context of knowledge and beliefs (epistemology), an assumption, also called an axiom, is defined as follows:
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
Knowledge is often defined as a justified belief that is true. There are problems with this definition, and other ways to define knowledge.
An assumption, or axiom, is a starting points in reasoning about anything. They are things that are held to be self-evident, and their acceptance is uncontroversial for anyone. On the one hand, they cannot be proven to be true. On the other, they cannot be disproven, since they have to be accepted in order try to disprove them. Some of the most basic axioms might include your own existence, that there is an external reality that we are able to interact and learn about, that our senses provide accurate information about this external reality, that we are capable of reasoning about the sensory input we receive and our own thoughts. I think the laws of logic are also axioms. Another basic assumption that all of science rests on is the uniformity of nature.
(I'm not a philosopher, so lmk if these definitions need some adjustment)
Every belief you have rests on accepting these most basic assumptions at least. Does the Earth revolve around the Sun? Given the assumption that there is an external reality that includes such objects, and ONLY after accepting these assumptions, can we say yes. In fact, as the topic gets more complicated, we end up accepting more assumptions. e.g. in that same example, we are also assuming things like gravity etc.
Perhaps this can clear up some of the earlier posts.
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
Knowledge is often defined as a justified belief that is true. There are problems with this definition, and other ways to define knowledge.
An assumption, or axiom, is a starting points in reasoning about anything. They are things that are held to be self-evident, and their acceptance is uncontroversial for anyone. On the one hand, they cannot be proven to be true. On the other, they cannot be disproven, since they have to be accepted in order try to disprove them. Some of the most basic axioms might include your own existence, that there is an external reality that we are able to interact and learn about, that our senses provide accurate information about this external reality, that we are capable of reasoning about the sensory input we receive and our own thoughts. I think the laws of logic are also axioms. Another basic assumption that all of science rests on is the uniformity of nature.
(I'm not a philosopher, so lmk if these definitions need some adjustment)
Every belief you have rests on accepting these most basic assumptions at least. Does the Earth revolve around the Sun? Given the assumption that there is an external reality that includes such objects, and ONLY after accepting these assumptions, can we say yes. In fact, as the topic gets more complicated, we end up accepting more assumptions. e.g. in that same example, we are also assuming things like gravity etc.
Perhaps this can clear up some of the earlier posts.
OP, in the context of knowledge and beliefs (epistemology), an assumption, also called an axiom, is defined as follows:
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
A belief is something you expect is true. You may have varying degrees of confidence in that expectation, from certainty to doubt. At least in these discussions, a belief remains a belief when it is almost certainly true (i.e. some people might say, they no longer believe something, they know something - this is not accurate since knowledge is a subset of belief; you do not stop believing something when you happen to know it).
As I explained faith and belief have nothing to do with science. In fact science eliminates those attributes, THAT IS WHAT SCIENCE IS ALL ABOUT, GOD DAMN YOU GUYS!
Thanks for the kind words! I guess calling me an idiot is ok in your book but when someone calls you out, you think it is wrong, cool! I hate to bring this up, but it is people(pigs in my book) like yourself that make this world a **** place!
You still did not answer my last question. Do you think an angel who is more evolved or an alien who is more evolved can do as he pleases with you no questions asked. Is his life much more important than yours or do you feel their is a moral injustice being done against you?
You still did not answer my last question. Do you think an angel who is more evolved or an alien who is more evolved can do as he pleases with you no questions asked. Is his life much more important than yours or do you feel their is a moral injustice being done against you?
You are saying basically ALL living things are basically equal or should be treated so...at least from what I take from your dribble.
Maybe calling you a name is over stepping the bounds of good taste, and for that I apologize. That part I am wrong for. What I should have said is that thinking like that is IDIOTIC. That would be a more proper context.
And I think its people like YOU that make this world a sh** place because you think its a sh** place. Its people with that attitude that make it the way it is. Looking at this world with a negative attitude and saying its sh** is the problem. I battled with depression my whole life, severe. On top of other mental issues. But I learned to see the beauty in the world and find happiness in smaller things, and yada yada yada. That's the truth. And its our negative thinking, like yours saying this place is sh**, that causes all of that. Negative thoughts bring negative outcomes... and I am living proof.
So I don't think this is a sh** place anymore. I don't look at things like that or let them eat me up inside. Yes, I realize bad things go on in this world, and I wish that would change...but I understand I cant control it and it never will. We have to accept the way things are when they are out of our hands. So I look at the positive things in this world and my own life and I enjoy those, and look past the rest.
You all can think what you want of me. You can think I am pompous just because I am confident in myself, in my life, and in my happiness. I am kind of arrogant, but show me a male who is not. So, like I said, its nice to have fans. But I stand by that all life isn't precious, and definitely not an earthworm or a plant for sure.
And as far as angels, if there really is such thing (I am Agnostic), then I believe they are more important. They have reached the pinnacle in this universe or whatever you want to call it. So I would say they earned a higher distinction. As far as an alien, I do not think they are any better than us, and I guess if they are more evolved and higher on the food chain, then I guess we will be their earthworm. So be it.
My point was to demonstrate that human life is not more important than something else just because you think it so.
In addition, YOU don't even believe what you're saying! How do I know? Because you could save countless human lives right now by selling everything you own and devoting 100% of your time and money to saving starving children on the verge of death. So how can humans be more important than animals according to you, but not even more important than your time and a material commodity like money?
Because you state personal opinions as facts.
My point was to demonstrate that human life is not more important than something else just because you think it so.
In addition, YOU don't even believe what you're saying! How do I know? Because you could save countless human lives right now by selling everything you own and devoting 100% of your time and money to saving starving children on the verge of death. So how can humans be more important than animals according to you, but not even more important than your time and a material commodity like money?
My point was to demonstrate that human life is not more important than something else just because you think it so.
In addition, YOU don't even believe what you're saying! How do I know? Because you could save countless human lives right now by selling everything you own and devoting 100% of your time and money to saving starving children on the verge of death. So how can humans be more important than animals according to you, but not even more important than your time and a material commodity like money?
Further more, youre right, I don't help starving kids...but I have given to charity since I was little boy giving part of my allowance each week. I have helped starving homeless on the street. So to be honest, I have done more than most because I do care.
But I am God is telling me I should care about earthworms and plants. haha There is a food chain for a reason. We as humans have to survive. We are made to eat plants and animals. Do you want me to shed a tear every time and say a eulogy for every hamburger I eat, or salad, because of the precious life that was lost to feed me? Get a grip. Or maybe have a funeral for a spider I just stomped on in my house?
This is just like ANY OTHER ARGUMENT. All we are going to do is shove our opinions down each others throats over and over again...and you know where that will end up? NOWHERE. Why? Because we will still have our OWN opinions and think the other is wrong.
I have gotten better over time not getting into these meaningless squabbles, because its all negative energy, and it ends up going NOWHERE. So, I respectfully bow out because it is not worth my time and energy to try to get YOU to change your opinion. You save the planet and I will keep eating meat and killing rodents.
Can you be specific please about what you 'believe' is wrong. The wiki entry on belief shows a Venn diagram with knowledge being a subset of belief.
Certainly you could do more and choose not to.
I was referring to wiki about epistemology.
Maybe calling you a name is over stepping the bounds of good taste, and for that I apologize. That part I am wrong for. What I should have said is that thinking like that is IDIOTIC. That would be a more proper context.
Further if we as humans are able in time to help lesser evolved animals and give them a better life, we shouldn't according to you because they are animals and are not important enough?
And I think its people like YOU that make this world a sh** place because you think its a sh** place. Its people with that attitude that make it the way it is. Looking at this world with a negative attitude and saying its sh** is the problem. I battled with depression my whole life, severe. On top of other mental issues. But I learned to see the beauty in the world and find happiness in smaller things, and yada yada yada. That's the truth. And its our negative thinking, like yours saying this place is sh**, that causes all of that. Negative thoughts bring negative outcomes... and I am living proof.
You are the one with negative thoughts, from an earthworms perspective he also thinks his life is very important, the fact that you think his life means nothing does not mean that his life is nothing. All it means is that you are not capable of thinking outside the box and understand that you are not the centre of the universe. Also fun fact but without earthworms your sorry ass would probably not even exist.
You all can think what you want of me. You can think I am pompous just because I am confident in myself, in my life, and in my happiness. I am kind of arrogant, but show me a male who is not. So, like I said, its nice to have fans. But I stand by that all life isn't precious, and definitely not an earthworm or a plant for sure.
And as far as angels, if there really is such thing (I am Agnostic), then I believe they are more important. They have reached the pinnacle in this universe or whatever you want to call it. So I would say they earned a higher distinction. As far as an alien, I do not think they are any better than us, and I guess if they are more evolved and higher on the food chain, then I guess we will be their earthworm. So be it.
That still doesn't tell me anything more about what you mean by:
Wrong about what? Be specific pls.
btw, the wiki page on epistemology includes a similar diagram showing knowledge as a subset of belief.
Wrong about what? Be specific pls.
btw, the wiki page on epistemology includes a similar diagram showing knowledge as a subset of belief.
Feedback is used for internal purposes. LEARN MORE