The Dogmatism Paradox | Saul Kripke, Romina Padro

Is refusing to consider evidence against one's views always wrong? Saul Kripke - widely regarded as the most influential analytic philosopher alive today - explores the question of whether the dogmatic attitude sometimes warranted.

Saul Kripke is an American philosopher and logician. He is a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and emeritus professor at Princeton University. Since the 1960s, Kripke has been a central figure in a number of fields related to mathematical logic, philosophy of language, philosophy of mathematics, metaphysics, epistemology, and set theory.

#saulkripke #logic #dogmatism

DELVE DEEPER

[RenRealism]

Kripke was lazy in his old years. He’d show up with no preparation at all and babble away nonsense like this. He never fleshed out his theory of truth and was lazy lazy lazy. How sad, he could’ve been the next Aristotle, but then he farted for a long time. Long live fart king kripke. We love him though so don’t hate everyone, I love kripke. The high point of his life “Naming and The Big Farter” will go down in history as Norman Wildberger and Brian Shaw become legends. Have a good night! And remember that Saul kripke is great and farted from time to time.

[OrdenJust]

Suppose you know that P. Therefore you know evidence against P is misleading. It does not follow from this that the "evidence", such as it is, is not worth pondering. If the evidence is fallacious, it can be beneficial to pinpoint the fallacy involved. Consider the paradoxes of Zeno. I know it is possible for Achilles to overtake the tortoise. But how to refute Zeno? That I do not know.

[keyfeatures]

In liberal philosophy, the point of dialogue is to come up with resolved truths, or at least points closer to the truth, this becomes an issue when so-called 'evidence' is presented against resolved truths such as the Earth is not flat, for example. A principle of dogmatism therefore seems to be necessary in terms of previously refuted positions, at least.

[bradmodd]

logic is a kind of word game with a side of mathematics, what kind of system of knowledge can arise from this, except the game itself developing more rules

[alleyway]

Getting big Nemo from Mr. Nobody vibes

[williamcarter]

It is not possible to absolutely know that Santa Claus is a real person-entity that delivers presents?