| appolose said:
Confusion 2 “Also, I think you were being tautologous, because if I'm right you are defining legitimate beliefs by the fact that they are consistent with sense data. “ No, if that’s what you think I mean by legitimate beliefs we have a misunderstanding. First, my understanding is it that both illegitimate beliefs and legitimate beliefs can be consistent with the same blob of sense data. The question has been (in regards to my issue of legitimate beliefs), how do you figure out which belief is the legitimate one, that is to say, the truth? Thus by legitimate belief I mean the one gained from a method of truth that grantees truth and leaves no possibility of being wrong. 0_o does that help? |
@ appolose
If any belief (illegitimate & legitimate, whatever we take those terms to mean) can be "consistent with sense data," then would it be fair to state your view this way?:
Belief is completely independent from sense data. (or) Sense data leads to no particular belief. (or) Sense data does not "argue" for any particular interpretation. (or) There is no connection between sense data and belief.
Or, if those are unsatisfactory formulations, what do you believe is the relationship between sense data and belief?
