Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scommstech
All arguments are in the head. You could say that irrespective of any proof the skeptic refuses to believe, whilst for some believers even the flimsiest of evidence is acceptable.
Rationally most believes do not need a comfort zone as such. They tend not be hindered by previous thought. They are able to accept, usually if personally observed, a repeatable demonstration supported wherever possible with a plausible explanation.
The skeptic on the other hand tends to have a closed mind. He is comfortable with the existing knowledge that he has and may even fear the possibility of losing that safe heaven which he needs. he is less likely to explore the unknown.
|
So do you see that if "All arguments are in the head" then they are 'fabrications of thought' and are not a direct component of what's being discussed. They're interpretations. And since interpretations are all generally semantically generated and composted of verbal approximations then there is no beliefs that are generated in this way that can replicate that which is being observed. All are approximations, whether they are flexible or not.
And when we approximate in this way we tend to think that we actually know more than we do. I'm currently reading a book that addresses this issue in some detail. It's entitled "The Knowledge Illusion" by Steve Sloman. It seems that we as individuals think we know far more than we actually so, even over the most simplest of things. We tend to form a platform of assumptions about most all things, that leave us with the impression that 'understanding' comes with it. When in truth all items and concepts are like fractals. The deeper you delve into them the deeper they go. If we chose to pause at any level over any observation then we are necessarily dealing in approximations.
Because we humans are conditioned in a block format we will generally share similar imagery on things, with some claiming greater access than others. When in truth the distance in "not knowing" is not all that different between those who inquire and those who remain stubbornly conditioned.