Well I'll try one more time. In brief: If we can envisage it as the truth and the closer we come to believing it is the truth, the greater is the likelihood that we are wrong...
For example we think that gravity is a universal force that acts on us. We define it in units of mass and acceleration. This is the same definition we use for our weight. And so we think we have proved that gravity acts on us because we feel our weight. Clouding logic with the filters provided by our senses lets us assign to the universe images of ourselves. So we think that a force that we feel is generated by inanimate matter. False. We generate the force we feel and it is applied on inanimate matter. The generated universal force that we do not directly feel acts on the atoms that make up inanimate and animate matter. We feel the cumulative resistance of those atoms. Of course that's just conjecture as stated. I can show it mathematically but we've already used that math to prove the validity of gravity acting on us. So in the final analysis here, whose conjecture do you choose? The true one or the false one? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
