What is God?

[Gordon]

I don't think making the sound of a lawn mower helps your ''case'' Gordon.

As I said: 'whoosh'.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As I said: 'whoosh'.

Gordon evidencing Empiricism:


Tell me, Vlad: if you have a garden with a lawn, and you liked a neat lawn, do you think you would be justified in buying a lawnmower?


You observe that the grass has grown and needs cutting.


Is your observation that the grass has grown empirical evidence (that grass can grow) or not?

My initial response was to your 'Where has empiricism etc. ever been evidenced?': you seem to agree that an observation that grass can be observed to have grown is empirical evidence. Yes?

Vlad: you asked 'Where has empiricism etc. ever been evidenced' and you've agreed that the observation that grass can grow is correct. This observation is based on a 'sensory experience' (which your definition mentions) that grass can indeed grow: hence the need for lawnmowers.''

[Gordon]

Gordon evidencing Empiricism:


Tell me, Vlad: if you have a garden with a lawn, and you liked a neat lawn, do you think you would be justified in buying a lawnmower?


You observe that the grass has grown and needs cutting.


Is your observation that the grass has grown empirical evidence (that grass can grow) or not?

My initial response was to your 'Where has empiricism etc. ever been evidenced?': you seem to agree that an observation that grass can be observed to have grown is empirical evidence. Yes?

Vlad: you asked 'Where has empiricism etc. ever been evidenced' and you've agreed that the observation that grass can grow is correct. This observation is based on a 'sensory experience' (which your definition mentions) that grass can indeed grow: hence the need for lawnmowers.''

Have you finished thrashing around yet, Vlad?

I take it you agree that there can be empirical evidence of phenomena?

[ProfessorDavey]

Not at all....you've missed God out.

And fairies, and pink unicorns, and flying spaghetti monsters and the invisible rainbow coloured climbing frame that is undetectable.

If you want to claim that unevidenced entities exist within the garden you need to demonstrate that they firstly exist, and secondly that they are within the garden. Until or unless you do then it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the garden contains things that are known to exist.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Have you finished thrashing around yet, Vlad?

I take it you agree that there can be empirical evidence of phenomena?

Yes, Now either be so good as to show how that 'evidences' Empiricism.
If you don't in your reply we can conclude that you can't.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And fairies, and pink unicorns, and flying spaghetti monsters and the invisible rainbow coloured climbing frame that is undetectable.

If you want to claim that unevidenced entities exist within the garden you need to demonstrate that they firstly exist, and secondly that they are within the garden. Until or unless you do then it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the garden contains things that are known to exist.

I think we are supposed to see fairies, pink unicorns, and I've certainly seen spaghetti fly.

[ProfessorDavey]

I think we are supposed to see fairies, pink unicorns, and I've certainly seen spaghetti fly.

And the invisible rainbow coloured climbing frame that is undetectable?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And the invisible rainbow coloured climbing frame that is undetectable.

Look...…….. how does the existence of empirical evidence 'evidence' empiricism?

[Gordon]

Yes, Now either be so good as to show how that 'evidences' Empiricism.
If you don't in your reply we can conclude that you can't.

I'm simply pointing out that some evidence can be considered empirical - would you not agree?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm simply pointing out that some evidence can be considered empirical - would you not agree?

I answered this in reply 68

Your love of inquisition seems to have got the better of you.

[wigginhall]

Vlad is trying to reverse the argument as usual.   He was supposed to be offering evidence as to the existence of fairies or God in the garden, but he has managed to switch the discussion onto empiricism. 

I think the relation between using empirical techniques and empiricism is complicated, since some people who use empirical techniques might not be full-going empiricists.  For example, they might think that some knowledge is innate - often known as rationalism.  So it's not black and white.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad is trying to reverse the argument as usual.   He was supposed to be offering evidence...…..

Why? Because no one can justify Adams' empiricism and materialism?
You seem to be saying that neither of these needs justification.

[wigginhall]

Why? Because no one can justify Adams' empiricism and materialism?
You seem to be saying that neither of these needs justification.

I thought he was using empirical observations about the garden and the fairies.  I have no idea if he supported empiricism or materialism as philosophical positions.  Method is different from philosophy.

[Stranger]

Why? Because no one can justify Adams' empiricism and materialism?

I've no idea about Adams' philosophical stance. You are doing your usual distraction tactic of trying to tell people that they have a particular philosophical view, that they have never actually put forward, and asking them to justify it - it's a kind of straw man.

If you are going to argue for the reality of something, then empirical evidence is one way to do it because it is intersubjective. The empirical world may not actually exist but if it doesn't it might as well, because it is inescapable. Neither does it need to be all that exists for it to be useful as a basis for evidence. One doesn't need to take a philosophical stance on those questions.

If you are going to propose the existence of something that isn't clearly a part of the intersubjective world, then it's up to you to come up with some reason to take your claim seriously - it's the normal philosophical burden of proof.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I've no idea about Adams' philosophical stance.

I find that hard to believe in people who"get" Adams metaphor of fairies and gardens, I'm afraid.

[Stranger]

I find that hard to believe in people who"get" Adams metaphor of fairies and gardens, I'm afraid.

See the rest of my post.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

See the rest of my post.

There is a burden of proof on statements of empiricism and materialism I'm afraid.
I wonder if you are under the apparent delusion that they have none.

[wigginhall]

Being empirical is not the same as empiricism.   

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Being empirical is not the same as empiricism.

I agree but there is no way IMV that a full reading of Adams' statement as provided by Ippy can leave us with the impression that Adams was merely waxing empirical rather than being empiricist.

[Stranger]

There is a burden of proof on statements of empiricism and materialism I'm afraid.

What "statements of empiricism" are you referring to? I have never claimed that either empiricism or materialism are true. As I said, read my post: #88.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What "statements of empiricism" are you referring to? I have never claimed that either empiricism or materialism are true. As I said, read my post: #88.

Adams statement is a metaphor for empiricism and materialism IMV.

[Stranger]

Adams statement is a metaphor for empiricism and materialism IMV.

I can't speak for Adams but reading a philosophical position into a simple quote like that seems utterly absurd to me.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I can't speak for Adams but reading a philosophical position into a simple quote like that seems utterly absurd to me.

Admitting not to speak for Adams and then trying to exonerate him from making an empiricist metaphor is the absurdity here?


I see you are back on the utterlies again.

[Stranger]

Admitting not to speak for Adams and then trying to exonerate him from making an empiricist metaphor is the absurdity here?

I'm not attempting to "exonerate" him from anything. He may or may not have been philosophically materialist or empiricist, I just don't think you can possibly know that from that one quote. You have form for pretending other people are taking philosophical positions they have never actually taken and this seems like an extreme case.

[wigginhall]

I think Vlad is just trying to annoy people.   I was just thinking, when I cross the road I use empirical observation, but that doesn't make me an empiricist.