Happy Easter

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm puzzled that you seem to want to confine discussions of the 'unknown/known' permutations to mental states, and we already do know that people can lack insight into themselves in various ways that may be apparent to others: my earlier mention of Freudian mental defence mechanisms is an example of this.

https://www.simplypsychology.org/defense-mechanisms.html

The issue of 'unknown unknowns' is simply an acknowledgement that since we (our species) doesn't already know 'everything about everything' then there may be aspects that we are simply unaware of currently whereas 'known unknowns' imply that we have an awareness of a 'something', via methods to confirm that there is indeed a 'something', but that we don't yet have a full understanding of that 'something': for example we know that homing pigeons 'home' but the precise mechanisms they use to do so isn't yet fully understood.

No one is saying there aren't unknown unknowns, just that the question of God's existence is a known unknown i.e. we know we collectively don't know.

So even if you can make a dispute against the existence of unknown knowns stick it has no bearing on the issue of the existence of God being a known unknown.

Since you were interested in Unknown Knowns the idea is used in business management to describe knowledge within an organisation which is unused and or ignored.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Certainly, Any behaviour or attitude which can be observed, recorded and that we refuse to acknowledge and are in denial of...

Or...

1. When you said to me "But that is all undone by the positing of the unknown known" you intended the standard "known unknown" but accidentally swapped the terms.

2. Gordon then asked you what you meant by it.

3. Panicked, you googled "unknown known" and to your considerable relief you found that someone had come up with that formulation.

4. Quick as a flash you then copied and pasted from the reference you found. Phew! Job done right? Except...

5. As with many a heist, you left behind a loose thread that we only have to tug at to find that "unknown known" meaning "Any behaviour or attitude which can be observed, recorded and that we refuse to acknowledge and are in denial of" isn't something I've ever done at all. There is no "behaviour or attitude" regarding my (supposed) belief on god "which can be observed, recorded".

(At this point Vlad is led away in 'cuffs, head bowed while yours truly does the Jack Warner homily - "You know, young Vlad though he'd committed the perfect crime there and he'd have got away with it too if only...." etc).

Nice try though.     

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

No one is saying there aren't unknown unknowns, just that the question of God's existence is a known unknown i.e. we know we collectively don't know.

So even if you can make a dispute against the existence of unknown knowns stick it has no bearing on the issue of the existence of God being a known unknown.

And still you don’t or won’t get it. It’s the positive claim “god absolutely is” that fails because of the principle of unknown unknowns – the person making it cannot know that something he’s never thought of could undo his statement.

Since you were interested in Unknown Knowns the idea is used in business management to describe knowledge within an organisation which is unused and or ignored.

Keep googling…

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

And still you don’t or won’t get it. It’s the positive claim “god absolutely is” that fails because of the principle of unknown unknowns – the person making it cannot know that something he’s never thought of could undo his statement.

Keep googling…

Unknown unknowns are not Known unknowns. The existence of God is a known unknown in other words He either absolutely is or isn't Be Rational has pointed this out.

Like the inability to be ''a little bit pregnant'' Something cannot be ''a little bit'' God.

On the other hand the statement the existence of God is a known unknown is hardly the same as a positive claim of certainty.......don't suggest such silly things in future, thank you.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Unknown unknowns are not Known unknowns. The existence of God is a known unknown in other words He either absolutely is or isn't Be Rational has pointed this out.

But the statement “god absolutely is” fails because of the risk of unknown unknowns, which was the argument was actually about. Keep trying though – you’ll get it eventually…

…or perhaps not.

Like the inability to be ''a little bit pregnant'' Something cannot be ''a little bit'' God.

You don’t say.

On the other hand the statement the existence of God is a known unknown is hardly the same as a positive claim of certainty....

But that is the claim we were discussing before you wrenched us off the road remember?
 

...don't suggest such silly things in future, thank you.

That's another irony meter in pieces all over the floor then...

[Owlswing]

Why would it be moved? It's primarily about Easter.

Humble?

Yes, you and Rees Mogg. Peas in a pod.

Thanks, TV! I have been without a computer internet - I live in an area that, at times, is a dead zone - since my last post here.

What Vlad carefully ignores is that Ostara pre-dates Jesus Christ, if he ever actually existed, as a Pagan Festival by many years.

Owlswing

)O(