Re: Knowledge and Belief

["Engdahl, Rod" <engdahl@VISA.COM>]

On the other hand, when we say:

"I (x1) know that <the Earth is the center> (x2) <of the solar
system>(x3) according to <Ptolemaic theory> (x4)."

that is a true statement.  Once we give a context of a (even internally
consistent) model, direct correspondence with reality is not necessarily
required.

Later, when we learn the flaw in the model, and replace it with a
Copernican or Keplerian model and say:

"I (x1) know that <the sun is the center>(x2) <of the solar system>(x3)
according to <Copernican theory> (x4)."

what in fact we have done is to replace the underlying model, which in
this example cannot be distinguished from the belief structure.

In the above example, the passage of time has nothing to do with the
truth values.  It may very well be that x4 cannot be omitted for djuno
if we are being precise in our statements.


Now, if we had someone from those times making that statement within the
context of the times, perhaps the belief structure argument gains more
ground . . .

 ----------
From: John Cowan
To: Engdahl, Rod
Subject: Re: Knowledge and Belief
Date: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 12:06PM

Rob Zook wrote:

> But if you look at a past system, you cannot affect the truth value
> of that system from the inside. The inside of the system is no longer
> accessible. So you cannot help but take a more inclusive view, which
> may include a copy of the previous system with a different truth value
> but that makes it obvous that your view cannot be compared the to old
> system on the same basis.

In theory that may be so.  But when I repudiate earlier claims of
truth, I am not normally adjusting my truth model, simply
my belief structure.  I do not say: "'Bantha is a cat' used to be
true (by my truth model), but now that I hear Bantha bark and
howl, I have changed my truth model so that the statement is
false."  I simply repudiate my previous belief that Bantha is a cat
and keep the same truth model.  Otherwise we are in the position
of saying that the Sun used to orbit the earth, but now does not,
a position that lojbab rightly rejects.  (We *can* create such
time-dependent metaphysicses, but they are decidedly abnormal.)

 --
John Cowan      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@ccil.org
        You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
        You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
                Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (FW 16.5)