Posted: Oct 08, 2010 3:52 am
Paul Almond wrote:but I would say that when we say "I know" something we aren't usually making a claim that is that strong. If you were in a conversation with someone, and you remembered them saying something ten seconds ago, you would normally have no problem saying that you know that they said that thing. Issues of residual uncertainty (false memories, etc) wouldn't be an issue here. Normally, we don't need qualification on this because we all know what "I know" means.
I was playing the devil's advocate. As theists -at least according to my observation- make the claim that we cannot know with absolute certainty therefore we shouldn't make such a claim. Of course I could go on and clarify each time but it's their misrepresentation and I'm merely trying to analyse their pov and see how I can communicate in a successful way so they receive what I've been sending in their direction.
Paul Almond wrote:And of course, I am discussing a very silly idea here as if it is sensible - and I want to be very clear that I think it is not sensible.
Since you made that remark in a reply to Teuton I'm unsure whether you find my objection not sensible or if it was indeed only addressing his response? You seem to think that miscommunication between theists/atheists is a non-issue?
I don't have a problem understanding you since we seem to be on the same page, I'm rather addressing "leaks" in communication between people who hold opposing views if that makes sense.