Posted: Jun 20, 2022 6:26 pm
by Spearthrower
BWE wrote:
This too, seems a caricature of a ridiculous position.


I concur... it's essentially placed itself outside of any form of reasoned discourse - there's nothing more to say to such a belief when knowledge isn't gained by observation - it's not just provably wrong, the claimant disproves it by their existence, by their participation, by the act of making the claim.

To me, it's a lot like an attempt to assert the existence of an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire - a constructed falsehood carefully placed outside of scrutiny.

Whatever it is, it's damn well not floating in a site specifically focused on rational skepticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_skepticism

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism (also spelled scepticism), sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry,[1] is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.


Personally, I think jamest is just uncomfortable with the massive vista of knowledge he has no access to or capacity to master, so he essentially needs to find a way to dismiss it en masse. I suggest a more sensible response to a self-awareness of ignorance is to simply acknowledge that one doesn't know, without pretending there is nothing to know.