Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

[milefile]

Certainly we'd still need infrastructure. Let's not forget about the ultimate form of expression - Art - that can be a goal in and of itself.

I'm baffled at the point of trying to argue that absolute knowledge is possible or desireable and I hope you see it as a mental excercise, because that's all it can ever be.

If we knew everything danger would be absolutely eliminated from life. Accomplishment would be eliminated. Anticipation would be eliminated as would excitment. Every last detail of every last detail would be utterly predictible. There'd be no such thing a surprises. Education would be impossible. Discovery would be impossible. Everything would be the same for everybody all the time. Choice would be eliminated.

How can absolute knowledge be possible or desireable, danoff?

 

[Danoff]

I hope you see it as a mental excercise

Of course.

Choice would be eliminated.

I don't see that. How does your knowledge affect something as simple as what you eat for your next meal or how fast you take the next turn in the road? Just because you know your situation perfectly doesn't mean you have to play it perfectly.

How can absolute knowledge be possible or desireable, danoff?

I don't think it's possible, but I think it's an excellent goal.

 

[Arwin]

Of course.



I don't see that. How does your knowledge affect something as simple as what you eat for your next meal or how fast you take the next turn in the road? Just because you know your situation perfectly doesn't mean you have to play it perfectly.



I don't think it's possible, but I think it's an excellent goal.

I agree (wow ). Ignorance is something at least I can do without. Even if you know everything, you can spend the rest of your days acting on that knowledge. Ok perhaps if you always knew how that action succeeds, it might get a little boring, but say if I know I learn to play the guitar better (which is a skill you have to learn, not something you know - you can know how to play the guitar, but that doesn't mean your hands can do what you want them to) I can still enjoy that greatly.

I do respect others for not wanting to know certain things, like what happens after they die, or if their spouses cheat, etc. I even think that makes many people happier. But it's not for me.

 

[milefile]

I agree (wow ). Ignorance is something at least I can do without. Even if you know everything, you can spend the rest of your days acting on that knowledge. Ok perhaps if you always knew how that action succeeds, it might get a little boring, but say if I know I learn to play the guitar better (which is a skill you have to learn, not something you know - you can know how to play the guitar, but that doesn't mean your hands can do what you want them to) I can still enjoy that greatly.

I do respect others for not wanting to know certain things, like what happens after they die, or if their spouses cheat, etc. I even think that makes many people happier. But it's not for me.

Striving to be as knowledgeable as possible is not the same as absolute knowledge. Absolute knowledge is a synthetic concept like infinity or imaginary numbers; it can only exist as a concept with no antecedent in reality.

Absolute knowledge would eliminate choices because every possible scenario would be totally predictable. Nobody would choose wrong because what is right would be known in advance. What is right and good would be known and what is bad and wrong would be known. There would have to be total agreement on it for absolute knowledge to be possible. There would be no room for judgement.

Absolute knowledge also introduces unresolveable time paradoxes. Absolute knowledge sort of desrtoys the future, because it is already known. If it isn't then we're not talking about absolute knowledge.

Absolute knowledge would destroy the ability for humans and humanity to develop and grow over time.

Absolute knowledge would destroy art. There wold be no art because art is creative and something created is new and hitherto unknown. Art would be impossible.

 

[Duke]

I disagree totally on your last premise, and that makes me disagree with the rest of your post above. I don't think absolute knowledge would cover the creation of unknown things such as art or music. Besides, even within the framework of known physics there is margin of uncertainty in the random effects of a given action.

Besides, many things are totally predictable right now and yet people still choose to do the wrong thing (or what appears to be the wrong thing to an outsider). People still free climb mountains and base jump off of bridges and take hard drugs, despite certain knowledge that these things are more dangerous to a great degree than not doing so. That would not be eliminated by absolute knowledge.

 

[milefile]

Then you're basically saying absolute knowledge is impossible. Remember, there are no grades of absolute; it is or it isn't.

 

[Arwin]

knowledge, choice and action are not the same, even when considered absolute

 

[milefile]

knowledge, choice and action are not the same, even when considered absolute

What? Think about what you are saying. There can be no choice or action whitout knowledge. Life and death atre not the same, but you can't die unless you're alive.

And no... I didn't just contradict myself.

 

[Famine]

Then you're basically saying absolute knowledge is impossible. Remember, there are no grades of absolute; it is or it isn't.

Absolute knowledge is impossible. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle takes care of that - it's impossible to know both the speed and direction of any lepton at the same time.

 

[Arwin]

What? Think about what you are saying. There can be no choice or action whitout knowledge. Life and death atre not the same, but you can't die unless you're alive.

And no... I didn't just contradict myself.

I generally do think about what I'm saying, thank you.

Simply consider the following:

Before me lies a slice of salmon. It's been lying there for a while and it could well be spoilt.

Say I know that it is spoilt (knowledge). I can then still choose to eat it (freedom of choice). And then I can still eat it (action).

So say that with absolute knowledge you know every consequence of every action. You still have to choose which consequence you prefer and you still have to act. It's like playing the guitar. I may know absolutely everything about playing guitar, but I still choose what I play and I still have to tell and even train my hands to actually play.

 

[milefile]

And you'd already know whether or not you eat (ate) the salmon.

 

[Danoff]

And you'd already know whether or not you eat (ate) the salmon.

I don't see why absolute knowledge implies knowledge of the future. Since the future may well be unknowable. In fact, I really hope the future is unknowable because, to quote a great movie, "I don't like the idea that I'm not in control of my life".


I think really we're arguing about the definition of absolute knowledge, whether it means knowing literally everything, or knowing everything that can be known.

I agree, if we knew everything (including the future) life would suck. But consider the following.

Let's say you know you're going to eat the salmon. What's stopping you from chosing not to eat it anyway and therefore altering the future? It's paradoxical because we control our actions in the present. Contradictory premises mean either anything follows, or that the premises are incorrect.

I think this shows that the future cannot be known. At least not with the level of certainty of a single action like eating salmon.

 

[milefile]

Absolute is absolute. There is no gray area.

 

[Arwin]

Absolute is absolute. There is no gray area.

Ok, so I can go with you on the assumption that when you already know what you're going to choose this implies there isn't actually a choice involved. But I'm not sure I agree with that.

Knowing that you're going to choose to eat the salmon doesn't necessarily mean you don't have the choice, you just know what choice you make. I can see how you'd argue that this isn't a free choice anymore, but you know you're choosing the one or the other for the simple reason that that's what you want, so that doesn't hold either.

Similarly, the action of actually eating the salmon remains an action that needs to be taken, an experience that is felt, even if you know exactly how it feels beforehand.

 

[milefile]

And what meaning does anything have in a word that is totally predetermined?

 

[ledhed]

You would already know the answer.

 

[milefile]

Indeed. Absolute knowledge becomes absurd in a hurry.