I can only assume that "West Asian" was intended to be "East Asian" instead, as "West Asian" isn't a category I can say I've heard used very much at all.
"Really knows" is just a form (perhaps indicating higher confidence) of "only believes", as any good bayesian understands.
Like a lot of philosophic thought, this is just playing with the meaning of words. Yet is that so bad? Did such discussions help set to thinking the people who finally got us to understand the probabilistic nature of all knowledge?
I think that if the meaning of "knowing" wasn't questioned, nobody would have bothered to answer what it is.
Edit: And I don't think that "bad" is really pertaining to this discussion.
Edit2: Oh, lookie, the submission is dead now. But why? It would have certainly spurred an interesting debate, furthermore when the results were shown in the future.
6 comments
[ 934 ms ] story [ 576 ms ] threadLike a lot of philosophic thought, this is just playing with the meaning of words. Yet is that so bad? Did such discussions help set to thinking the people who finally got us to understand the probabilistic nature of all knowledge?
Edit: And I don't think that "bad" is really pertaining to this discussion.
Edit2: Oh, lookie, the submission is dead now. But why? It would have certainly spurred an interesting debate, furthermore when the results were shown in the future.