Monday, September 04, 2006

Pile of chocolate ice cream

I feel like ranting (if you couldn't tell), so I'm going to post something! And this time it'll be wrothwhile!

So, lets to say that I really want to be a pile of chocolate ice cream. I tell myself that I am a pile of chocolate ice cream day after day, until soon I believe it, and I see myself as a pile of chocolate ice cream. Thus, am I actually a pile of chocolate ice cream? Or, because no one else will see me as a pile of chocolate ice cream, am I not a pile of chocolate ice cream? Is this worthwhile to talk about when thousands of people are dying in Iraq? Please to answer.

Pink Text!


Jared,givemeagooddisplaynamenow,wolschlager said...

The death's in iraq are olde news, while chocalate ice cream is essential to human development. And to answer your question yes I believe that if you see your-self as a pile of ice cream. I see myself as supreme master of the universe, and no one else does, but it is still so. Yes I control you. Their I think I answered that sufficentlt, now for a more important ?(jk),

Can someone assume they are something without any real evidence/experience. Ie is it possible to believe in god without ever experiencing it first hand. Can a belief truly be logical without personal experience.

Jared "that is my contention and I think this is my nickname" wolschlager

lasanya said...

Well, to this question, I would have to say, I don't think you are actually a pile of chocolate ice cream. It would be a belief because it would be your map of reality, but it wouldn't be knowledge or truth because it couldn't be properly justified.

and jared- you need to do some spell

Vvyynn said...

Jared, I agree with Anya. As long as your in MY topic, you're going by my rules. And those rules are SPELLING AND PUNCTUATION! If you fail to comply again, I'll purge you. Now in response to my own question: How could we be sure if it's a belief if everything we see confirms the fact that I am a pile of chocolate ice cream. According to the Correspondence theory, it would be truth. At any rate, I'm glad people are posting on this.

Jared,givemeagooddisplaynamenow,wolschlager said...

My puncuation was purely rhetorical. But aren't we truly what we think we are. In all honestly our maps are the only true reality we can know so thus our reality is the reality, and thus you are chocolate ice cream.

Kaitlin said...

Well seeing as it might be worthwhile or useful to you to believe that you are, in fact, a pile of chocolate ice cream, your belief would fit into the Pragmatic Theory. Since you say that everything we see confirms that you are a pile of chocolate ice cream, it fits the Correspondence Theory. As for the Coherence Theory, if you have other beliefs that fit with this belief, such as your hair being whipped cream (which would go along quite nicely with chocolate ice cream), then you are a pile of ice cream.

Merry_Dip_Salad_Bunny said...

Whether or not we believe things, or have preconceptions about what is true, there is still an absolute and existing truth out there, and we may never know it exists. What if we do not know it but we are in fact piles of chocolate ice cream?
Such theorists as Aristotle probably thought about the same thing, only they maybe didnt have ice cream in those days.
The truth behind all matters of truth is that we are handicapped by our own preconceptions and belief systems, handicapped from knowing the "real" truth. And really some philosophers would say that in this phsyical world, in teh physical form we are in, we can prove not a lot. We can only believe things to be true, and in the immortal words of oh you know who, "the only thing that i truly know for certain is that i know nothing."

N Dauth said...

Well, if Vinnii actually repeated this phrase enough times to himself, "I am a pile of chocolate ice cream" I'm certain he would eventually convince himself of this belief. I remember reading an article about how people with lack of self esteem repeated an affirmative several hundred times a day until they convinced themselves that it was true. One of the phrases they repeated was, "Im very good looking." (This is a bad example because good looks is more or less an opinion, so it can't be compared directly to Vinnii's factual example) But the study showed that these individuals displayed stronger confidence after forcing the affirmative into their memory. Thus they actually believed that they were very good looking. I think that where I'm getting at is that this study showed how people use the pragmatic theory to convince themselves (while avoiding the correspondence and coherence theory). The other theories of truth, which were avoided, were the harder of the truth theories to "pull off." It's much easier to convince one self something is true by declaring it useful (pragmatic) than actually seeing (coherence) and comparing (correspondence)it in a more logical way. The reason why society wont agree with you Vinnii is because you justified your truth using mainly the pragmatic theory, and society will see how your belief just doesn’t fit with the other two theories. So in essence, since you have not applied the other theories yet, the pragmatic one makes your statement true, but only for urself. But since society has many members who will consider all of the truth tests it will be found out that your truth doesn’t comply with the other truth tests which means that it isn’t true.

Vvyynn said...

I don't have much to say right now, however i said I'd comment on every post, so I'll comment on every post. The only thing I'd like to say is that do we know there is the universal truth? Personally, I don't think that there is one universal truth that never changes and never ceases. However, for the purposes of TOK, we are to state this as one of the conditions of the class. I am a pile of chocolate ice cream.