Coherentism and Justification. No good deed goes unpunished

Effective Actualization. Is a thing. Theories of Justification abound. We often burden ourselves with a failing explanation with an ad hoc hypothesis.

What?😳

We often burden ourselves with acts of kindness when they backfire on us.

“Urbi et Orbi”.

Thomas Aquinas contemplated deeds and punishment philosophically. Perhaps the local 501c 3 would agree. Perhaps not. Perhaps it is the mission statement. Or hidden in the table of contents of the who’s and the why’s of the foundational beliefs of an organization. Time is usually of the essence in finding the founding beliefs.

Time will tell. It usually does.

How ‘bout this…..

Let’s take an abbreviated map reading course for a moment:

Walter Map. Was a medieval writer. In nowadays terms his work may be akin to “The National Enquirer”. In his work “De numismatic curialium, aka “Trinkets or the Court” his work takes an anecdotal approach of people and places. Offering many sidelights of the history of his own time. Some are from personal knowledge, and apparently reliable; others represent popular rumors about history and current events, and are often far from the truth. (wk).

Some of Mr. Map’s ideological thoughts included: friendships, quarrels, a brief justification of fiction and its pleasures, a story of Eudo deceived by the Devil, a copy of a letter found among the works of St. Jerome in which Valerius advises Rufinus against marriage, story of the cobbler Constantinople, a satirical comparison of the court of King Henry II with Hell. This concluding and particular chapter begins with a citation of the words of St. Augustine:

“I am in the world and I speak of the world, but I do not know what the world is.”

I will be the first to admit.

Neither do I.

Please join the club if you wish.

The name of the club is: “I wish I knew then what I know now”.

Then life would be perfect.

Boring.

But perfect.

Right?

I wish I knew.

In the spirit of the upcoming St. Patrick’s Day, let’s ponder the concept of surplus and surplice and justice and justification. If a man is accused of breaking a vase and makes supernatural claims that the lepruchans were responsible for breaking it. A simple explanation might be the man did it, but ongoing ad hoc justification and hypothesis “it wasn’t me they tampered with it”. This endless supply of elaborate explanations, called saving hypothesis cannot be ruled out—

except using Occam’s Razor…….? I wish I knew. The opportunity to know.

A tease? The tease. The bias-variance trade-off. Or personal responsibility….

The epistemology (no, not of or pertaining to a surgical procedure) Although, again one could slide this into a coding and justification in the moment of heated and painful moment.

Emergency for me but not for you. Destined to endure the ongoing pain in the game. Your skin in the game. The BIG game.

😳What?

The epistemology, also called epistemic justification is really a concept in epistemology used to describe reasons that someone holds a rationally admissible belief—although the term is also sometimes applied to propositional attitudes such as doubt.

I doubt it.

I think a reasonable person would too.

But therein lies the “gray area”.

In and of our heads.

In and of life.

In epistemology, the features include the ideas of “Warrant”—a proper justification for holding a belief—knowledge, rationality and probability.

Justification involves the reasons why someone holds a belief that one should hold based on one’s current evidence. Justification is a PROPERTY of beliefs insofar as they are held blamelessly. As in own it. Or do not own it.

A person is entitled to hold two conceptions of justifications:

1) Deontological—obligation and responsibility

2) Truth-conducive—sufficient evidence or reasons that the belief is at least likely to be true

A person is entitled to hold two conceptions of justifications.

Parsimony=The Rule of Simplicity. Why do some things become so complicated?

There are many variants. There exist many teaching stories. What is the most valuable treasure in the human heritage? Notwithstanding cultural, religious spiritual beliefs. A good majority of us have some—some beliefs.

Do unto others and you you would have done unto you?

Most of the time, this sounds like a good thing—Right?

It’s complicated.

Here is an outline of specific terms and conditions for you to piece through your own acts of deeds, good deeds or not good deeds:

Notable theories of Justification.

Foundationalism—Basic beliefs justify other, non basic beliefs.

Epistemic- Each belief is justified if it coheres—-COHERES—-with the over all system of beliefs. Beliefs are justified if they cohere with other beliefs a person holds.

Infinitism —Beliefs are justified by infinite chains of reasons

Foundherentism—A combination of foundationalism and epistemic coherentism.

Internalism—The believer must be able to justify a belief through internal knowledge.

Externalism—Outside sources of knowledge can be used to justify a belief.

Reformed epistemology—Beliefs are warranted by proper cognitive function.

Epistemic skepticism—A variety of viewpoint questions the possibility of knowledge.

Evidentialism—Beliefs depend solely of evidence for them.

Reliablism—A belief is justified if it is the result of a reliable process. (ja)

As you can guess, criticisms abound of the theories of justification. However they offer a framework of personal responsibility.

The Rule of Simplicity, also known as Occam’s, Ockham and Ockham offers the ideological framework of Simple. The problem-solving principle that entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.

Contagions abound too.

Or. Well. They do now.

But this is not the best time to cut.

Because.

Ouch. It hurts.

Many.

The least of these.

The most of these.

Competing theories or explanations , THE SIMPLER ONE, a model with fewer parameters is preferred, leaves fewer assumptions vulnerable to those who really hold their conscience close to their vest in the interest only of:(ja)

Protection.

Damage is done.

Damage has been done.

Slowly.

And. Then.

Suddenly. (bs)

If one skims, reads, or studies the beautiful tale from India about rescue, sacrifice and personal responsibility. Feigning sympathy is dirty, a dirty way to trick another. Feigning incomprehension only feeds the tiger a smorgasbord of lies and deception and acid indigestion. Foundation ally speaking of love, of course. Not hate.

Variants abound of the perceptions and perspectives. Kinda a mind map similar to Walter Map’s map. A means and ways to an end. But. One that may or may not eat away at the conscience.

Competition is ok.

Healthy is.

That is.

The race to the top of the pearly white……

Gates?…

Or, today’s “Hates”……..

Can we be friends?

All get along?

I doubt it.

I think a reasonable person would, too.

But therein lies “the gray area”

In and of our heads.

In and of life.