Can We Reject Possibilities?

If we know an idea or theory to be a logical possibility, in that it is not logically impossible, are we able to form a rejection of it. When we attempt to reject something that is possible are we merely creating an illusion for ourselves, or is it actually possible to form a set of beliefs that require no proof? Since every explanation for anything I have is a logical result of some axiom that can not be proven or disproven I truly know that I know nothing (minding the verbal paradox), but does this mean that I can’t form beliefs? Or is the fact that we can’t prove anything enough to put our beliefs on a scale where absolutism is unnecessary?

Similar to the other previously mentioned paradox…can I at least hold the absolute belief that the only absolute belief I can have is that the only absolute belief I can have is that the only absolute belief I can have…(infinite repetition)…is that I can’t form absolute beliefs? Perhaps a discussion of infinity’s use in paradoxical thoughts is necessary.

That’s why I see atheists as believers.

I think it’s bad to reject possibilities. But I think that possibility isn’t as all encompassing a thing as it’s made out to be by some crazy types.

If we know an idea or theory to be a logical possibility, in that it is not logically impossible, are we able to form a rejection of it.

Sure. “Logically possible” just means “not self-contradictory”.

Of course it’s possible to believe without proof. But is we accept every belief, we will be accepting much that contradicts many other beliefs that we hold. That’s gonna be mighty confusing.

That makes you a very unusual person. Every belief you have is the logical result of an axiom? That’s impressive. Of course you can form beliefs.

Absolutism is unnecessary, but I don’t really understand this question.

Maybe. But maybe you’re just stubborn.

Indefinitely? Under different conditions, one may draw different conclusions; no?

That being said, I think you can accept and reject whatever you like, but the realm of possibility is always wide open. I think that even the most staunch believers must recognize, in their own minds, the possibility that their beliefs aren’t “true”. However, I also think that is the same risk we assume when we believe anything…

If we really ‘know’ nothing, then it’s more a matter of picking and choosing what to believe based on perceived evidence. Although, I will also say that the “evidence” used in affirmation of a belief does not necessarily imply logic. Quite the opposite at times.

That’s why we have scientific methods for evaluating theories as more or less plausible. E.g. We evaluate theories on the basis of the following criteria: Testability; Fruitfulness; Scope; Simplicity; Conservatism, etc. Most of what we “know” just comes from this process. Faust also makes a good point. There are at least two different kinds of possibility: metaphysical possibility and logical possibility.

Logical Possibility:

Logical possibility exists for any proposition that is not a contradiction. Metaphysical possibility exists for any proposition that is both not a contradiction and possible in the world we live in. I’ve used italics to emphasize my vagueness. There is still some debate about what it means to be metaphysically possible, and the debate include arguments about whether determinism is true or not and what that means for our notions of possibility. So whether it is metaphysically possible for the sky to be green depends on whether determinism is true or not.

The problem with humanity is not that we reject was is possible, but that we count on it… The Greeks once said that as children of Promaethius, that we too had the gift of foresight; but that we blind ourselves with hope aginst hope…What is possible seldom happens, and what is probable happens more often, and what is likely usually happens and what will happen happens… Logic is good for telling what did happen, and useful in telling what usually happens in a given situation…Nature economize action to reaction… People are more complex, so no; no one has to prove their beliefs… If it were possible to prove them they would not be beliefs… The concept gets its name because it is not knowledge…We, meaning the rational, only have to prove a fact to a reasonable certainty…Most people do not need to go so far…The lazy mind find a goal easily reached and declares itself the winner…

we can reject possibilities , when these possibilities go against common sense

for instance

is it possible than a living cell can also become concrete ?

It is possible for a whole brain to become concrete… Consider, for example, the republican party…

I reject theoretical and possible inter-dimensions on the account that I have never expirienced them not to mention noone else has either. For me for the possible to exist it must first be expirienced.

Somthing cannot be possible without expirience.

So you are making an argument for sensational reality, or tangible reality, or physical reality; and what was the word: Ideas of perception???All the rest of us leave that world to science and consider that the really rough water with the fastest fish is captured by moral forms refelecting moral reality… Our problems lie in our relationships with society and between society, and our needs can only be defined by moral forms defining no particular experience… I can’t show you a justice, and certainly no perfect justice, and people more often define it against the injustice they know…Is it a matter of experience??? Certainly, but one impossible to share objectively, so we are left with concepts of reason to define what no one has experienced directly…

ObnoxiousCynic,

Somthing cannot be possible without expirience.
What you are saying is that everything is impossible unless it is experienced, yes?

Also, I have one more question:

If you can experience a thing then it is actual, isn’t it? Things are either ‘true’ (made so by experience) or they are ‘impossible’ on your view.

Yes or at the very least observed which is another form of expirience.

Yes.

Yes. I’m very much a empiricist and materialist in that physical evidence is what I base upon reality or things existing.

I try not to put my faith in much of anything without having expirienced it or observe it for myself.

There are very few things in life that I have faith in alone without having expirienced them.

I believe most of reality can be reduced to physical and material forms.

For me no such moral reality exists because of the hundreds of contradictions that revolve around the subject.

I believe in power and might. I believe in what a person can do and what a person can’t do.

The problems that global societies face is that of their own making.

Society creates it’s own problems and since it creates it’s own problems it can then deal with them in whatever matter it must.

I feel no pity towards others nor do I feel any sympathy for others. You get what you get and then you die.

Your choice is to adapt or become destroyed. Morality has nothing to do with it all. For me morality is just an illusion.

Morality is a dead issue.

Social justice is a joke. There is no justice in the world. Just another illusion cast out by naive followers and peddling liars.

No there isn’t and yet the desired effect is that people act perfectly within a script or else…Pretty funny.

One man’s injustice is another man’s gain. Yes it’s all a matter of expirience.

Reason has nothing to do with it and human beings themselves are definately not reasonable.

Experience, with the senses lie… What we do experience does not tell us in the least what may be possible, and all that may be possible may never be known…In life we grasp what we have known personally, and what society knows culturally… We have the prinicpal of cause and effect…Beyond that we don’t know… Many cause have no noticable effect, and many effects appear as facts having no apparent cause…Yet; we presume a universal cause and effect for all, and not a spiritual cause…

Yes; social forms act as a means to social control… And everyone should value self control and social control… If we could control our own behavior the environment would not be in trouble… But; our forms, by which we structure our relationships can be used against us when we become unconsious of them… Jefferson was conscious of forms as everyone was who signed the declaration… When forms, like marriage for example, work well, we can often become unconscious of them, and only think of the realtionship in the structure… When the structure injures the relationship, people get out, or they reform the relationship…
Yes; the experience is subjective… We are all blind men having a single subjective experience of an elephant… The confusion can be cleared by exchanging position, seeing the beast with the fingers of another… If we know, and through philosophy we do know that we are dealing with a single thing, that is form, then we can change the one thing people have always changed, and we can understand what we are dealing with, and work with the purpose and precision of a surgeon…Forget being one of those who flails at the branches of evil, and tear at its roots… What is happening in our society is old news, and has been history for over a thousand years… Most often, people unable to renew their socieites through revolution must suffer invasion and social death…People suffering frustration and blame are sufffering their inability to see the structures at work in their lives…They need form glasses, as you do…You are in the right place… Philosophy can give you eyes, and then you will never be one of the blind leading the blind…

of course there is the absolute truth that there are billions of truths !!!

and the proof is all around us in forms and what produces these forms , and what the forms can , and can not be , if we could just understand the limits of the Universe

Sure. But would you? To the degree it is valuable in the future, would have a bearing on your decision. Since everything is in a flux, truth moves and it would be natural that perceptions also move with it. Logic and possibility become indulgences to an individual who slows the movement down to form a progression of events towards something identified with. Heritage and tradition help keep things in place.

Possibilities don’t exist unless they are at first expirienced. The very word possible concludes this.

( Possibility waits for the arrival of expirience to make it somthing other than possibility.)

While the senses can sometimes deceive a person the senses is all we have and therefore they are all we can measure with.

The rest of your post made no sense to me therefore I refrain from answering the rest of it.

How many people who have died for absurd contradicting beliefs of god, liberty, or justice does not concern me and they do not spring from everybody’s mentality as there still remains people like myself who believe in none of those concepts.

You seem to believe that because a great deal of many people have sacrificed their lives for such absurd beliefs somehow makes them all the more real but for me those people who have sacrificed their lives for such concepts were nothing more than terrible naive people who sacrificed themselves in vain for very stupid ridiculous notions.

It’s all about you interpret things.

Imagination is one of the most fluid things out there and just because one can imagine somthing mentally does not mean that it exists beyond mental form or that it can be achieved beyond the mind in physical form.

( Although that doesn’t stop many from wishing stuff into existence in a absurd manner upon their willy nilly dreams of perception.)

Free will exists within limits. There are limitations with any given free will and there are determinations that are already preconceived place upon freewill.