Honesty & Openness

[greenfuse]

Here anew misreads my post, attributes positions to me that are Peter Kropotkin’s, makes a lot of false assumptions and does not ask clarifying questions. There is a question in his post, which is followed by an assertion showing he believes I am wrong since I did not understand him. Though I wasn’t responding to him. I was pointing out the problems with Peter Kropotkin’s position. A problem anew sees also.

Anew manage to judge me, pretend-read my mind, bemoan the fact that people don’t just immediately agree with him and miss the fact that we actually have very similar criticisms of Peter Kropotkin.

When he does these types of things, it is not a problem in his mind. It is other people’s problem. When other people assert things, he interprets this as assertions of final absolute truths, from their perspective. When this is in fact what he is doing over and over. How dare others do what he does (that he seems not to notice that he does).

He initiated condescension and pretend mind-reading into the thread.

@anew1

@greenfuse

OK, lots of problems here:

“(and that is what ‘‘a priori’’ means, a theory of evidence, how do we know what we know, what are the ways we can know facts and evidence)”

I have already explained. But, of course, this may well have been forgotten or missed also.

@greenfuse

In philosophy, a priori refers to knowledge or justification that is independent of empirical experience (e.g 2+2=4 or logical tautologies). The phrase “how do we know what we know” is the definition of epistemology, not a priori.

Even here is an example of how ‘we’ know, for sure, that ‘we know’ what ‘we’ know.

But this was also missed by ‘these people’ here as well.

@greenfuse

But let’s deal with the elephant in the room. He appealed to the authority of hemeneutics, which is actually a field with many positions, most opposed to his binary conclusion, to justify a subjectivist epistemology.

Once again, the view, belief, and position “greenfuse” has taken is the one and only right and true one, and if anyone has a different view, belief, or position, then they are mistaken or are not credible.

@greenfuse

All our interpretations are just subjective stories.

Of course, but HOW is the ‘objective story’ arrived at, and KNOWN to be the True, Right, Accurate, and/or Correct One, exactly?

I have already informed ‘the posters’ here, previously, but what will be ‘seen’ is that they have either forgotten it, missed it, or misunderstood it.

My response:

@greenfuse

@anew1

I have already explained. But, of course, this may well have been forgotten or missed also.

If you have explained something about that quote I had of PK’s, that’s fine. I’m not sure what you are trying to say to me.

@anew1

Even here is an example of how ‘we’ know, for sure, that ‘we know’ what ‘we’ know.

But this was also missed by ‘these people’ here as well.

There’s nothing there that I missed. I pointed out that he was using the term apriori to mean epistemology.

@anew1

Once again, the view, belief, and position “greenfuse” has taken is the one and only right and true one, and if anyone has a different view, belief, or position, then they are mistaken or are not credible.

And so you went personal, pretended to read my mind and judged my making assertions in a way you never judge your assertions.

@anew1

Of course, but HOW is the ‘objective story’ arrived at, and KNOWN to be the True, Right, Accurate, and/or Correct One, exactly?

That was Peter Kropotkin’s position, not mine.

@anew1

I have already informed ‘the posters’ here, previously, but what will be ‘seen’ is that they have either forgotten it, missed it, or misunderstood it.

Imagine the temerity of not instantly agreeing with you.
You completely misunderstood my post. You did not ask clarifying questions about most of what you judged. You did not understand the context: how my post related to and quoted Peter Kropotkin and his position. And the one question you asked me, you follow with a statement that indicates that whatever my answer is it is either just like what you believe or wrong. You’ve already decided. It was a faux question.