Very Bad Are You?

3min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

The meta epistemology underlying all of this I think is a sentimentalist one. And that's where we part ways because, you know, I'm not willing to go full blown pragmatist about what truth is. But aside from that,I do like the psychology and I think it's an interesting way to think about truth. Because I don't see the sentimentalist view necessarily being pragmatic. All right. Well, I think there's more to talk about and we've stumbled our way through parts of this. Find it very interesting; worth a read.

David and Tamler argue about William James' classic essay "The Will to Believe." What's more important - avoiding falsehood or discovering truth? When (if ever) is it rational to believe anything without enough evidence? What about beliefs that we can't be agnostic about? Are there hypotheses that we have to believe in order for them to come true? Does James successfully demonstrate that faith can be rational?

Plus, a philosopher at Apple who's not allowed to talk to the media - what are they hiding? And why are academics constantly telling students that academia is a nightmare?

Support Very Bad Wizards

Links: