Justification ppt grant_nick_ross
•Download as PPT, PDF•
0 likes•277 views
Justification Powerpoint
Report
Share
Report
Share
![Justification through JTB ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recommended
Belief, Knowledge, and Truth
Why do people believe the things they believe? What does it even mean to “know” something is true, and how can we determine what is true? In this sermon by Harmony member Mike Markey, you'll learn about epistemology—the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.
What is the difference between knowledge and belief?
What is the difference between knowledge and belief? A comparison between knowledge and belief.
Recommended
Belief, Knowledge, and Truth
Why do people believe the things they believe? What does it even mean to “know” something is true, and how can we determine what is true? In this sermon by Harmony member Mike Markey, you'll learn about epistemology—the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.
What is the difference between knowledge and belief?
What is the difference between knowledge and belief? A comparison between knowledge and belief.
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes bel.docx
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes beliefs about the way the world was, is, or is going to be that the communicator wants us to accept as “facts.” These beliefs can be conclusions, reasons, or assumptions. We can refer to such beliefs as factual claims. The first question you should ask about a factual claim is, “Why should I believe it?” Your next question is, “Does the claim need evidence to support it?” If it does, and if there is no evidence, the claim is a mere assertion, meaning a claim that is not backed up in any way. You should seriously question the dependability of mere assertions! If there is evidence, your next question is, “How good is the evidence?” To evaluate reasoning, we need to remember that some factual claims can be counted on more than others. For example, you probably feel quite certain that the claim “most U.S. senators are men” is true, but less certain that the assertion “practicing yoga reduces the risk of cancer” is true. Because it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to establish the absolute truth or falsity of most claims, rather than asking whether they are true, we prefer to ask whether they are dependable. In essence, we want to ask, “Can we count on such beliefs?” The greater the quality and quantity of evidence supporting a claim, the more we can depend on it, and the more we can call the claim a “fact.” For example, abundant evidence exists that George Washington was the first president of the United States of America. Thus, we can treat that claim as a fact. On the other hand, there is much conflicting evidence for the belief “bottled water is safer to drink than tap water.” We thus can’t treat this belief as a fact. The major difference between claims that are opinions and those that are facts is the present state of the relevant evidence. The more supporting evidence there is for a belief, the more “factual” the belief becomes. Before we judge the persuasiveness of a communication, we need to know which factual claims are most dependable. How do we determine dependability? We ask questions like the following: What is your proof? How do you know that’s true? Where’s the evidence? Why do you believe that? Are you sure that’s true? Can you prove it? You will be well on your way to being among the best critical thinkers when you develop the habit of regularly asking these questions. They require those making arguments to be responsible by revealing the basis for their arguments. Anyone with an argument that you should consider will not hesitate to answer these questions. They know they have substantial support for their claims and, consequently, will want to share their evidence in the hope that you will learn to share their conclusions. When people react to simple requests for evidence with anger or withdrawal, they usually do so because they are embarrassed as they realize that, without evidence, they should have been less assertive about their beliefs. When we regula.
An Essay On Knowledge And Belief
Professional Writing Service
http://StudyHub.vip/An-Essay-On-Knowledge-And-Belief 👈
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
Informal Fallacies
Enterline Design Services LLC/iStock/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Describe the various fallacies of support, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
2. Describe the various fallacies of relevance, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
3. Describe the various fallacies of clarity, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
We can conceive of logic as providing us with the best tools for seeking truth. If our goal is to seek truth, then we must be clear that the task isnot limited to the formation of true beliefs based on a solid logical foundation, for the task also involves learning to avoid forming falsebeliefs. Therefore, just as it is important to learn to employ good reasoning, it is also important to learn to avoid bad reasoning.
Toward this end, this chapter will focus on fallacies. Fallacies are errors in reasoning; more specifically, they are common patterns ofreasoning with a high likelihood of leading to false conclusions. Logical fallacies often seem like good reasoning because they resembleperfectly legitimate argument forms. For example, the following is a perfectly valid argument:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in Paris.
Therefore, you live in France.
Assuming that both of the premises are true, it logically follows that the conclusion must be true. The following argument is very similar:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in France.
Therefore, you live in Paris.
This second argument, however, is invalid; there are plenty of other places to live in France. This is a common formal fallacy known asaffirming the consequent. Chapter 4 discussed how this fallacy was based on an incorrect logical form. This chapter will focus on informalfallacies, fallacies whose errors are not so much a matter of form but of content. The rest of this chapter will cover some of the most commonand important fallacies, with definitions and examples. Learning about fallacies can be a lot of fun, but be warned: Once you begin noticingfallacies, you may start to see them everywhere.
Before we start, it is worth noting a few things. First, there are many, many fallacies. This chapter will consider only a sampling of some of themost well-known fallacies. Second, there is a lot of overlap between fallacies. Reasonable people can interpret the same errors as differentfallacies. Focus on trying to understand both interpretations rather than on insisting that only one can be right. Third, different philosophersoften have different terminology for the same fallacies and make different distinctions among them. Therefore, you may find that others usedifferent terminology for the fallacies that we will learn about in this chapter. Not to worry—it is the ideas here that are most important: Ourgoal is to learn to identi.
Ethics in academic research: avoiding plagiarism
Ethics in Academic Research and how to Avoid Plagiarism
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
10
Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
Elizabeth Fricker
1 . D I V I S I O N O F E P I S T E M I C L A B O U R V E R S U S T H E
I D E A L O F I N D I V I D U A L E P I S T E M I C A U TO N O M Y
A reference point in philosophical investigation of knowledge from testimony
is the ideal of the ‘autonomous knower’. This ideal type relies on no one else
for any of her knowledge. Thus she takes no one else’s word for anything,
but accepts only what she has found out for herself, relying only on her own
cognitive faculties and investigative and inferential powers. Descartes explicitly
espoused this ideal, and method, in his Meditations (Descartes 1641). Locke
equally rejected ‘other men’s opinions floating in one’s brain’ as not constituting
knowledge (Locke 1690). The wholly autonomous knower will not accept any
proposition, unless she herself possesses the evidence establishing it. Thus she
will not accept anything on the basis of another’s word for it, even when she has
evidence of their trustworthiness on the topic in question.
Such extreme purism restricts how much one can come to know very severely.
We humans are essentially social creatures, and it is not clear that we do or
could possess any knowledge at all which is not in some way, perhaps obliquely,
dependent on testimony. How exactly does the system of empirical belief —
hopefully knowledge — of each of us depend on others’ testimony? There is cer-
tainly massive causal reliance on testimony in the process by which each of us
develops into a language-user and thinker, ‘grows into possession of a world’.!
The initial stages of language acquisition by a child inevitably occur through a
Earlier versions of this paper were given at a workshop on ‘Testimony, Trust and Action’
in King’s College Cambridge in September 2003, at a conference on ‘Moral Testimony’ in the
Philosophy Department at Birmingham University in March 2004, and at a conference at the
Inter-University Centre in Dbrovnik, Croatia, in May 2005. I received very useful comments from
audiences at these events, in light of which I corrected various errors. I am also very grateful to both
John Hawthorne and Stephen Schiffer for valuable comments and discussion on an earlier draft.
The research for this paper was done between January and June 2002, during a period of leave
funded by my employers, Magdalen College and Oxford University, and by a Fellowship from the
Mind Association. My thanks for their support.
226 Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
process of simple trust" in its teachers — parents and other carers. In this cog-
nitive developmental process learning meanings is not separable from coming to
grasp and accept our shared basic world picture, the common-sense theory which
structures and frames our empirical thought. There is, for instance, no distinction
to be drawn between learning the meanings of ‘chair’, and ‘horse’, and ‘jump’,
and ‘cook’, and learning about chairs, and horses, and jumping, and cooking.#
The fa ...
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
10
Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
Elizabeth Fricker
1 . D I V I S I O N O F E P I S T E M I C L A B O U R V E R S U S T H E
I D E A L O F I N D I V I D U A L E P I S T E M I C A U TO N O M Y
A reference point in philosophical investigation of knowledge from testimony
is the ideal of the ‘autonomous knower’. This ideal type relies on no one else
for any of her knowledge. Thus she takes no one else’s word for anything,
but accepts only what she has found out for herself, relying only on her own
cognitive faculties and investigative and inferential powers. Descartes explicitly
espoused this ideal, and method, in his Meditations (Descartes 1641). Locke
equally rejected ‘other men’s opinions floating in one’s brain’ as not constituting
knowledge (Locke 1690). The wholly autonomous knower will not accept any
proposition, unless she herself possesses the evidence establishing it. Thus she
will not accept anything on the basis of another’s word for it, even when she has
evidence of their trustworthiness on the topic in question.
Such extreme purism restricts how much one can come to know very severely.
We humans are essentially social creatures, and it is not clear that we do or
could possess any knowledge at all which is not in some way, perhaps obliquely,
dependent on testimony. How exactly does the system of empirical belief —
hopefully knowledge — of each of us depend on others’ testimony? There is cer-
tainly massive causal reliance on testimony in the process by which each of us
develops into a language-user and thinker, ‘grows into possession of a world’.!
The initial stages of language acquisition by a child inevitably occur through a
Earlier versions of this paper were given at a workshop on ‘Testimony, Trust and Action’
in King’s College Cambridge in September 2003, at a conference on ‘Moral Testimony’ in the
Philosophy Department at Birmingham University in March 2004, and at a conference at the
Inter-University Centre in Dbrovnik, Croatia, in May 2005. I received very useful comments from
audiences at these events, in light of which I corrected various errors. I am also very grateful to both
John Hawthorne and Stephen Schiffer for valuable comments and discussion on an earlier draft.
The research for this paper was done between January and June 2002, during a period of leave
funded by my employers, Magdalen College and Oxford University, and by a Fellowship from the
Mind Association. My thanks for their support.
226 Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
process of simple trust" in its teachers — parents and other carers. In this cog-
nitive developmental process learning meanings is not separable from coming to
grasp and accept our shared basic world picture, the common-sense theory which
structures and frames our empirical thought. There is, for instance, no distinction
to be drawn between learning the meanings of ‘chair’, and ‘horse’, and ‘jump’,
and ‘cook’, and learning about chairs, and horses, and jumping, and cooking.#
The fa ...
Running Head PhilosophyPhilosophy2PhilosophyName .docx
Running Head: Philosophy
Philosophy 2
Philosophy
Name of Student
Institutional Affiliation
Part A
In the first article, Gallagher tried to expound more on the notion of faith by looking at two characters who had completely view of the notion about faith with one being a staunch believer while the other one basing their arguments on the knowledge about the reality of the situation. Aquinas mainly described the two notions namely, faith and knowledge as being interdependent in that each supported the other. One of the major instances in her cancerous situation, Rose believes that the island has already cured her of her cancer.
However, as much as Bernard might have the knowledge about the beliefs of Rose, he cannot question the beliefs of Rose since she already has so much belief that it influences Bernard’s opinion about her condition. However, Aquinas emphasized on the importance of the view of the two notions from a generalized perspective in that as much one might have as much faith as Rose, it should never supersede the naturalistic reasoning ability. Aquinas is highly supportive of the interdependence between the two since he believes that knowledge is born out of ideas for example the knowledge on the existence of God is normally described from a natural context but for the revelation of the true existence of God there has to be some faith to shed some light.
The relationship between beliefs and knowledge is investigated by looking at the ideologies of Hume, Charlie, James and Plato who have a number of suggestions regarding the validity of a belief based on the availability of the justifications. They mainly suggest that a rumor or rather a testimony cannot be considered to be knowledge if it is not properly justified. However, Philosophers like James believe that in the absence of evidence to support testimonies, the consequences of those knowledge ought to be analyzed to determine the truth in them. The main idea behind the suggestion is that some ideas though true to some extent might be hard to prove.
In the third essay, the main character being analyzed is House who depicts the same ideology as Socrates where they believe that an examined life meaning a life where one seeks the truth from the various ideas developed brings out the meaning of life. He even goes to an extent of temporarily killing himself to prove that there is no afterlife hence whatever is done on earth ends here. He maintains that living a life of reason is what makes life have a meaning since by reasoning you get to evaluate the consequences.
Part B
Hume believed that the validity of a testimony was mainly based on the experience of a person himself and also that the various truths that were presented in form of testimonies would be very hard to be considered as being true. The notion is highly suggestive of the fact that some level of accuracy concerning the testimonies could be attained through the relation of those testimonies with the experie ...
More Related Content
Similar to Justification ppt grant_nick_ross
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes bel.docx
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes beliefs about the way the world was, is, or is going to be that the communicator wants us to accept as “facts.” These beliefs can be conclusions, reasons, or assumptions. We can refer to such beliefs as factual claims. The first question you should ask about a factual claim is, “Why should I believe it?” Your next question is, “Does the claim need evidence to support it?” If it does, and if there is no evidence, the claim is a mere assertion, meaning a claim that is not backed up in any way. You should seriously question the dependability of mere assertions! If there is evidence, your next question is, “How good is the evidence?” To evaluate reasoning, we need to remember that some factual claims can be counted on more than others. For example, you probably feel quite certain that the claim “most U.S. senators are men” is true, but less certain that the assertion “practicing yoga reduces the risk of cancer” is true. Because it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to establish the absolute truth or falsity of most claims, rather than asking whether they are true, we prefer to ask whether they are dependable. In essence, we want to ask, “Can we count on such beliefs?” The greater the quality and quantity of evidence supporting a claim, the more we can depend on it, and the more we can call the claim a “fact.” For example, abundant evidence exists that George Washington was the first president of the United States of America. Thus, we can treat that claim as a fact. On the other hand, there is much conflicting evidence for the belief “bottled water is safer to drink than tap water.” We thus can’t treat this belief as a fact. The major difference between claims that are opinions and those that are facts is the present state of the relevant evidence. The more supporting evidence there is for a belief, the more “factual” the belief becomes. Before we judge the persuasiveness of a communication, we need to know which factual claims are most dependable. How do we determine dependability? We ask questions like the following: What is your proof? How do you know that’s true? Where’s the evidence? Why do you believe that? Are you sure that’s true? Can you prove it? You will be well on your way to being among the best critical thinkers when you develop the habit of regularly asking these questions. They require those making arguments to be responsible by revealing the basis for their arguments. Anyone with an argument that you should consider will not hesitate to answer these questions. They know they have substantial support for their claims and, consequently, will want to share their evidence in the hope that you will learn to share their conclusions. When people react to simple requests for evidence with anger or withdrawal, they usually do so because they are embarrassed as they realize that, without evidence, they should have been less assertive about their beliefs. When we regula.
An Essay On Knowledge And Belief
Professional Writing Service
http://StudyHub.vip/An-Essay-On-Knowledge-And-Belief 👈
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
Informal Fallacies
Enterline Design Services LLC/iStock/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Describe the various fallacies of support, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
2. Describe the various fallacies of relevance, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
3. Describe the various fallacies of clarity, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
We can conceive of logic as providing us with the best tools for seeking truth. If our goal is to seek truth, then we must be clear that the task isnot limited to the formation of true beliefs based on a solid logical foundation, for the task also involves learning to avoid forming falsebeliefs. Therefore, just as it is important to learn to employ good reasoning, it is also important to learn to avoid bad reasoning.
Toward this end, this chapter will focus on fallacies. Fallacies are errors in reasoning; more specifically, they are common patterns ofreasoning with a high likelihood of leading to false conclusions. Logical fallacies often seem like good reasoning because they resembleperfectly legitimate argument forms. For example, the following is a perfectly valid argument:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in Paris.
Therefore, you live in France.
Assuming that both of the premises are true, it logically follows that the conclusion must be true. The following argument is very similar:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in France.
Therefore, you live in Paris.
This second argument, however, is invalid; there are plenty of other places to live in France. This is a common formal fallacy known asaffirming the consequent. Chapter 4 discussed how this fallacy was based on an incorrect logical form. This chapter will focus on informalfallacies, fallacies whose errors are not so much a matter of form but of content. The rest of this chapter will cover some of the most commonand important fallacies, with definitions and examples. Learning about fallacies can be a lot of fun, but be warned: Once you begin noticingfallacies, you may start to see them everywhere.
Before we start, it is worth noting a few things. First, there are many, many fallacies. This chapter will consider only a sampling of some of themost well-known fallacies. Second, there is a lot of overlap between fallacies. Reasonable people can interpret the same errors as differentfallacies. Focus on trying to understand both interpretations rather than on insisting that only one can be right. Third, different philosophersoften have different terminology for the same fallacies and make different distinctions among them. Therefore, you may find that others usedifferent terminology for the fallacies that we will learn about in this chapter. Not to worry—it is the ideas here that are most important: Ourgoal is to learn to identi.
Ethics in academic research: avoiding plagiarism
Ethics in Academic Research and how to Avoid Plagiarism
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
10
Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
Elizabeth Fricker
1 . D I V I S I O N O F E P I S T E M I C L A B O U R V E R S U S T H E
I D E A L O F I N D I V I D U A L E P I S T E M I C A U TO N O M Y
A reference point in philosophical investigation of knowledge from testimony
is the ideal of the ‘autonomous knower’. This ideal type relies on no one else
for any of her knowledge. Thus she takes no one else’s word for anything,
but accepts only what she has found out for herself, relying only on her own
cognitive faculties and investigative and inferential powers. Descartes explicitly
espoused this ideal, and method, in his Meditations (Descartes 1641). Locke
equally rejected ‘other men’s opinions floating in one’s brain’ as not constituting
knowledge (Locke 1690). The wholly autonomous knower will not accept any
proposition, unless she herself possesses the evidence establishing it. Thus she
will not accept anything on the basis of another’s word for it, even when she has
evidence of their trustworthiness on the topic in question.
Such extreme purism restricts how much one can come to know very severely.
We humans are essentially social creatures, and it is not clear that we do or
could possess any knowledge at all which is not in some way, perhaps obliquely,
dependent on testimony. How exactly does the system of empirical belief —
hopefully knowledge — of each of us depend on others’ testimony? There is cer-
tainly massive causal reliance on testimony in the process by which each of us
develops into a language-user and thinker, ‘grows into possession of a world’.!
The initial stages of language acquisition by a child inevitably occur through a
Earlier versions of this paper were given at a workshop on ‘Testimony, Trust and Action’
in King’s College Cambridge in September 2003, at a conference on ‘Moral Testimony’ in the
Philosophy Department at Birmingham University in March 2004, and at a conference at the
Inter-University Centre in Dbrovnik, Croatia, in May 2005. I received very useful comments from
audiences at these events, in light of which I corrected various errors. I am also very grateful to both
John Hawthorne and Stephen Schiffer for valuable comments and discussion on an earlier draft.
The research for this paper was done between January and June 2002, during a period of leave
funded by my employers, Magdalen College and Oxford University, and by a Fellowship from the
Mind Association. My thanks for their support.
226 Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
process of simple trust" in its teachers — parents and other carers. In this cog-
nitive developmental process learning meanings is not separable from coming to
grasp and accept our shared basic world picture, the common-sense theory which
structures and frames our empirical thought. There is, for instance, no distinction
to be drawn between learning the meanings of ‘chair’, and ‘horse’, and ‘jump’,
and ‘cook’, and learning about chairs, and horses, and jumping, and cooking.#
The fa ...
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
10
Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
Elizabeth Fricker
1 . D I V I S I O N O F E P I S T E M I C L A B O U R V E R S U S T H E
I D E A L O F I N D I V I D U A L E P I S T E M I C A U TO N O M Y
A reference point in philosophical investigation of knowledge from testimony
is the ideal of the ‘autonomous knower’. This ideal type relies on no one else
for any of her knowledge. Thus she takes no one else’s word for anything,
but accepts only what she has found out for herself, relying only on her own
cognitive faculties and investigative and inferential powers. Descartes explicitly
espoused this ideal, and method, in his Meditations (Descartes 1641). Locke
equally rejected ‘other men’s opinions floating in one’s brain’ as not constituting
knowledge (Locke 1690). The wholly autonomous knower will not accept any
proposition, unless she herself possesses the evidence establishing it. Thus she
will not accept anything on the basis of another’s word for it, even when she has
evidence of their trustworthiness on the topic in question.
Such extreme purism restricts how much one can come to know very severely.
We humans are essentially social creatures, and it is not clear that we do or
could possess any knowledge at all which is not in some way, perhaps obliquely,
dependent on testimony. How exactly does the system of empirical belief —
hopefully knowledge — of each of us depend on others’ testimony? There is cer-
tainly massive causal reliance on testimony in the process by which each of us
develops into a language-user and thinker, ‘grows into possession of a world’.!
The initial stages of language acquisition by a child inevitably occur through a
Earlier versions of this paper were given at a workshop on ‘Testimony, Trust and Action’
in King’s College Cambridge in September 2003, at a conference on ‘Moral Testimony’ in the
Philosophy Department at Birmingham University in March 2004, and at a conference at the
Inter-University Centre in Dbrovnik, Croatia, in May 2005. I received very useful comments from
audiences at these events, in light of which I corrected various errors. I am also very grateful to both
John Hawthorne and Stephen Schiffer for valuable comments and discussion on an earlier draft.
The research for this paper was done between January and June 2002, during a period of leave
funded by my employers, Magdalen College and Oxford University, and by a Fellowship from the
Mind Association. My thanks for their support.
226 Testimony and Epistemic Autonomy
process of simple trust" in its teachers — parents and other carers. In this cog-
nitive developmental process learning meanings is not separable from coming to
grasp and accept our shared basic world picture, the common-sense theory which
structures and frames our empirical thought. There is, for instance, no distinction
to be drawn between learning the meanings of ‘chair’, and ‘horse’, and ‘jump’,
and ‘cook’, and learning about chairs, and horses, and jumping, and cooking.#
The fa ...
Running Head PhilosophyPhilosophy2PhilosophyName .docx
Running Head: Philosophy
Philosophy 2
Philosophy
Name of Student
Institutional Affiliation
Part A
In the first article, Gallagher tried to expound more on the notion of faith by looking at two characters who had completely view of the notion about faith with one being a staunch believer while the other one basing their arguments on the knowledge about the reality of the situation. Aquinas mainly described the two notions namely, faith and knowledge as being interdependent in that each supported the other. One of the major instances in her cancerous situation, Rose believes that the island has already cured her of her cancer.
However, as much as Bernard might have the knowledge about the beliefs of Rose, he cannot question the beliefs of Rose since she already has so much belief that it influences Bernard’s opinion about her condition. However, Aquinas emphasized on the importance of the view of the two notions from a generalized perspective in that as much one might have as much faith as Rose, it should never supersede the naturalistic reasoning ability. Aquinas is highly supportive of the interdependence between the two since he believes that knowledge is born out of ideas for example the knowledge on the existence of God is normally described from a natural context but for the revelation of the true existence of God there has to be some faith to shed some light.
The relationship between beliefs and knowledge is investigated by looking at the ideologies of Hume, Charlie, James and Plato who have a number of suggestions regarding the validity of a belief based on the availability of the justifications. They mainly suggest that a rumor or rather a testimony cannot be considered to be knowledge if it is not properly justified. However, Philosophers like James believe that in the absence of evidence to support testimonies, the consequences of those knowledge ought to be analyzed to determine the truth in them. The main idea behind the suggestion is that some ideas though true to some extent might be hard to prove.
In the third essay, the main character being analyzed is House who depicts the same ideology as Socrates where they believe that an examined life meaning a life where one seeks the truth from the various ideas developed brings out the meaning of life. He even goes to an extent of temporarily killing himself to prove that there is no afterlife hence whatever is done on earth ends here. He maintains that living a life of reason is what makes life have a meaning since by reasoning you get to evaluate the consequences.
Part B
Hume believed that the validity of a testimony was mainly based on the experience of a person himself and also that the various truths that were presented in form of testimonies would be very hard to be considered as being true. The notion is highly suggestive of the fact that some level of accuracy concerning the testimonies could be attained through the relation of those testimonies with the experie ...
Similar to Justification ppt grant_nick_ross (20)
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes bel.docx
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes bel.docx
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
10Testimony and Epistemic AutonomyElizabeth Fricker1
Running Head PhilosophyPhilosophy2PhilosophyName .docx
Running Head PhilosophyPhilosophy2PhilosophyName .docx
Recently uploaded
Empowering NextGen Mobility via Large Action Model Infrastructure (LAMI): pav...
Empowering NextGen Mobility via Large Action Model Infrastructure (LAMI)
Essentials of Automations: Optimizing FME Workflows with Parameters
Are you looking to streamline your workflows and boost your projects’ efficiency? Do you find yourself searching for ways to add flexibility and control over your FME workflows? If so, you’re in the right place.
Join us for an insightful dive into the world of FME parameters, a critical element in optimizing workflow efficiency. This webinar marks the beginning of our three-part “Essentials of Automation” series. This first webinar is designed to equip you with the knowledge and skills to utilize parameters effectively: enhancing the flexibility, maintainability, and user control of your FME projects.
Here’s what you’ll gain:
- Essentials of FME Parameters: Understand the pivotal role of parameters, including Reader/Writer, Transformer, User, and FME Flow categories. Discover how they are the key to unlocking automation and optimization within your workflows.
- Practical Applications in FME Form: Delve into key user parameter types including choice, connections, and file URLs. Allow users to control how a workflow runs, making your workflows more reusable. Learn to import values and deliver the best user experience for your workflows while enhancing accuracy.
- Optimization Strategies in FME Flow: Explore the creation and strategic deployment of parameters in FME Flow, including the use of deployment and geometry parameters, to maximize workflow efficiency.
- Pro Tips for Success: Gain insights on parameterizing connections and leveraging new features like Conditional Visibility for clarity and simplicity.
We’ll wrap up with a glimpse into future webinars, followed by a Q&A session to address your specific questions surrounding this topic.
Don’t miss this opportunity to elevate your FME expertise and drive your projects to new heights of efficiency.
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...
💥 Speed, accuracy, and scaling – discover the superpowers of GenAI in action with UiPath Document Understanding and Communications Mining™:
See how to accelerate model training and optimize model performance with active learning
Learn about the latest enhancements to out-of-the-box document processing – with little to no training required
Get an exclusive demo of the new family of UiPath LLMs – GenAI models specialized for processing different types of documents and messages
This is a hands-on session specifically designed for automation developers and AI enthusiasts seeking to enhance their knowledge in leveraging the latest intelligent document processing capabilities offered by UiPath.
Speakers:
👨🏫 Andras Palfi, Senior Product Manager, UiPath
👩🏫 Lenka Dulovicova, Product Program Manager, UiPath
Kubernetes & AI - Beauty and the Beast !?! @KCD Istanbul 2024
As AI technology is pushing into IT I was wondering myself, as an “infrastructure container kubernetes guy”, how get this fancy AI technology get managed from an infrastructure operational view? Is it possible to apply our lovely cloud native principals as well? What benefit’s both technologies could bring to each other?
Let me take this questions and provide you a short journey through existing deployment models and use cases for AI software. On practical examples, we discuss what cloud/on-premise strategy we may need for applying it to our own infrastructure to get it to work from an enterprise perspective. I want to give an overview about infrastructure requirements and technologies, what could be beneficial or limiting your AI use cases in an enterprise environment. An interactive Demo will give you some insides, what approaches I got already working for real.
JMeter webinar - integration with InfluxDB and Grafana
Watch this recorded webinar about real-time monitoring of application performance. See how to integrate Apache JMeter, the open-source leader in performance testing, with InfluxDB, the open-source time-series database, and Grafana, the open-source analytics and visualization application.
In this webinar, we will review the benefits of leveraging InfluxDB and Grafana when executing load tests and demonstrate how these tools are used to visualize performance metrics.
Length: 30 minutes
Session Overview
-------------------------------------------
During this webinar, we will cover the following topics while demonstrating the integrations of JMeter, InfluxDB and Grafana:
- What out-of-the-box solutions are available for real-time monitoring JMeter tests?
- What are the benefits of integrating InfluxDB and Grafana into the load testing stack?
- Which features are provided by Grafana?
- Demonstration of InfluxDB and Grafana using a practice web application
To view the webinar recording, go to:
https://www.rttsweb.com/jmeter-integration-webinar
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
After immersing yourself in the blue book and its red counterpart, attending DDD-focused conferences, and applying tactical patterns, you're left with a crucial question: How do I ensure my design is effective? Tactical patterns within Domain-Driven Design (DDD) serve as guiding principles for creating clear and manageable domain models. However, achieving success with these patterns requires additional guidance. Interestingly, we've observed that a set of constraints initially designed for training purposes remarkably aligns with effective pattern implementation, offering a more ‘mechanical’ approach. Let's explore together how Object Calisthenics can elevate the design of your tactical DDD patterns, offering concrete help for those venturing into DDD for the first time!
Bits & Pixels using AI for Good.........
A whirlwind tour of tech & AI for socio-environmental impact.
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: The WebAuthn API and Discoverable Credentials.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar
State of ICS and IoT Cyber Threat Landscape Report 2024 preview
The IoT and OT threat landscape report has been prepared by the Threat Research Team at Sectrio using data from Sectrio, cyber threat intelligence farming facilities spread across over 85 cities around the world. In addition, Sectrio also runs AI-based advanced threat and payload engagement facilities that serve as sinks to attract and engage sophisticated threat actors, and newer malware including new variants and latent threats that are at an earlier stage of development.
The latest edition of the OT/ICS and IoT security Threat Landscape Report 2024 also covers:
State of global ICS asset and network exposure
Sectoral targets and attacks as well as the cost of ransom
Global APT activity, AI usage, actor and tactic profiles, and implications
Rise in volumes of AI-powered cyberattacks
Major cyber events in 2024
Malware and malicious payload trends
Cyberattack types and targets
Vulnerability exploit attempts on CVEs
Attacks on counties – USA
Expansion of bot farms – how, where, and why
In-depth analysis of the cyber threat landscape across North America, South America, Europe, APAC, and the Middle East
Why are attacks on smart factories rising?
Cyber risk predictions
Axis of attacks – Europe
Systemic attacks in the Middle East
Download the full report from here:
https://sectrio.com/resources/ot-threat-landscape-reports/sectrio-releases-ot-ics-and-iot-security-threat-landscape-report-2024/
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...
Do you want to learn how to model and simulate an electrical network from scratch in under an hour?
Then welcome to this PowSyBl workshop, hosted by Rte, the French Transmission System Operator (TSO)!
During the webinar, you will discover the PowSyBl ecosystem as well as handle and study an electrical network through an interactive Python notebook.
PowSyBl is an open source project hosted by LF Energy, which offers a comprehensive set of features for electrical grid modelling and simulation. Among other advanced features, PowSyBl provides:
- A fully editable and extendable library for grid component modelling;
- Visualization tools to display your network;
- Grid simulation tools, such as power flows, security analyses (with or without remedial actions) and sensitivity analyses;
The framework is mostly written in Java, with a Python binding so that Python developers can access PowSyBl functionalities as well.
What you will learn during the webinar:
- For beginners: discover PowSyBl's functionalities through a quick general presentation and the notebook, without needing any expert coding skills;
- For advanced developers: master the skills to efficiently apply PowSyBl functionalities to your real-world scenarios.
Assuring Contact Center Experiences for Your Customers With ThousandEyes
Presented by Suzanne Phillips and Alex Marcotte
To Graph or Not to Graph Knowledge Graph Architectures and LLMs
Reflecting on new architectures for knowledge based systems in light of generative ai
Mission to Decommission: Importance of Decommissioning Products to Increase E...
Mission to Decommission: Importance of Decommissioning Products to Increase Enterprise-Wide Efficiency by VP Data Platform, American Express
Accelerate your Kubernetes clusters with Varnish Caching
A presentation about the usage and availability of Varnish on Kubernetes. This talk explores the capabilities of Varnish caching and shows how to use the Varnish Helm chart to deploy it to Kubernetes.
This presentation was delivered at K8SUG Singapore. See https://feryn.eu/presentations/accelerate-your-kubernetes-clusters-with-varnish-caching-k8sug-singapore-28-2024 for more details.
Key Trends Shaping the Future of Infrastructure.pdf
Keynote at DIGIT West Expo, Glasgow on 29 May 2024.
Cheryl Hung, ochery.com
Sr Director, Infrastructure Ecosystem, Arm.
The key trends across hardware, cloud and open-source; exploring how these areas are likely to mature and develop over the short and long-term, and then considering how organisations can position themselves to adapt and thrive.
From Siloed Products to Connected Ecosystem: Building a Sustainable and Scala...
From Siloed Products to Connected Ecosystem: Building a Sustainable and Scalable Platform by VP of Product, The New York Times
Recently uploaded (20)
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: FIDO Security Aspects.pdf
Empowering NextGen Mobility via Large Action Model Infrastructure (LAMI): pav...
Empowering NextGen Mobility via Large Action Model Infrastructure (LAMI): pav...
Essentials of Automations: Optimizing FME Workflows with Parameters
Essentials of Automations: Optimizing FME Workflows with Parameters
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...
Kubernetes & AI - Beauty and the Beast !?! @KCD Istanbul 2024
Kubernetes & AI - Beauty and the Beast !?! @KCD Istanbul 2024
JMeter webinar - integration with InfluxDB and Grafana
JMeter webinar - integration with InfluxDB and Grafana
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object Calisthenics
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: The WebAuthn API and Discoverable Credentials.pdf
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: The WebAuthn API and Discoverable Credentials.pdf
State of ICS and IoT Cyber Threat Landscape Report 2024 preview
State of ICS and IoT Cyber Threat Landscape Report 2024 preview
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...
Assuring Contact Center Experiences for Your Customers With ThousandEyes
Assuring Contact Center Experiences for Your Customers With ThousandEyes
To Graph or Not to Graph Knowledge Graph Architectures and LLMs
To Graph or Not to Graph Knowledge Graph Architectures and LLMs
Mission to Decommission: Importance of Decommissioning Products to Increase E...
Mission to Decommission: Importance of Decommissioning Products to Increase E...
Accelerate your Kubernetes clusters with Varnish Caching
Accelerate your Kubernetes clusters with Varnish Caching
Key Trends Shaping the Future of Infrastructure.pdf
Key Trends Shaping the Future of Infrastructure.pdf
From Siloed Products to Connected Ecosystem: Building a Sustainable and Scala...
From Siloed Products to Connected Ecosystem: Building a Sustainable and Scala...
Justification ppt grant_nick_ross
- 1. Justification Nick Davin, Ross Buchan, and Grant Simens
- 7. Examples
- 10. Au revoir! Fin