tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4667288583830493271.post5259839014816118922..comments2023-10-31T06:14:24.897-07:00Comments on Philosophy in Progress: Justification vs. Truth PuzzleSharon Berryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17434076853502881274noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4667288583830493271.post-33149710317417502842009-12-13T18:02:39.612-08:002009-12-13T18:02:39.612-08:00C'mon this isn't that puzzling.
So suppos...C'mon this isn't that puzzling.<br /><br />So suppose we bet on the outcome of a roll of the dice. You get 100 bucks if you guess the sum of the dice and give me a blow job. I roll the dice under a cup and ask for your guess. Now supposing you would rather get the money than give me head both of the following statements would be true.<br /><br />"You should guess the number that is the sum of the dice under the cup."<br /><br />"You should guess the number 7"<br /><br />These two statements aren't contradictory even when the number rolled is not 7. One of them makes a claim about the desired outcome while the other tells you what procedure would you most likely to achieve that outcome.<br /><br />Now of course, and perhaps this is what you are really trying to ask, one can ask what makes one hypothesis more likely than another. However, that's just another way of asking for a solution to the problem of induction. You're well aware of what I think about induction but in either case once you grant certain background beliefs about the probability of various claims being true I don't see any additional puzzile here.TruePathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09101368178633477827noreply@blogger.com