Basic Practical Philosophy

Academic Philosophers like to talk about the Problem of the Criterion.  This is basic to Epistemology, the study of how we know things.  The Problem of the Criterion has to do with our foundational approach to knowledge--do we use a particular method or do we rely on some set of previous knowledge.

I think that those questions are very idealistic and impractical and academic and worthless.

The birth of a philosopher occurs when he (includes women) begins to ask questions about knowledge, methods of knowing, how to behave, what exists, etc.  This occurs as an adult and the philosopher comes into being as an individual knowing language with a set of beliefs, experiences, and an approach to life.  The discerning philosopher quickly discovers that his beliefs have contradictions and realizes that he needs to examine his beliefs and needs a method for examining them and for knowing.  The philosopher needs to weed out false beliefs and confirm true beliefs and needs a method for discovering truth and discovering lies/errors.  The philosopher begins his philosophical life as One Who Has Been Deceived.

Thus, the Philosopher knows of the existence of Language, Life, Thought, Truth, Falsehood, Lies, and Errors.  The first task of the philosopher is to discover a method that can help him discover his own true and false beliefs.

This is basic practical philosophy.  I think that it accords very well with the philosophy of Ecclesiastes.

After weeding out his own false beliefs, the Philosopher can go on to examine all branches of philosophy, including metaphysics.  This is almost certain to be an iterative process, as such examinations will likely show further errors in the philosopher's beliefs.

The Witness Formula in the Law and New Testament

Let’s consider the application of the witness formula for evidence found in the Law of Moses. This formula is found three times in the Old Testament and five times in the New Testament. Its application in the Old Testament is within a court trial. In the New Testament there are wider applications, including church courts and especially by Christ concerning his own identity to the Pharisees and to John the Baptist after John began to doubt.

The Law states the mosaic formula concerning witnesses three times: 1) “…at the mouth of witnesses…” (Num. 35:30, marg. reading), 2) “On the mouth of two witnesses or three witnesses….” (Deut. 17:6, marg. reading), “…on the mouth of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.” (Deut. 19:15, marg. reading) The judges are admonished to investigate thoroughly in order to discover any false witnesses. “And the judges shall investigate thoroughly; and if the witness is a false witness, he has testified against his brother falsely." (Deut. 19:18) We note that the grammatical case for “mouth” in the biblical text is singular, which conflicts with the case for the associated noun, which is plural (“witnesses”). This odd construction is intentional. The purpose of the mosaic formula concerning witnesses is to discover points of agreement, indicated by the singular case for “mouth.”

The witness formula occurs in the New Testament five times: 1) “… by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be confirmed.” (Mt. 18:16), 2) Christ states in His assertion of His identity, “Even in your law it has been written, that the testimony of two men is true.” (John 8:17), 3) “Every word will be confirmed by the mouth of two or three witnesses.” (2 Corinthians 13:1), 4) “Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.” (I Tim. 5:19), and 5) “Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on two or three witnesses.” (Heb. 10:28)

This repetition of the witness formula in both the Law and the New Testament emphatically shows its profound importance. It demonstrates that testimonial evidence is of superlative importance in both the Old and New Testaments. If anything, it is more important for the New Testament than for the Old. Not only is the witness formula repeated in five different documents by five different writers, showing the mindset of the apostles, but Jesus relies upon it in his response to John the Baptist’s question and doubts about Jesus’ identity. The apostles also repeatedly used their function as witnesses as a defense in Acts – that they were obeying the mitvot to testify truly when they testified about Christ.

Implications of the uncertainty of inference of rate-based methods

If rate-based methods produce results in which we have no certain confidence, that undermines all radiometric dating methods, which undermines some claims about the age of the earth and its rocks. I would argue that the older that the rocks are claimed to be, the more opportunity that there has been for data-destroying processes to act, and therefore we have more uncertainty about the reliability of conclusions about the age of the rocks.

Existentialism

The first chapter of Ecclesiastes shows the dire situation of the man without God--he is stuck in a swamp of vanity. All his work will be destroyed by cyclical natural processes--especially by water and wind. People will forget that he existed. Even if he thinks that he creates something new, someone else will probably have done it first. If a man tries to discover knowledge about natural history, he will fail because there are processes that destroy data which have already destroyed the data which the man is trying to access. Man is only left with the detritus of the past and cannot count what is lacking. It is all very similar to the conclusion of Existentialism.