Meta-Dialogue: feb 28

The following things this week talk about the importance of interpretation:

• Fire in the Equations
• Empathy process
• 12 angry men
• Language (Armando de la Torre)
• The world is a formal system
• Patterns

How do we know that we know?

What can we rely on in the universe in order to give us facts and truth?
If everyone has their own interpretation how can the world ever agree on anything?

Maybe we can demonstrate it in allopoiesis, showing mastery. But this still doesnt solve the question of how can we know that we know.
In 12 angry men, we can see that one is never sure that you really know.

We can take Poppers side. He said that we can only know when something is not true, but we can never know if something is 100% sure of something true. Like in 12 angry men, there is always a possibility for doubting. (reasonable doubt).

Episteme: knowledge that is certain. What is objective truth outside the impression you have on it.

Interpretation: kind of like what happened with the chair. Everyone has different perspectives.

Should we have a reasonable doubt on reality?
Always have in mind that there are perceptions and an objective truth.

What would happen if we doubt everything?
We always need a leap of faith (Fire in the Equations).
We have to at least believe in these leaps of faith:

• you exist
• you are sane
• knowledge can be acquired

We are in this reality, in which we can never know an objective truth. We can't pop-out (GEB) of the system in order to get a bigger view of the whole truth detail. Its outside our reality. 

The seeking of the truth is not a dead end, in which there is no point in trying. It is a road/goal that we will never reach but in the process of reaching it, we will acquire certain things that will make us or help us comprehend the world better. 

Even though we don't have the complete truth, we have a better understanding.

"Truth is not a democracy."