The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Science & Alternative Science => Topic started by: QED on April 21, 2019, 04:50:10 PM
-
This post is an effort to learn more about the operative foundations of zeteticism.
Assumptions
- zetetics believe objective truth exists
- zetetics want to believe that which is true
- absolute truth is unverifiable, but truth to a reasonable standard is attainable - though perhaps evolving
The epistemological nuance of this post is: by what objective standard is evidence assessed?
In previous discussions, it was stated that zetetic inquiry does not insist on a display of the process by which evidence, information, experiment, or conclusion was attained. Apparently this is to avoid bias in future independent efforts to acquire personal truth.
As we know, the most reliable (presently known) method for removing bias is the scientific method, which operates under the stress of transparency.
In this sense, I perceive zeteticism as a rebuttal - a comment - which says: the very act of transparency seeds the independent inquirer with confirmation bias, and hence is faulty.
Thus, I seek to discuss and better understand the following:
1. What is zeteticism’s position on the double blind process, as it seems to atone for this rebuttal?
2. How does objective truth become verified? We know that personal investigation is necessarily flawed because our senses are biased. Hence, my zetetic truth need not align with yours, and presently I can identify no mechanism by which a resolution is attained.
As always, any misrepresentation of zetecism in this post is my own and unintentional. And correction to misrepresentation is highly desired and appreciated in advance. Zeteticism is interesting, and I seek to learn.