/lit/ - Literature

>>8143725
But if all people like it and want it deep down then can rape exist? You can't rape the willing.

/lit/, I gotta ask, do you have extensive internal fantasy realms that you can turn to? Or just any fictional world. How old are you?

I'm 20 and have kept a continuous fantasy world going since in was 15. Do we ever stop dreaming at some point?

>>6383535
Do we really need another prodigy thread today?
Oh, well if you insist, /sci/. Jacob Barnett's kind of qt anyways.

It is generally agreed that a person S knows a proposition P only if S believes P and P is true, as necessary conditions. Socrates believed that we also require Justification for knowledge and thus knowledge has traditionally been known as Justified True Belief. Gettier has pointed out there is no complete relationship between justification and truth. That is you can believe yourself justified in believing a true proposition and still not hold knowledge. JTB has thus been shown to not be sufficient for knowledge. This is because justification itself is not reliable always. I would say, reliable beliefs are justified but not all justifications are completely reliable. In this way it would seem that Justification is a subset of reliability, at times seeming to be necessary or sufficient although it is not.

From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, slightly paraphrased:

Peter Unger proposes that S knows that P just in case it is “not at all accidental that S is right about its being the case that P.” Being right about P amounts to believing truly that P. Its not being accidental that one is right about P amounts to there being something in one’s situation that guarantees, or makes it highly probable, that one wouldn’t be wrong.

Reliability and justification seem to be important only for a sense of authority, that in every case a person believes a proposition to be true it is true and thus the belief cannot be doubted(for it could never be a false belief in some cases, if it’s true in all cases). Fear of a false belief in the future seems to be what calls for justification, perhaps rooted in our human desires and understanding of the world, justification would serve to help us avoid this fear. I would propose that complete reliability instead of justification as the third criteria for knowledge or as it was put by Robert Nozick “tracking the truth”.

P is true
S believes P is true
If P were not true, S would not believe P
If, in changed circumstances, P were still true, S would still believe P
In this case, divination that is always correct is knowledge. People would have difficulty accepting this but remember; divination that is always correct means divination that will be correct in the future. This is difficult to imagine occurring in our world but that’s not the point, if it were to be the state of affairs then it, the process of divination, is knowledge. An interesting thing to point out and likely what anyone not on board with this is having trouble with is that we cannot know that this divination is knowledge. Say that there is a divination process as such, which constitutes knowledge, there is never any reason for us to believe that the divination will always be correct. So while knowledge can exist in the process, we cannot know that there is knowledge present.

>>4410990
You know how to live.