Comment by bluebarbet
2 days ago
Comments noted but I always choose my words carefully. The accusation of bad faith is definitionally unfalsifiable. It makes a claim about intention, which - by definition - nobody but the speaker can know.
2 days ago
Comments noted but I always choose my words carefully. The accusation of bad faith is definitionally unfalsifiable. It makes a claim about intention, which - by definition - nobody but the speaker can know.
You seriously don't know what a definition is ... care isn't adequate in the presence of incompetence. Intentions can be inferred ... it's done all the time (and bad faith is not strictly a matter of intention--people can argue in bad faith without a conscious intention of doing so). I've seen this pedantic epistemologically absurd to the point of bad faith argument so many times--"knowing" is not the standard that anyone actually uses for justification of claims--even the common but quite flawed philosophical definition of knowledge as "true justified belief" recognizes that one only needs justified belief, not knowledge--only via god's eye can it be certified that such beliefs are true. And of course Popper's falsifiability does not depend on "knowing" at the epistemic extreme ... again, this is incompetence.
Enough ... now I'm really going silent no matter how much you goad me.