For most philosophical problems，The situation we see is often: different opinions of philosophers，No sincerity is，Some philosophical disputes even for more than 2,000 years。Despite the continuous promotion of the new，But it is difficult to say that it is knocked (KNOCK-DOWN)。So，Can philosophical discussion really bring knowledge about these issues? If not，Why? For these questions，Contemporary Philosophy Suspects，such as Hilary Kornblith、William Lycan and Helen Beebee claim: the discussion and research of philosophy cannot bring any substantial knowledge; more precisely，The whole of the philosopher community does not know if it is not possible to know whether the substantial philosophy proposed is true。

Bibi believes that there are two main basis for philosophy doubts: the challenges of the methodology and objection。The former refers to the methodology used by philosophers to use the methodology of "truth -oriented"，Therefore, there is a lack of sufficient reasons to claim that it can be used to obtain the truth。The challenge of the objection refers to the claim of a philosopher about a philosophical issue，He can always find a point of view that is not compatible with his own position，The proposal of these views is as rational as he is as rational and sufficient to see，This makes the entire philosopher community has no right to declare that any philosophy view is correct。The phenomenon of people who have learned philosophy on the challenge of the objection should be no stranger，But why is the methodology of philosophy? Bibi thinks，This is because of the two core parts in this methodology -the advantages Bet365 app download of philosophical evidence and theoretical advantages (also known as the "best explanation inference" (Ibe, Inference to the Best Explanation or "ABDUCTIVE METHOD") -。On the issue of evidence，Bibi gave multiple examples to explain that our intuition of most philosophical issues conflict with each other; she believes that the intuition of these conflicts comes from the theoretical presets of each other，This then makes philosophers lack effective ways to determine which of them is correct。On IBE question，Bibi pointed out: Scientists have accumulated evidence to believe that IBE can lead to scientific truth，But philosopher lacks inductive evidence to believe that IBE can lead to philosophical truth; even if we agree that the individual projects in IBE inference are the truth -oriented，Philosophers still lack consensus on their respective importance or weight，Therefore, it is difficult to determine which theory is the best theory of "overall"。

Piber's statement is quite simple，In order to better understand her so -called methodological challenges and my own views on this issue，We must first know that the main purpose of this method is to screen the best theory from multiple mutual competitive theories。For this purpose，Philosophers usually use the following standards as the basis for screening: (1) Explanation breadth: How much is the data that can be explained by the theory (DATA; that is, the so -called "intuition")? (2) Explained item strength: How reliable or important to be explained by the theory?，or use a more streamlined way to explain the data? (8) Conservativeness: Whether this theory is logically contained in many of our existing views is false，Therefore, we ask us to significantly modify the existing views? (9) Clear and accuracy: Whether the concept used in this theory is clear，Is the content accurate? (10) The ability to solve bet365 Play online games problems: Can this theory solve the problem it aims?，Is there any other application of the theory?

If we can use a number xi to represent the importance or weight of each standard，and use another digital yi to indicate the score of a theory on a certain standard，Then we can calculate the total score of each of the philosophical theory of each competing with each other (if the theory T scores in various items is y1, respectively, y2, … y11，Then the total score of the theory will be (y1 × x1)+(y2 × x2)+...+(y11 × x11)，And thus picking a "best theory" with the highest score。Some philosophers are optimistic that such an objective score is possible。and Bibi questioned this: First, our philosophical intuition often conflict with each other，Who is the correct controversy in the conflict，There is a lack of preset theory solutions among philosophers; the second is why the weights of each standard in IBE and how to determine the scores of various theories in various standards，There are often disputes between philosophers。Failure to get satisfactory solutions based on these disputes，Bibi believes that IBE is not a way -oriented methodology，I will not bring us any philosophical knowledge。

I personally sympathize with Piber's view，Like her, holding a doubt about philosophy。But I think she obviously underestimates the seriousness of the problems existing in contemporary philosophy.，It is impossible to explain some common phenomena。If we take a closer look at the standards in Ibe，I will find that some of these problems are obviously ignored by Bibi。First，Some standards themselves are confusing，such as "non -characteristic", "strength" and "pressing"，This makes it extremely difficult for philosophers to score them，even arbitrarily exist。Next，Some standards are controversial，Logic consistency。I believe that some contradictory bet365 live casino games sentences are real double -sided real theorists.。Last，Some standards，Rulong，resorted to other theories that also need Ibe evaluation，Therefore, when applying this standard, there will be a possibility of cycle or infinite retreat。In addition，I think Ibe Method Theory has the following two extremely serious questions，enough to paralyze the methodology itself: the correct logic problem and the stability and reliability of intuition。

First，Correct logical problems。Multiple evaluation standards in Ibe，If conservative、Explanation breadth and integration，All related to the relationship between the "logic afterward" or logic itself: In order to see whether a theory T conflict with some existing views，You must first launch some post -logo from T logic; in order to explain that T can indeed explain a certain intuition i，You need to prove that T logic contains i or at least highly supports i; in order to explain that the two theories are integrated with each other，It is proved that they will not launch contradictions together logically。Since our philosophical theory is expressed in daily language，Therefore, the launch of the post -logic method of the application logic method，We need to use "the right logic for daily language"。The question is: What kind of logic is this logic? This problem is an important question in contemporary philosophy，But the unfortunate is，More than one answer given by contemporary philosophers on this question。Some philosophers believe that the logic of daily language is the classic logic proposed by Freder at the end of the 19th century，Some philosophers think，This logic is a certain non -classic informed association logic or three -value logic。The key is，Different logic may have different judgments for whether there is a logic between the two statements。For Bet365 app download example，Classic logic believes that the dual negation logic of a statement contains this statement，But intuitive logic believes that the relationship between this containment is not generally established; the classic logic believes that a contradiction sentence logic contains any sentences，But the logic of Pae Confrages believes that the relationship between this containment is not necessarily established。This difference will affect our judgment on how much the theory scores under an IBE project。Therefore，In order to use IBE evaluation philosophy theory，We must first decide which logic for daily language is correct。But the problem is，This question itself is still a philosophical question and there are different answers。How can we determine which answer is it correct? If we use the Ibe method again，Obviously facing circulatory questions; but do we still have other methods to determine the answer to this question? I think this problem is an unsolved problem in IBE。

Second，The stability and reliability of intuition。If the correct logic problem has no solution in Ibe methodology，The only one we can ask in IBE is only our intuition judgment on various philosophical issues。Bibi believes that these intuition not only often conflicts，and also preset different philosophical theories。but，Bibi's views not only cannot explain why philosophers sometimes (or often) change their position，And also ignored a fact: philosophers often agree that their opponents are different from their own intuition.，and not simply originated from the preset theory，Therefore, I feel that its opponent's intuition needs some reasonable explanation。other，Bibi's view is not easy to explain why we have accumulated evidence to believe that IBE can cause scientific truth，But lack of inductive evidence to believe that IBE can lead to philosophical truth。I believe，The reasonable interpretation of the bet365 live casino games above three phenomena is rooted in the instability and unreliableness of philosophical intuition。Due to the strong dependence of IBE methodology for philosophical intuition，The latter is neither unstable nor reliable than scientific data，Therefore, IBE cannot guide the truth like science in philosophy; due to the instability and unreliableness of philosophical intuition，Therefore, philosophers often have to admit that their opponents' intuition is self -coming，Therefore, some reasonable explanation is required; and the reason why philosophers can easily change the philosophy stance，That's because they usually clearly realize the instability and unreliableness of philosophical intuition。Even，Due to its instability and unreliable，Philosophy intuition to a certain extent is "manipulating"。The so -called "manipulation intuition"，I refer to the philosopher to interpret the correct intuition of himself or opponents as "it has a self，But strictly speaking, it is incorrect "。In fact，Contemporary philosophers are already familiar with more than one "manipulation intuition" technology，This makes any philosophical intuition is not certain。For example，Philosophers originally (or their opponents) believed that the correct intuition can be "extended" by "Explain Away".，But it is actually incorrect "; and the intuition that originally believed that conflict between each other could have no real conflict through the method of contexting to the context。There are many ways to "explain" here，If there is nothing, it is often explained by "rewriting" "why do we naturally (but error) believe that the composition exists in reality"; H. P.Grice resorts To explain, "Why do we naturally (but error) think that some classical logic effective inferences are invalid"。

I think，The two factors above are the important Bet365 app download reasons that make it impossible for us to use IBE to make no controversial evaluation of any philosophical theory。Due to the actual use of contemporary philosophy, it is just Ibe，Therefore, for most philosophical issues，This method cannot provide real solutions and knowledge for philosophical issues at all。

　　bet365 Play online games