Criticize my philosophy

>>3064414
not really clear how much of this is stipulation vs belief

> Criticize my philosophy

>>3064414
secular trash desu

evidence isn't evidence because your senses are shit

>>3064414

>Understanding is a value itself
I personally agree with this, and there's a really good metaphorical explanation in The Republic (book 5/6?) as to why this is. But we're criticizing so:

why? What end does "understanding" serve that would make it a value in itself? What is a value - is it simply a pleasurable thing, a thing-of-importance outside of human perception?

Also you lack a functional definition for "understanding." This makes it hard for readers to apply a consistent definition of the term and avoid ambiguity. I've found it good practice to reread my stuff to look for "hanging words," which are just words I neglect explaining and take my internal "given" definition.

>Understanding depends on values like reason and evidence
Why? Much of human history thrived on an "understanding" of life that was based on spiritual and political authority (papal authority, god-kings, mystics, etc.). Why then would you assert understanding requires reason & evidence? Centrally it seems more that it requires willingness to cease criticizing that things could be any other way.

>Reason and evidence underlie the process of understanding
See above

>all propositions must cohere
woah there bub

>Propositions that are not based on reason and evidence are excluded from this unity of understanding
At some point you'll get into the trap of "prove the validity of rationality and evidence rationally and with evidence without circular reference" - this is a classic problem with the sort of objectivist direction you're going

>>3064414
Plus:

>You: Understanding depends on values
>You: Values depend on understanding how conscious beings flourish
>Implicitly You: Understanding depends on understanding

Go into epistemology. The question "what constitutes knowledge", "how can one know they know something", etc. are at the heart of this

>>3065304
Particularly need to delineate 'knowing' things and being able to articulate that knowledge, which is closely related to the ability for abstraction etc.

>>3064414
>Reason and evidence underlie the process of understanding in domains ranging from science to spirituality.

Tautological/axiomatic in scientific understanding, plainly untrue in spirituality.

>>3064414
I have been in that room.