Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bortlip t1_jdrb2ea wrote

It seems tht even just 1 and 2 together are self defeating.

  1. We should believe only the truth. (premise)
  2. If S should do A, then S can do A. (premise)

Can't we then say:

Conclusion: We can only believe the truth. Nothing we believe is false.

EDIT: Instead of downvoting, I'd love to hear why this is wrong.

−1

Kangewalter t1_je711a0 wrote

You're interpreting "we can only believe the truth" as "it is impossible for us to believe anything but the truth", while the relevant sense is clearly "it is possible for us to hold true beliefs without any false beliefs." Huemer does infer the former is true if determinism is true in step 5, but he needs the third premise for that (If determinism is true, then if S can do A, S does A.)

Also, the conclusion isn't necessarily self-defeating, it just seems implausible.

1