If you don't accept something, does that mean rejection or non-acceptance?

[Brandon Nankivell]

If I don't accept Jerry as my friend...

Does that mean I reject him, so he is NOT my friend...

or

I neither accept or reject him as my friend, so he is neither my friend NOR not-my-friend?

[Brandon Nankivell]

I think the word I'm looking for is 'neutrality ' or 'agnostic'.

What I'm wondering is if that's actually a thing.

Can you truly be 'agnostic' about a thing, especially when it comes to debating concepts / ideas.

To be agnostic about the existence of Jesus existence for example, is to deny his existence but be open to the possibility of changing your mind to accept his existence.

So you are always either 0 or 1. There is no 0.5... right?

[hyruga]

I think it's perfectly fine to be neutral.

So if you just meet someone on the road and that the person says hi, does he automatically becomes your friend or an acquaintance or neutral.

It first depends on your definition of 'friend'.

Even if we go past language, we can still have 3 main ways when considering something:

1. I agreed with him.

2. I am still deciding whether to agree with him.

3. I disagree with him.

[zurew]

19 hours ago, Brandon Nankivell said:

To be agnostic about the existence of Jesus existence for example, is to deny his existence

No.

You can be agnostic about things. That just means you haven't formed an opinion on the matter and it doesn't mean the negation of something.

In other words it means "I don't have a belief about x". - notice , that this way you don't make any explicit or implicit positive or negative claims about the subject matter , you only make a claim about the current status of that specific belief .

[Bobby_2021]

21 hours ago, Brandon Nankivell said:

If I don't accept Jerry as my friend...

Does that mean I reject him, so he is NOT my friend...

or

I neither accept or reject him as my friend, so he is neither my friend NOR not-my-friend?

According to automata theory, you can either accept him or reject him. It's a strict binary with no third option. You have to choose one.

But.....In real terms

You need time to compute/think whether you accept him or not. This computation can take forever that you will never actually arrive at either yes or no decision.

---

If you acknowledge the concept of jerry, and you acknowledge the concept of a friend, then you have to accept him as a friend or reject him as a friend. There is no third option. 

[Brandon Nankivell]

@Bobby_2021 So it sounds like when speaking in terms of strict mathematicly-natured stuff, this is true. But in normal human matters, as @zurew is suggesting, agnosticism is a thing.

[hyruga]

It depends on how binary and how decisive you want to be.

[Bobby_2021]

3 hours ago, Brandon Nankivell said:

@Bobby_2021 So it sounds like when speaking in terms of strict mathematicly-natured stuff, this is true. But in normal human matters, as @zurew is suggesting, agnosticism is a thing.

Agnosticism simply means that you are delaying the compute or choosing to not compute at all. But that also means that you do not value Truth and not willing to make an effort. 

The thing is even if you choosing to remain agnostic by not thinking, you are still making decisions. You might as well make a decision about jerry being a friend or not. 

Edit: Reality does not really offer you a lot of options. You have to converge eventually.

Edited September 12, 2023 by Bobby_2021

[zurew]

2 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Agnosticism simply means that you are delaying the compute or choosing to not compute at all. But that also means that you do not value Truth and not willing to make an effort. 

Both of those claims are false.

1) You can be agnostic about things even after you "computed" them or in other words, even after you have deeply investigated them - its just happens to be the case , that neither side were more compelling or persuasive from your pov,compared to the other. Or it happens to be the case, that you haven't yet found the answer that would be required to take a position on something - but that doesn't mean,that you are not interested in finding out that truth or answer; it just means you haven't found it yet.

2)This ties back to point 1. Just because you haven't taken a position regarding a proposition ,from that doesn't follow that you don't value finding out the truth value of that proposition.

 

[Bobby_2021]

On 9/12/2023 at 7:19 PM, zurew said:

You can be agnostic about things even after you "computed" them or in other words,

If you finish computing then you would get a result, yes or no in this case. 

 

On 9/12/2023 at 7:19 PM, zurew said:

its just happens to be the case , that neither side were more compelling or persuasive from your pov,compared to the other.

This can happen if you don't clearly and deterministically describe the problem.

And can also stem from incomplete or missing information. If you have missing information, that doesn't mean a third option though. This would become a classic case of the uncertainty principle.

As long as critical information is missing the answer would be simultaneously right or wrong.

Think about it?

Is 2+2 = 4, a yes or no.

2+3 = 10, is a yes or no. 

"I am agnostic" is not answering the question and has nothing to do with the question at all. The answer definitely exists. It all depends on whether you can reach it and allocate the resources for compute. 

On 9/12/2023 at 7:19 PM, zurew said:

2)This ties back to point 1. Just because you haven't taken a position regarding a proposition ,from that doesn't follow that you don't value finding out the truth value of that proposition

Sure. But the reason for which you haven't taken a position on that matter is important.

Are you refusing to take a position because you lazy and unwilling to dedicate the resources?

If yes, then you are lazy.

If you lack the resources, then it's more or less understandable. 

The universe is clearly deterministic. There isn't much wiggle room. 

[zurew]

@Bobby_2021 I think there is a slight miscommunication here.I use the term 'belief' the same way people use it in philosophy circles (attitude or stance towards a proposition). This is important because this is different from a knowledge claim. (knowledge is used here as 'justified true belief')

For example taking your math example - someone can believe that 2+3 = 10 but thats different from them saying that 2+3  is actually 10. I can believe in things without any proper justification.

 

56 minutes ago, Bobby_2021 said:

The universe is clearly deterministic.

Well, have you read about the problem of induction?

[Ajax]

On 9/11/2023 at 4:20 AM, Brandon Nankivell said:

If I don't accept Jerry as my friend...

Does that mean I reject him, so he is NOT my friend...

or

I neither accept or reject him as my friend, so he is neither my friend NOR not-my-friend?

It's simply a consideration based on your viewpoint.  To solve a paradox/dilemma, you simply change the way you look at it. 

Edited September 13, 2023 by Ajax