After talking over some ideas of how we can improve our methods with the Box Project, we have reached a semi-intrusive problem. If, as has been mentioned in lecture, our understanding is seemingly imperative for a "good" explanation, then how is it that we will ever be able to complete the assignment? Obviously we are not accepting this as the solution to the problem, or anywhere close, but rather trying to grasp just how far we can hope to get with this.
If we are not able to understand what is in the box, then what good is our explanation? There is no knowledge based evidence for its contents, so our conclusions seem to be belief-based thus far. In applying this situation to recent lecture, it looks as if we have come in contact with the Gettier Problem. Our current belief is that there is another box within the observable box. This may prove to be false. However, it is important to note that there could be a box within the observable box, but a box we have not accounted for. Perhaps a much smaller box is within the contents that we have no concept of. According to this problem, it does not seem that we have any "understanding" of the contents at all. Perhaps there is a large box-shaped piece of paper in place of what we thought was a secondary box. Believing a box is within the contents must be paired with the truth of the actual contents. Our beliefs are misplaced and it seems, as of right now, we can not be quite certain.
Due to this being the majority of our talk on the project, the IBE model has not come up much. We believe that it is important to use, but we first need to clarify our observations and intentions.
No comments:
Post a Comment