You're absolutely right. I have no problem using indentation for quotes, as a matter of fact I was wondering how to do that, it's his condescending tone that I took issue with. In retrospect though, I should have just ignored it, but let my temper get the best of me. I'll try to keep counter-productive comments to a minimum in the future.
It was a comment on wedrifid's implicit assumption that I should care about what annoys him and bizarre expectation that I would adjust my behavior because I was "prompted" (not asked politely mind you) by him. Not sure what part of that is not obvious to you.
Duly noted. God forbid I do something that annoys you. Won't be able to live with myself.
Isn't it an essential criteria of falsifiability to be able to design an experiment that can DEFINITIVELY prove the theory false?
Ok, I understand what you mean now. Now that you've clarified what Eliezer meant by anticipated experience my original objection to it is no longer applicable. Thank you for an interesting and thought provoking discussion.
So essentially what you and Eliezer are referring to as "anticipated experience" is just basic falsifiability then?
That's really clever. I always thought that "credible evidence" was a bit redundant actually. I just used as a figure of speech without thinking about, but according to my definition of evidence that it has to be credible is pretty much implicit. It has been made abundantly clear to me, however, that this community's definition differs substantially, so that's the definition I will use when posting here going forward.
Alright, I think I see what you're getting it, but I still can't help but think that your definition of sensory experience is too broad to be really useful. I mean the only type of belief that it seems to filter out is absolute nonsense like "I have a third leg that I can never see or feel", did I get that about right?
Well that clarifies things quite a bit. I find this definition of evidence surprising, especially in this community, but very interesting. I'll have to sleep on it. Thank you for the references.
You're not addressing my core point though. If the criteria of anticipated experience as you define it is as likely to be satisfied by fallacious beliefs as it is by valid ones, what purpose does it serve?