Support our online development, and advance our onground research initiatives in free market economics, as we seek to showcase the brightest Next-Gen minds.
THE ME-P DISCLAIMER: Posts, comments and opinions do not necessarily represent iMBA, Inc., but become our property after submission. Copyright © 2006 to-date. iMBA, Inc allows colleges, universities, medical and financial professionals and related clinics, hospitals and non-profit healthcare organizations to distribute our proprietary essays, photos, videos, audios and other documents; etc. However, please review copyright and usage information for each individual asset before submission to us, and/or placement on your publication or web site. Attestation references, citations and/or back-links are required. All other assets are property of the individual copyright holder.
Epistemic Ambivalence!
CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549
[By staff reporters]
Epistemic Ambivalence is almost the opposite idea of what ambivalence means because to be epistemic means you know, you are sure.
Epistemic ambivalence is when you may know the truth of a situation but cannot say which truth it is, because there is more than one option.
***
***
***
MORE: Schrödinger’s cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935. It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects. The scenario presents a hypothetical cat that may be simultaneously both alive and dead, a state known as a quantum superposition, as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics. Schrödinger coined the term Verschränkung (entanglement) in the course of developing the thought experiment.
***
Assessment: Your thoughts are appreciated.
***
***
Invite Dr. Marcinko
***
Share this:
Filed under: Ethics, Marcinko Associates, Touring with Marcinko, Videos | Tagged: Epistemic ambivalence, knowledge, Marcinko, paradox |
The Leading Business Education Network for Doctors, Financial Advisors and Health Industry Consultants 
LikeLike
Münchhausen Trilemma
In epistemology, the Münchhausen Trilemma is a thought experiment intended to demonstrate the theoretical impossibility of proving any truth, even in the fields of logic and mathematics, without appealing to accepted assumptions. If it is asked how any given proposition is known to be true, proof may be provided. Yet that same question can be asked of the proof, and any subsequent proof. The Münchhausen trilemma is that there are only three ways of completing a proof:
1-The circular argument, in which the proof of some proposition presupposes the truth of that very proposition
2-The regressive argument, in which each proof requires a further proof, ad infinitum
3-The dogmatic argument, which rests on accepted precepts which are merely asserted rather than defended
The trilemma, then, is the decision among the three equally unsatisfying options. Karl Popper’s suggestion was to accept the trilemma as unsolvable and work with knowledge by way of conjecture and criticism.
Karl
LikeLike