Knowledge and Proof
I overheard this discussion today (only slightly fictionalized):
Tim: You can do what is right without being able to prove it is right, otherwise 98% of people would not be able to do what is right.
Soc: Do you know you are doing what is right?
Tim: Maybe not, but that doesn’t matter.
Soc: Could you think you are doing what is right but be incorrect about that?
Tim: Sure, that is common.
Soc: So everyone agrees we should do what is right, and yet we often disagree about what is right. How can we know?
Tim: Some things you just know.
Soc: But above you said you might think you know and be incorrect.
Tim: The things you just know are produced by reliable mechanisms, either moral mechanisms or belief forming mechanisms. These are reliable because they are aimed at what is right or true.
Soc: How do you know they are reliable or aimed at what is right and true?
Tim: They were made by God, or evolved (either way), to be such.
Soc: Doesn’t that just push the problem up a level? How do you know that your beliefs about God, or evolution, and properly functioning mechanisms are true? At some point you will have to start giving proof.
Tim: The fact that I need to give proof doesn’t change that what I did was right or what I believed was true.
Soc: But that’s not really the issue is it? The problem is what to do and what to believe. Is what I think is right, or what I think is true, actually right or true?
Tim: You’ll just know.