Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Epistemology

Let's start with a definition:

What do you know?

I saw about the last ten minutes of Bill Clinton's speech last night at the DNC convention in Philadelphia. Our protagonist had to undertake an epistemological task. His goal was to tell us that everything we've recently heard about Hillary is, well, a lie:
Now, how does this square? How did this square with the things that you heard at the Republican convention? What’s the difference in what I told you and what they said? How do you square it? You can’t. One is real, the other is made up.

You just have to decide. You just have to decide which is which, my fellow Americans.
So how do you decide? Well, you can certainly look at the veracity of the fellow asking the question:


And you can look at the veracity of the person he is vouching for:


I suppose you could believe the Clintons. If you do, I'd suggest another definition is in order:

It's a growth industry in Philadelphia these days
The Clintons have been on the stage for a quarter century. A recently departed moral philosopher explained them well:


4 comments:

R.A. Crankbait said...

From Will Rogers:

"The more you observe politics, the more you have to admit that each party is worse than the other."

"It isn't what we know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so."

"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."

"The only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."

"I tell you, folks, all politics is applesauce."

R.A. Crankbait said...

Oops, wrong thread.

Bike Bubba said...

Some how this comes to mind:

Officer Opie, I cannot tell a lie. I put that envelope under that garbage.

R.A. Crankbait said...

Littering...and creating a public nuisance.