Question

It seems a characteristic of humans to be convinced about a matter in the absence of overwhelming evidence, even where logic suggests that are other valid alternative positions to take. We see this in many areas of philosophy in which rival schools of thought promote mutually incompatible ideas, and in science, for example, where there are ardent supporters of rival interpretations of quantum theory and the nature of consciousness. Religion is perhaps the most extreme example, while famously, of course, a dozen economists will hold at least thirteen conflicting beliefs. Are there any philosophers who are particularly known for studying that tendency of humans to hold convictions in the absence of categoric proof?

Answer 1

In philosophy, the tendency of humans to hold convictions in the absence of categoric proof is studied in the field of epistemology. Ludwig Wittgenstein is one philosopher known for exploring this topic, particularly in relation to language and meaning.

Step-by-step explanation:

In philosophy, there are philosophers who study the tendency of humans to hold convictions in the absence of categoric proof. This area of study is often referred to as epistemology, which is the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of knowledge and belief. One famous philosopher who explored this topic is Ludwig Wittgenstein, particularly in his work on language and meaning.

Wittgenstein argued that language is a form of social practice and that meaning is determined by its use within a particular linguistic community. He believed that many philosophical problems arise from misunderstandings about the nature of language and that by examining language carefully, we can gain a clearer understanding of our own beliefs and the beliefs of others.

Overall, philosophers in the field of epistemology are interested in how we acquire knowledge, how we justify our beliefs, and why we are sometimes convinced about matters in the absence of overwhelming evidence. They aim to critically examine our cognitive processes and challenge us to think more rigorously and objectively about our convictions.