Do you know what time it is ?

 

Claire asks Tiffany "Do know what time it is?"

 

Tiffany looks around at an old-fashioned clock sitting on the sideboard which shows that the time is 6.56. 

"Yeah, it is four minutes to 7," says Tiffany.

  

Following Tiffany's glance, Claire says, "Oh, that clock doesn't work. It always shows 6.56. So you are mistaken."

 

Tiffany looks at her mobile phone and says "Really? I think you are mistaken as my phone confirms that it is 6.56 at the moment."

 

(Adapted from Bertrand Russell, Human Knowledge: Its scope and limits, 1948)

QUESTIONS

 

Does Tiffany have a legitimate claim to "knowing" the time after viewing the stopped clock? 

 

If the time was 6.56, and Tiffany believed it was, and justified that belief by reading the clock, does she have knowledge? 

 

The notion that knowledge is 'justified, true belief' suggests that she does. Perhaps we ought to change the definition of knowledge? How would you change the definition?

 

ADDITIONAL SOURCES

https://philosphere.blog/2018/03/28/russell-and-the-stopped-clock/ 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettier_problem 

What is truth?

1. The Truth is... a riddle

What is something that humans seek, and don't know it when they see it?

The answer is the truth!

(C.f. Jacobellis v Ohio 1964 in which the judge declined to define hard-core pornography, but famously said "I know it when I see it".)

2. The Truth is... not known

 

The conundrum of seeking truth but not knowing it when we see it is embedded in the idea of knowledge as justified true belief. 

It is said that we know something to be true if 

    (a) we believe it to be true, 

    (b) we have justification for our belief, and 

    (c) it is true.

We can build towards knowledge 

with beliefs and justifications, 

but we fail unless it's true.

And how do we "know" if it's true? 

 

Whether something is true is... unknown. 

Frustrating! 

What is truth?

La Vérité sortant du puits armée de son martinet pour châtier l'humanité

Jean-Léon Gérôme (1896)

   

• The truth is very often not knowable
      
• The truth is that many beliefs are formed without knowledge
     
• The truth is that people claiming to know the truth are generally deluded
     
• The truth is that a fiction can be powerful (think placebo, nocebo, etc.)
     
• The truth is that truth may not be a supreme virtue
     
• The truth is that what works, practical wisdom, may be all that matters

Who holds the power in marketing: the marketer or the customers?

We often like to 'blame'  marketers for pushing people to buy stuff that they do not need. 

On the other hand, customers often demand, and go to great lengths to source stuff which does very little. 

Think of things like rhino horn, homeopathy, anti-aging cosmetics, and status-related items. These items often fail to meet the wants of the customer to a greater or lesser degree. But customers keep on demanding them.

So does marketing succeed because of the marketing efforts or the customer desires?  And if it fails, is it the marketer or the customer who is to blame?

What do you think?

Consider resveratrol, a naturally occurring molecule found in red wine.  Here's my take on the interplay of marketers and customers in the marketing of resveratrol.

(Paste the following link into your browser if the above hyperlink does not work: https://theconversation.com/resveratrol-in-a-red-wine-sauce-fountain-of-youth-or-snake-oil-12743)