23. If I don’t know whether someone has two
hands (say whether they have been amputated or not) I shall believe his
assurance that he has two hands, if he is trustworthy. And if he says he knows
it, that can only signify to me that he has been able to make sure, and hence
that his arms are e.g. not still concealed by coverings and bandages, etc. etc.
My believing the trustworthy man stems from my admitting that it is possible
for him to make sure. But someone who says that perhaps there are no physical
objects makes no such admissions.
someone’s assurance – is really their rhetoric
–
and saying someone is ‘trustworthy’ – is
saying you believe their rhetoric –
you’ve fallen in
if he says he knows it – that is a claim to an authority –
which if it means anything more than his authorship –
is false and deceptive –
is rhetoric
and ‘making sure’ – is what?
reasserting his claim – in some other terms –
in short – rhetoric
all anyone one needs to do is state their
case –
make their statement –
and leave it at that
loading it up with assurances – claims to
knowledge etc-
is unnecessary and misleading
their
proposition is like any other –
uncertain
you can run with it – or not
and whatever reason you have for your
assent or dissent –
that too –
will be open to question –
open to doubt
someone who says perhaps there are no physical objects –
is someone who calls into question – the
description ‘physical object’ –
and yes –
if you are questioning a description – in this case – a world view –
you will not be engaged in –
rhetoric
