eris
My practical purposes are with the goal of knowledge acquisiton being to better predict future salient outcomes. Assuming things are just how they appear is not in that service; deducing and inferring some better correlative underlying structure is. Even if that structure turns out to be not real.
Alright, Sentient, I think it is fair to say that we’re at an amicable place. But you realize this only means that, sooner or later, we’ll have this discussion again… 
(Not that it bothers me in the slightest.)
DSeid, I was not aware of that kind of practicality, but of course you are right that assuming everything is as it appears is not conducive to the acquisition of knowledge asyou or I would understand the term. As my strenuous objections in this thread should testify, I do not feel that assuming there is a mind-independent world is practical in that sense, either, however. I believe the whole “external world” hulabaloo is confusing the way we talk about things with the way things are… the very step I feel is not justified, epistemically speaking.
Definitely, and a lot of philosophical inquiries are useless w/r/t any even possible theoretical practical impact. For instance, those that posit entities which may not be able to transmit information to the physical: I eliminate those as not being even so possible as to merit serious discussion.
Now, given this, you can extrapolate some possible scenarios as to why we have this physical configuration, but none of them are even provable in the scientific manner, much less the more rigorous, logical, manner. Whereas once we posit that the physical is real and exists, a lot of science is, obviously, provable in the “giving provisional support to” way.
Were I to find myself anywhere else, no matter the nature or scale of our disagreement, it would sadden me enough that I would pack up and head for it without the slightest delay.
I positively look forward to it. 
:nods:
Next up: why science isn’t an inductive system if it is to be justified, and why falsification is not the panacea it is sometimes presented as… 
Another time, another time.
In that same amicable spirit…
other-wise: I apologise for becoming impatient with you. I found myself playing three separate games of chess, continually having to re-read the thread to make sure who had made which moves, against two grandmasters **Lib[/] and erl and a guy who hadn’t even picked a colour.
I have just realised that you were the one whose questions effectively introduced me to Lib in his thread Love when I first joined this message board. I am grateful for them then, and so should bear them now with equal good grace.
Ask away, friend.
Sentient:
Yes, throughout the thread you’ve made it perfectly clear that you are expressing your opinion; I’ve never intimated that you’ve done otherwise nor have I denied you your opinion. Yet when I made it perfectly clear that in my opinion there is no explanation of awareness that is worthy of the name, you summarily dismissed it as nihilistic (and now cowardly!) and continued to press me to choose a position more to your liking.
You take a hard look around, see two bales of hay, and you choose one. I take a hard look around, see nothing but thin air, then get yelled at by you for not choosing.
Had you restricted your posts to pure opinion, I would not have raised any objections whatsoever. But you have repeatedly claimed that your opinion was “what the evidence suggests beyond all reasonable doubt”. I repeatedly challenged that claim, and I believe I did so directly and non-snarkily.
I’m genuinely sorry this conversation took such a bad turn (and, if you’ll recall, I tried to end it on a civil note). I hope we can have a better one in the future.
Well, I hope my apology goes some way to turning it good again right now.
And yes, that specific point that I thought the evidence suggested “beyond reasonable doubt” was that general anaesthetic made you unconscious. I realise that there is room for some nuance there, which you were perfectly justified in pointing out.
I understand your unwillingness to “take a position” - diving in as recklessly as I do certainly requires its share of emotional investment! But if you want to find yours, I’ll do all I can to help.
Come on in. The water’s lovely!
Yargh.
Always. check. for. cross. posts.
Sentient, thank you for your graciousness: you are a gentleman and a scholar and one helluva good poster.
I try to be sensitive to when a poster is being dog-piled (or in the case of Lib and erl, elephant-piled), and instead of taking that into account here, I just bulldozed ahead and contributed to the morass. I apologize for that.
I’ll be bowing out of this thread now, but I very much look forward to our next convesation…
Drinks and conversation. My house. All of you in this thread. Anytime.
An offer you couldn’t pay me to refuse.