In Al Gores an inconvienant truth he uses knowledge to persuade the audiance that global warming is a real phenomenon that is affecting our planet and causing damage. I am not a sophist to debate issues without the belief that I may have some general information upon the subject or have an indepth insight upon it. This knowledge is supposed to be truth. I tell you there is only one truth in this world. Cogito Ergo Sum. For there to be truth there must be knowledge and this has no knowledge.
S knows that P IFF
P is true,
S believes that P, and
S is justified in believing that P.
by the way this is an irrelevent first post to test out the colors.
For being a first post it was a good one. I agree that in Inconvenient truth there was a lot of facts and stories and things from other people, but that is the issue. What knowledge does he truly posses about the subject? He is in essence a paid spokes person who is delivering a convincing speech on global warming. Now that is not to say he does not believe that global warming is happening but as a listener it is imperative that you know part of why he is doing this is because he is paid. He is good at convincing global warming is happening because he is being paid to be convincing and those who are paying him know that he is convincing that is why they hired him.
ReplyDeleteEven if he is being paid, the instances and facts he portrays to the audience really is enlightening. Just stop and think about the strange things our weather has been doing the last decade. Maybe there is truth that alot of the information is hyph and misguiding, but the overall picture of how much things are changing states something is happening and we should listen. If we are convinced this global warming is not true, maybe we should do our own investigating into why the environment is changing so drastically.
ReplyDelete