Alright, stick with me here, this is going to get lengthy.
How do you interpret what is real, and what isn't? What should be, and what shouldn't? Is it by sight, a sense we most rely on even beyond what we are aware of? Is it touch, to disprove an illusion? Is it the way we hear things around us, questioning every unfamiliar wave? Let me deliberate even more.
How can you trust these senses, which are all wired into our brain. We've all known the idea that nothing around us is real, but merely an illusion. Even the way we perceive time is completely psychologically-dependent if we are not given astrology to watch the sun go by, or nature to tell us the seasons. The obsession in finding uniformity is very human in nature, so is it not possible that these things that we measure are too, part of human nature?
For instance, the theory of infinite regression. In infinite regression, it claims that for something to be true, it must be completely proven from every aspect, and each piece of evidence to prove this true must also be proven, which, in essence, means there will never be an end. For example, we know that water boils at 100 degrees Celsius, and freezes at 0 degrees Celsius, but we cannot question the existence of temperature beyond the motion of particles and energy, it is simply as futile as finding a reason for life. A commonly asked question, simply answered with 'because we do.'
Even committing these ideas to human nature as evidence, it would be submitted to it's own devices and disproved, creating a psychological paradox in the eyes of obsession. The fact that this very idea is a paradox also supports this theory, but in the mind of society, proves that this is nonsense. So here we have an impasse with no solution until the end of infinity is discovered, which is by definition, impossible.
How do you see the world, given this information? Do you continue to accept everything arbitrarily without a shred of regret, do you consider this a unique tidbit of knowledge to store for deep thought and live on your life, or do you tear down the confining walls of the very basis of our security, knowledge?
Persuasion is impossible through paradox, and so I assume you will regard this as the ramblings of a madman that could never be refuted, but I hope you do just this, as then you may realize how much you rely on the foundation that society has laid out for us. Care to elaborate or offer personal opinions on the matter?
I just use my senses and what's left of my head. I'm k.
When I look up at the sky and see the sun at different parts of the day. I could think, it looks like it's revolving around the Earth. But lots of books say the Earth revolves around the Sun. Eh? IDK, I can't prove either way, but in this case, do I believe my books or the things on my face? The books, why? It just seems to make sense. But why would the books make more sense than what I'm directly percieving? IDK, probably because that's what I've been led to believe at a young age.
So if I were asked what my empirical standpoint is, I'd say it's skeptic first then pragmatic second.
Doubt is nice and all that. But doubt shouldn't be a hampering factor in life, really. Even if I don't know if things are true, that doesn't stop me from acting and thinking like they are true under discretion. I don't regret thinking what I think.
In the studies of logic there are statements that have no proof, yet proofs are built from them. They're called axioms. Just statements that logicians assume to be true in some field of logic. And they're quite alryte. This one guy named Hilbert once asked to prove the axioms of arithmetic are true. But then this other guy named Gödel said, "Yo, no proof of its consistency can be carried out within arithmetic itself." And he said this with a complete proof to back it up. Maybe without the "Yo" but I'm sure they were cool.
Personally, when I'm taken over by doubts, I think of an axiom to fix it. Axioms as general as possible - but as reliable as I can possibly imagine. I collect axioms as I walk through life, so to speak. But I try to operate with as few of these are possible. They are assumptions, afterall.
If we did not look at things logically, society and our frameworks would break down, although the way our country is going...I say we go back to Pioneer days, when everyone left everyone else alone....all I need is a library and I am good....self-discovery should be the new thing, I think....we'd be better off....
I personally feel like I look at the world from afar, and I really come down to earth when I can see and understand the set rules. Something on a scale such as society is hard to grasp from each angle, so I take a step back and watch it happen. Simply passing by in life is it's own sort of self-discovery. The world has already been shaped for us, and we are given a path with limited choices as a result, but as long as you keep moving forward, the world is still new to us. The reason we see society as this obstacle to exploring life is because we fear the consequences for each action, so simply taking a different angle to look at it provides you with new insight.