True statements: Philosophy Forums

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Last

True statements

Banno
Old goat

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
Location: Oz

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6301

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:09 PM:	#11
NothingtoSay wrote: You asked what it took for a statement to be true. If you meant 'What is truth?' by that question, then I apologize for repeating you. So does this mean that truth plays a role in knowledge? Any examples of what knowledge is? What more do you think there is to "what is truth?" than what it takes to make a statement true? One only knows what is true. There is snow on Mnt Everest.
Davidson: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimizes agreement. Russel Morris: There's a meaning there, but the meaning there doesn't really mean a thing... Ned: Such is life

NothingtoSay
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 11, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 287

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:09 PM:	#12
J. Random Hacker wrote: I agree. It depends on what you mean by "stop breathing". If you take it to mean that the person in question will never breath again then holding your breath wouldn't matter, as long as you breathe again. Of course, in principle, it's hard to tell when someone will "never" do something again since we can't verify predictions over infinite periods of time. We can't ever establish certainty, only probability. Then we can agree that truths, whatever they may be, can at least be added and grouped, e.g.: "Men breath and hold their breaths." So lets use "Men breath and never hold their breaths for periods of time." Would the fact that men hold their breaths for periods of time break that truth? If not, would you give me an example of a truth and a fact that would break it?

Banno
Old goat

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
Location: Oz

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6301

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:16 PM:	#13
NothingtoSay wrote: So knowing what is true makes a statement true? Of course not. But you can't know something that is not true.
Davidson: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimizes agreement. Russel Morris: There's a meaning there, but the meaning there doesn't really mean a thing... Ned: Such is life

J. Random Hacker
banned

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 11, 2009

Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 479

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:17 PM:	#14
NothingtoSay wrote: So lets use "Men breath and never hold their breaths for periods of time." Would the fact that men hold their breaths for periods of time break that truth? I would say that the argument is unsound because necessarily one of the premises is false. 1. Men breathe. 2. Men never hold their breaths. 3. Men hold their breaths. Both 2 and 3 can't be true. Any argument with a false premise is unsound. We can't say anything about whether or not the conclusion of the argument is true or false.

NothingtoSay
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 11, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 287

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:21 PM:	#15
Banno wrote: What more do you think there is to "what is truth?" than what it takes to make a statement true? One only knows what is true. There is snow on Mnt Everest. I would think that 'what is truth?' searches for all the properties of truth and 'what makes this statement true?' focuses only on what makes the statement true--that 'what is truth?' would be a bigger umbrella. Do we know what truth is? Maybe what makes a statement true would differ from what would make a painting true.

Banno
Old goat

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
Location: Oz

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6301

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:22 PM:	#16
Dead men aren't men? They don't much breath...
Davidson: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimizes agreement. Russel Morris: There's a meaning there, but the meaning there doesn't really mean a thing... Ned: Such is life

Banno
Old goat

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
Location: Oz

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6301

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:28 PM:	#17
NothingtoSay wrote: I would think that 'what is truth?' searches for all the properties of truth and 'what makes this statement true?' focuses only on what makes the statement true--that 'what is truth?' would be a bigger umbrella. Do we know what truth is? Maybe what makes a statement true would differ from what would make a painting true. I don't understand what "what is truth" might mean, beyond "which statements are true?" What makes you think that truth has properties? What could that mean?
Davidson: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimizes agreement. Russel Morris: There's a meaning there, but the meaning there doesn't really mean a thing... Ned: Such is life

NothingtoSay
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 11, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 287

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:28 PM:	#18
J. Random Hacker wrote: I would say that the argument is unsound because necessarily one of the premises is false. 1. Men breathe. 2. Men never hold their breaths. 3. Men hold their breaths. Both 2 and 3 can't be true. Any argument with a false premise is unsound. We can't say anything about whether or not the conclusion of the argument is true or false. What argument? Did we not take "Men breath and never hold their breaths for periods of time" as truth? If men do in fact hold their breaths, would the truth be broken or not?

J. Random Hacker
banned

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 11, 2009

Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 479

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:34 PM:	#19
NothingtoSay wrote: What argument? Did we not take "Men breath and never hold their breaths for periods of time" as truth? If men do in fact hold their breaths, would the truth be broken or not? Sorry, I didn't mean to make things overcomplicated. It's false that men never hold their breaths so "Men breath and never hold their breaths for periods of time" is false because (T ∧ F) = F.

NothingtoSay
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 11, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 287

Posted 04/14/09 - 08:41 PM:	#20
Banno wrote: I don't understand what "what is truth" might mean, beyond "which statements are true?" What makes you think that truth has properties? What could that mean? The problem here is that we don't know what truth is. If what makes a statement true differs from what makes a painting true, then I think whatever we come out of 'What makes a statement true?' would not be very helpful to us in determining what makes a painting true. What do you think? Should we understand what truth is, or just understand what makes a statement true? If the latter, would our understanding of what makes a statement true help us in figuring out what makes a painting or a plant or an idea true? I am not sure. I assume that truth has properties. Characteristics? Rules to being true? I don't think I have an idea, really. What do you think?

Members currently reading this thread: Cheshire
	Download thread as

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Last

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.