True statements: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Metaphysics and Epistemology » True statements » True statements

Page: First 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Last

True statements

et cetera
thinks too much at work

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 31, 2008

Total Topics: 20
Total Posts: 319

Posted 04/26/09 - 03:05 PM:	#331
Truth is a shallow concept.
Any necessary truth, whether a priori or a posteriori, could not have turned out otherwise. -- Saul Kripke Meaning is what essence becomes when it is divorced from the object of reference and wedded to the word. -- Quine A possible world is given by the descriptive conditions we associate with it - Kripke

Banno
Old goat

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

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6293

Posted 04/26/09 - 03:13 PM:	#332
et cetera wrote: Actually this is deflationary. A formal correspondence thesis would be: "The cat is on the mat" is true iff it corresponds to the fact that the cat is on the mat. That is what I tried to say, though not as clearly...
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 04/26/09 - 03:34 PM:	#333
et cetera wrote: Actually this is deflationary. A formal correspondence thesis would be: "The cat is on the mat" is true iff it corresponds to the fact that the cat is on the mat. No, that's just more verbose. It means the exact same thing. I am happy with either version.

Banno
Old goat

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

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6293

Posted 04/26/09 - 03:38 PM:	#334
J. Random Hacker wrote: No, that's just more verbose. It means the exact same thing. I am happy with either version. Then you are happy with ambiguity.
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 04/26/09 - 04:08 PM:	#335
Banno wrote: Then you are happy with ambiguity. It's not ambiguous to me.

Banno
Old goat

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

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6293

Posted 04/26/09 - 04:19 PM:	#336
J. Random Hacker wrote: It's not ambiguous to me.
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

aletheist
Professor

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Olathe, KS

Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 620

Posted 04/26/09 - 05:50 PM:	#337
Banno wrote: But notice that correspondence and coherence come in a the stage of justification. They are not theories of truth, but theories of knowledge. Neither provide the meaning of truth; the best they can do it tell us how we decide if a statement is true or not. I disagree with this analysis, at least with respect to correspondence. As I have said before, my understanding and usage has always been that correspondence defines what it means for a proposition to be true, and has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is justified. "The cat is on the mat" is true iff the cat is on the mat--the proposition corresponds to an actual state of affairs. Anyone who says otherwise is defining the word "true" in a way that deviates significantly from its common, ordinary, everyday usage. "The cat is on the mat" is justified iff I have good reasons for believing that the cat is on the mat--perhaps I can see it there myself, or someone else whom I trust has told me that it is there, or the cat detector attached to the mat currently indicates "Yes". Different people will have different criteria for evaluating evidence and reaching a judgment as to whether the cat is, in fact, on the mat; i.e., whether they believe the proposition to be true. I agree that the distinction between truth and justification is important, because it is consistent with the general fallibility of human knowledge of the concrete world. Although greater justification of a particular belief increases my confidence that it is true, there is always the possibility that it may turn out to be false after all; maybe new evidence will turn up. How we determine (to the best of our ability) whether a proposition is (likely) true--i.e., whether it really does correspond to the facts--is where theories of knowledge come into play. Banno wrote: And in the case of correspondence, we would have beliefs that correspond to the facts - whatever that means. Beliefs that correspond to the facts are true beliefs; they may or may not be justified. Banno wrote: But if truth is seen as independent of justification, as it should be, then we maintain the three legs. Correspondence does this, as I have outlined.
"Be attentive, Be intelligent, Be reasonable, Be responsible." - Bernard Lonergan (1904-1984)

dackowns
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2009

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 14

Posted 04/29/09 - 05:29 AM:	#338
You must understand that we can discredit everything because it all leads to more and more questions which is why knowledge and certainty do not exsist.

sensabile
Hungry Mogwai

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Sep 23, 2003
Location: Southern England

Total Topics: 132
Total Posts: 4312

Posted 04/29/09 - 07:11 AM:	#339
dackowns wrote: You must understand that we can discredit everything because it all leads to more and more questions which is why knowledge and certainty do not exsist. I am certain that you have incorrectly spelt "exist". I know this because according to the dictionary (the authority in this area) it is spelled "exist". Questions?
For the winner there was a big three-legged cauldron to stand over a fire - it was worth a dozen oxen by the Greek's reckoning - and for the loser he brought forward a woman thoroughly trained in domestic work whom they valued at four oxen. -Homer's The Illiad Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? -Mark 9:50

boagie
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 20, 2007
Location: canada

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 96

Posted 04/29/09 - 11:40 AM:	#340
A fact is truth if it is found to be so through your own biology, all meaning, all evaluations are biologically determined, what others say is truth, is hear say.
It is a dreamy moving not quite thing, only the illusion is the grasp of the ring.

Page: First 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Last

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