To our fellow muricans

[Xant]

well, it would be useful to know how you define truth for yourself?

as I'd like to understand it, truth is a word and words are never the worldly things they point to. the map is not the territory.
surely there are some more accurate descriptions and models of the worldly things, but there is no such thing as truth, or ultimate facts, when you're communicating in everyday language. every phrase is subject to interpretation, therefore you cannot transmit reality, not even into your own brain, which thinks in language.

surely you'd counter that we then have to look for those more accurate descriptions with all the proof we can get. yes, sure, but I'd rather not look for the truth. "knowing stuff" is not linear.

So 2+2 is not 4? That is not true?

[zagibu]

It is true, but it is not real, and thus not interesting. Are 2 potatoes plus 2 potatoes really 4 potatoes? Yes, but it doesn't matter, because only morons count single potatoes. And even when you weigh them, you have to use real scales, which might be tampered with or simply badly calibrated, which means your 4 kg of potatoes might actually not be 4 kg. So you see, in reality, it is never as easy as it is in the world of concepts.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

So 2+2 is not 4? That is not true?

How do you know 2 is actually 2, maybe 2 is actually 3 in disguise...

[Xant]

It is true, but it is not real, and thus not interesting. Are 2 potatoes plus 2 potatoes really 4 potatoes? Yes, but it doesn't matter, because only morons count single potatoes. And even when you weigh them, you have to use real scales, which might be tampered with or simply badly calibrated, which means your 4 kg of potatoes might actually not be 4 kg. So you see, in reality, it is never as easy as it is in the world of concepts.

Of course it gets harder, 2+2=4 is the very simplest truth there is. But just because it gets more difficult doesn't mean the truth does not exist.

How do you know 2 is actually 2, maybe 2 is actually 3 in disguise...

I hope you're joking.

[Lt_Anders]

Of course it gets harder, 2+2=4 is the very simplest truth there is. But just because it gets more difficult doesn't mean the truth does not exist.
I hope you're joking.

Go read Descartes. In some of his treatises(?) he specifically mentions how numbers could be "wrong." Though, he uses it in the reference to define a greater mandate(IE GOD), his points are interesting.

Also, what happened to Syria discussion? Over here, media making it look like Mr. President, had this whole plan concocted from the start, rather than a on the fly thing. Damn politiks. Can't do SHIT right.

[Xant]

Go read Descartes. In some of his treatises(?) he specifically mentions how numbers could be "wrong." Though, he uses it in the reference to define a greater mandate(IE GOD), his points are interesting.

Why would I read a 17th century philosopher who knew nothing about modern cognitive sciences?

[Clockworkkiller]

We can still save this! Start posting pics of boobs NOW!

[Xant]

"The sentence 'snow is white' is true if and only if snow is white."
        —Alfred Tarski
"To say of what is, that it is, or of what is not, that it is not, is true."
        —Aristotle, Metaphysics IV

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

"The sentence 'snow is white' is true if and only if snow is white."
        —Alfred Tarski
"To say of what is, that it is, or of what is not, that it is not, is true."
        —Aristotle, Metaphysics IV

Nice supporting the argument against you.

[Xant]

Nice supporting the argument against you.

It went that much over your head?

[Kajia]

Why would I read a 17th century philosopher who knew nothing about modern cognitive sciences?

"To say of what is, that it is, or of what is not, that it is not, is true."
        —Aristotle, Metaphysics IV

then why would you cite Aristotle?

I respect Aristotle, mind you, but much of his work is out-dated. it never leaves the world of language and guesswork (hence, "metaphysics").

2+2=4 is true in the abstract language of mathematics, but it's as that not useful in our world, as seen in the example of 2 potatoes + 2 potatoes, as no two potatoes are the same. similarly, when you take other systems, like binary, you will notice how the simple truth of 2+2 is not anymore 4, but something different, it has to be translated.
the problem lies in the abstraction, when properties are being stripped away. the extreme case of the number "2" has no relation to any substantial referent in the physical world at all. it is just symbols and language to make things fit in our heads. but not the truth. (something "being true" and "the truth" should not be confused as you will know)
or even differently phrased: if there is a truth (not the truth) it would lie on a non-verbal level.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


read up on General Semantics, I recommend:

Drive Yourself Sane
Language in Thought and Action
Tyranny of Words



in that sense (back to topic), sanity is consciousness of abstraction. when we mention Syria and bombing it, do we talk about the geographic Syria (land)? the anthropology of Syria (culture)? the Syrian people? their government? when I say Syrian people, do I mean the people living there? what about their lifestock? houses? family graves? sacred sites? what about the people just staying there? do I think of the refugees in other countries aswell? we should ask ourselves that when we speak and think.

[Xant]

then why would you cite Aristotle?

Because he is right? I don't judge sentences as true or false based on the reputation or general authority of the author, I judge them based on what they say.

in that sense (back to topic), sanity is consciousness of abstraction. when we mention Syria and bombing it, do we talk about the geographic Syria (land)? the anthropology of Syria (culture)? the Syrian people? their government? when I say Syrian people, do I mean the people living there? what about their lifestock? houses? family graves? sacred sites? what about the people just staying there? do I think of the refugees in other countries aswell? we should ask ourselves that when we speak and think.

When people talk about bombing Syria, they talk about bombing Syria. All of those things fall under that umbrella word. And that's obvious. Nobody is talking about bombing family graves to save the civilians from getting sarin'd to death. Needlessly complicating things doesn't make you Deep.

[zagibu]

You never leave the comfortable world of concepts, do you? In the real world, there are no truths, only observations.

[Swaggart]

in that sense (back to topic), sanity is consciousness of abstraction. when we mention Syria and bombing it, do we talk about the geographic Syria (land)? the anthropology of Syria (culture)? the Syrian people? their government? when I say Syrian people, do I mean the people living there? what about their lifestock? houses? family graves? sacred sites? what about the people just staying there? do I think of the refugees in other countries aswell? we should ask ourselves that when we speak and think.

This is exactly why I never bothered to even consider studying philosophy. Sounds like people wasting time thinking about bullshit 0.005% of the population cares about. If I say Syrian people, why would anyone think of livestock? Last time I checked people is a word assigned to humans not animals. Anyone questioning that definition of people is a complete fucking tool.

The thing about philosophers is that their work has some relevance in the world they currently inhabit. A couple of generations later and their work is either irrelevant or outdated.

[Armpit_Sweat]

This is exactly why I never bothered to even consider studying philosophy. Sounds like people wasting time thinking about bullshit 0.005% of the population cares about. If I say Syrian people, why would anyone think of livestock? Last time I checked people is a word assigned to humans not animals. Anyone questioning that definition of people is a complete fucking tool.

The thing about philosophers is that their work has some relevance in the world they currently inhabit. A couple of generations later and their work is either irrelevant or outdated.

Everything else is getting outdated even sooner. If you read a 2500 year old works of Plato, and do not find any wisdom i them, it is you, who are going to be "a complete fucking tool".

“Wise men speak because they have something to say; fools because they have to say something.”

As for Syria, I don't really want to share my opinions, as they will probably be unpopular - listen to BBC world radio, they have a good coverage, and they seem to let both sides of Syrian civil war speak.