Home | Community | Message Board

Cannabis Seeds UK
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Truth constantly changing
    #6776711 - 04/11/07 09:46 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Let's assume that in the future, human kind will come up with some sort of medicine, treatment, a new invention which will be able to keep us alive for let's say a few centuries.
Now this thing, this new prolonged life will sure take the individual to a next level of everything, very strong achievements and realization about the nature of things and bigger truths.
Knowing that the world we're living in is constantly changing faster and faster, in time some truths will become crap seen and proved as being invalid. It already happened in the past, more then a lot, it does now even more in such a manner that we get to be witnesses to these changes within our lifetime and even from decade to decade, and if it's going to keep up that way which I'm almost sure it will, these changes will occur even from month to month.
So I found myself asking, where would all that new phenomenon bring the concept of philosophy and what what would be the view for a future human notion of truth in all that?


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6776761 - 04/11/07 10:04 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

I think it's a very bad idea. Most humans would continue their selfish and greedy ways and things will get much worse. You know that with our population explosion only the rich will have access to eternal youth and they are usually very emotionally bankrupt humans (like most others). We have all the spirituality and phylosophy we need right now to be happy. We just have to do the work of using it.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleCracka_X
Spiritual Dirt Worshipper
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/25/03
Posts: 8,808
Loc: Swamp
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6776767 - 04/11/07 10:06 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

knowledge is only so limited as to 'now'. some people believe cancer is worse now than it hasbeen ever and that's ridiculous, becuase now we're actually documenting cancer more effeciently and health care is able to scren more than just those who had top dollar. Everything with change in the world has always been going on. We're here today because we've survived generations upon generations of people surviving. It's funny to think that our ancestors literally roughed it compared to us making posts on a forum catered to growing fungus. Who'd a thought this would be the way it is now? I'm sure those have dreamed. But back to the question, where would the new phenomena bring philosophy and human notion of truth for the future....

I believe we try to attain the basics. We work hard so later won't have to work so hard and be sustained. We need this balance. Somewhere along the line, humanity has come to a point where it sustains itself to supposedly constant progress. So much is being taken care for that the balance is out of place. I say this based on my experiences in life and with all that is given to me I push/give away and want to be basic once more. Energy is the accomodations/conveniences in life and while I need a certain amount for equilibrium, I feel that many people live their lives as an extreme endergonic reaction with too much energy(accomodations) while there's those in Afric that live highly exergonic constantly using the traces of energy given. I want equilibrium, but some rich CEO wants a copious amount so we're lost in translation there. blah, money=evil doesn't mean I don't need it but it sure does cause a lot of bullshit. I hope I was on track with what you were getting at.


--------------------
The best way to live
is to be like water
For water benefits all things
and goes against none of them
It provides for all people
and even cleanses those places
a man is loath to go
In this way it is just like Tao        ~Daodejing


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: Icelander]
    #6776786 - 04/11/07 10:12 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

That does not have anything to do with the topic.
I was taking purely hypothetically and from a philosophical point of view.
I was arguing about the notion of the truth.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: Cracka_X]
    #6776799 - 04/11/07 10:16 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Cracka_X said:
knowledge is only so limited as to 'now'.  some people believe cancer is worse now than it hasbeen ever and that's ridiculous, becuase now we're actually documenting cancer more effeciently and health care is able to scren more than just those who had top dollar.  Everything with change in the world has always been going on.  We're here today because we've survived generations upon generations of people surviving. It's funny to think that our ancestors literally roughed it compared to us making posts on a forum catered to growing fungus.  Who'd a thought this would be the way it is now?  I'm sure those have dreamed.  But back to the question, where would the new phenomena bring philosophy and human notion of truth for the future.... 

I believe we try to attain the basics. We work hard so later won't have to work so hard and be sustained.  We need this balance.  Somewhere along the line, humanity has come to a point where it sustains itself to supposedly constant progress.  So much is being taken care for that the balance is out of place.  I say this based on my experiences in life and with all that is given to me I push/give away and want to be basic once more.  Energy is the accomodations/conveniences in life and while I need a certain amount for equilibrium, I feel that many people live their lives as an extreme endergonic reaction with too much energy(accomodations) while there's those in Afric that live highly exergonic constantly using the traces of energy given.  I want equilibrium, but some rich CEO wants a copious amount so we're lost in translation there.  blah, money=evil  doesn't mean I don't need it but it sure does cause a lot of bullshit.  I hope I was on track with what you were getting at.





I like this point of view :thumbup:
Other opinions?


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6776896 - 04/11/07 10:45 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
That does not have anything to do with the topic.
I was taking purely hypothetically and from a philosophical point of view.
I was arguing about the notion of the truth.




As I said We have all the spirituality and philosophy we need right now to be happy. We just have to do the work of using it.

And I would add that we will discover nothing new about truth or philosophy.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC


Edited by Icelander (04/11/07 10:46 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: Icelander]
    #6776947 - 04/11/07 11:04 PM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Icelander said:
Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
That does not have anything to do with the topic.
I was taking purely hypothetically and from a philosophical point of view.
I was arguing about the notion of the truth.




As I said We have all the spirituality and philosophy we need right now to be happy. We just have to do the work of using it.

And I would add that we will discover nothing new about truth or philosophy.




I think that, if we really take a close and lucid look at these matters, everything make or could make a combination to knowledge.
i.e.: computers would never "understand" us, our actions, our feelings, our unpredictability, in a word our "humanity", yet they come in great help to us while our sensitivity could never be replaced by logic.
Humans ARE and always HAVE BEEN driven by ambition, and I suspect that it's going to be there in the future.
To conclude all that, I'd say that wisdom and knowledge are different from each other but go so well hand in hand.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleLakefingers

Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Loc: mumuland
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6781735 - 04/13/07 04:09 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
...in time some truths will become crap seen and proved as being invalid. ...




Assuming that our idea of truth remains the same (that truth doesn't come to envelope
this idea, or take another path away from the Anglo-American idea of truth that you
propose). Yes, some things will be seen as "crap"...perhaps even your understanding of
"truth", which seems to be blurred with "fact". In other words, there is nothing
stable or universal in the idea of truth, so why should it suddenly remain the same for "then"?

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
So I found myself asking, where would all that new phenomenon bring the concept of philosophy and what what would be the view for a future human notion of truth in all that?




As I suggested above I think you should explore "truth" in its historical context.
This is an old philosophical discussion and there is a lot of literature on it.
Martin Heidegger's The Essence of Truth has been an influential book,
but it's probably too difficult to get into if you haven't dedicated a few years to
studying philosophy.

Also, After Philosophy: End or Transformation? edited by Baynes, Bohman
and McCarthy, is a popular anthology that takes up the same questions you
ask. Be prepared though, the answers will be difficult and they will change the way
you formulate your questions. This book is a collection of some of the 20th Century's
most influential philosophers who discuss the future of truth and philosophy.



There's been a lot of talk about truth S&P lately and I think much of the discussion
could be improved with a little overview of the history of this strange idea "truth".
I might make a short presentation of "truth" in the philosophical tradition...could be
a sticky?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleLakefingers

Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Loc: mumuland
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6781739 - 04/13/07 04:12 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
Quote:

Cracka_X said:
knowledge is only so limited as to 'now'.  some people believe cancer is worse now than it hasbeen ever and that's ridiculous, becuase now we're actually documenting cancer more effeciently and health care is able to scren more than just those who had top dollar.  Everything with change in the world has always been going on.  We're here today because we've survived generations upon generations of people surviving. It's funny to think that our ancestors literally roughed it compared to us making posts on a forum catered to growing fungus.  Who'd a thought this would be the way it is now?  I'm sure those have dreamed.  But back to the question, where would the new phenomena bring philosophy and human notion of truth for the future.... 

I believe we try to attain the basics. We work hard so later won't have to work so hard and be sustained.  We need this balance.  Somewhere along the line, humanity has come to a point where it sustains itself to supposedly constant progress.  So much is being taken care for that the balance is out of place.  I say this based on my experiences in life and with all that is given to me I push/give away and want to be basic once more.  Energy is the accomodations/conveniences in life and while I need a certain amount for equilibrium, I feel that many people live their lives as an extreme endergonic reaction with too much energy(accomodations) while there's those in Afric that live highly exergonic constantly using the traces of energy given.  I want equilibrium, but some rich CEO wants a copious amount so we're lost in translation there.  blah, money=evil  doesn't mean I don't need it but it sure does cause a lot of bullshit.  I hope I was on track with what you were getting at.





I like this point of view :thumbup:
Other opinions?




My opinion is that its connection to philosophy and truth are vague. It invokes
a certain pre-understanding of philosophy and truth and goes from there, instead of
questioning them, which I think is necessary when we discuss "the notion of truth"
and philosophy. What is truth and what is philosophy?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: Lakefingers]
    #6782456 - 04/13/07 11:48 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Yes, some things will be seen as "crap"...perhaps even your understanding of
"truth", which seems to be blurred with "fact".




Please explain to me that statement.
I was talking about a philosophical truth which bases on fact so how can it be blurred by it?

Quote:


As I suggested above I think you should explore "truth" in its historical context.
This is an old philosophical discussion and there is a lot of literature on it.
Martin Heidegger's The Essence of Truth has been an influential book,
but it's probably too difficult to get into if you haven't dedicated a few years to
studying philosophy.

Also, After Philosophy: End or Transformation? edited by Baynes, Bohman
and McCarthy, is a popular anthology that takes up the same questions you
ask. Be prepared though, the answers will be difficult and they will change the way
you formulate your questions. This book is a collection of some of the 20th Century's
most influential philosophers who discuss the future of truth and philosophy.




You're the one who's arguing about, so you're the one who must come with a presentation of their ideas.
Therefore, you have the duty to explain yourself.


Quote:

My opinion is that its connection to philosophy and truth are vague. It invokes
a certain pre-understanding of philosophy and truth and goes from there, instead of
questioning them, which I think is necessary when we discuss "the notion of truth"
and philosophy. What is truth and what is philosophy?





Please explain this too.
Anyways, I think I have a slight idea on what you're referring to... you view on truth... which seems to be a Universal one and then yes,it's the same.
However, the logic truth and the Universal truth must have different approaches... meaning the you can't apply your rationality to the the incommensurable or the irrationality to reason.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Edited by MushroomTrip (04/13/07 01:51 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleLakefingers

Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Loc: mumuland
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6785740 - 04/14/07 04:39 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
Quote:

Yes, some things will be seen as "crap"...perhaps even your understanding of
"truth", which seems to be blurred with "fact".




Please explain to me that statement.
I was talking about a philosophical truth which bases on fact so how can it be blurred by it?




Explain how truth is based on fact.

I'll be analytical here. Let's call your idea of truth, which the thread moves out from,
A. I do not know exactly what A means, but I do know from what you've written that
you assume A is stable and has something to do with facticity. I also know that you imply
this truth is common to us all, because you the way you talk about "it" and because it as a
whole is talked about in the singular.

A different theory truth B could encompass A by taking it into account, but providing a
larger scheme for what is called truth.

Another theory of truth C would not resemble A or B, except
that it would be called a theory of truth.

All other possible theories of truth we'll call AO.

Thus I wrote: Assuming that A remains the same and B doesn't come along and
explain not only A but things A can't explain, and as long as C doesn't become generally accepted, then
A will change. BUT this change is not change into another theory such as
B, C or AO, but only change relative to itself. That is, facts
will change, but the grounds of truth won't.

So, why don't you take consideration to the ontological change of the theory of truth, such
as B, C or AO, instead of assuming it (truth) will always
be a neat and stable basis of A.
Continuing I said: Yes, some things will be seen as "crap"...perhaps even A if
truth change too much. Also A seems to be blurred with "fact" ("...some
truths will become crap seen and proved as being invalid. It already happened in the past,
more then a lot, it does now even more in such a manner that we get to be witnesses to these
changes within our lifetime and even from decade to decade, and if it's going to keep up that
way which I'm almost sure it will, these changes will occur even from month to month").


Quote:


Quote:


As I suggested above I think you should explore "truth" in its historical context.
This is an old philosophical discussion and there is a lot of literature on it.
Martin Heidegger's The Essence of Truth has been an influential book,
but it's probably too difficult to get into if you haven't dedicated a few years to
studying philosophy.

Also, After Philosophy: End or Transformation? edited by Baynes, Bohman
and McCarthy, is a popular anthology that takes up the same questions you
ask. Be prepared though, the answers will be difficult and they will change the way
you formulate your questions. This book is a collection of some of the 20th Century's
most influential philosophers who discuss the future of truth and philosophy.




You're the one who's arguing about, so you're the one who must come with a presentation of their ideas.
Therefore, you have the duty to explain yourself.





Well, I thought a bit of reading could help you along the way. What is one to think "freely" about
if one doesn't access more of what there is to think? Thinkig isn't done alone.

Quote:

Quote:

My opinion is that its connection to philosophy and truth are vague. It invokes
a certain pre-understanding of philosophy and truth and goes from there, instead of
questioning them, which I think is necessary when we discuss "the notion of truth"
and philosophy. What is truth and what is philosophy?




Please explain this too.
Anyways, I think I have a slight idea on what you're referring to... you view on truth... which seems to be a Universal one and then yes,it's the same.
However, the logic truth and the Universal truth must have different approaches... meaning the you can't apply your rationality to the the incommensurable or the irrationality to reason.




I haven't presented my view on truth. I've said that there are several ways of approaching truth. If
I was forced to give an answer I might say: truth is a nasty word and I don't like it very much,
it's too universalist and there are too many competing theories (and these hardly consider one
another); I can hardly take the idea(s) of truth as my groudig understanding of truth. However,
I do like the Ancient Greek idea of truth []aletheia. My view on truth is definitely not
universalist.

If something were incommesurable to me, how would I even detect it?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineFrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist


Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6785753 - 04/14/07 04:46 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Well I think a lot of what we consider more fundamental truths will remain less changed. But I think a lot of truth based on what we call science may change radically, perhaps not so much the content as the methodology.

I think the peer reviewed process may be supplanted as people are able to modify themselves so as to become individually more objective or connect to each other's thoughts/minds/personalities more directly. Also machines will begin making a lot of intellectual advances as well. What we call science may become one methodology among a variety.


--------------------


"Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: Lakefingers]
    #6785980 - 04/14/07 08:03 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:


Explain how truth is based on fact.

I'll be analytical here. Let's call your idea of truth, which the thread moves out from,
A. I do not know exactly what A means, but I do know from what you've written that
you assume A is stable and has something to do with facticity. I also know that you imply
this truth is common to us all, because you the way you talk about "it" and because it as a
whole is talked about in the singular.

A different theory truth B could encompass A by taking it into account, but providing a
larger scheme for what is called truth.

Another theory of truth C would not resemble A or B, except
that it would be called a theory of truth.

All other possible theories of truth we'll call AO.

Thus I wrote: Assuming that A remains the same and B doesn't come along and
explain not only A but things A can't explain, and as long as C doesn't become generally accepted, then
A will change. BUT this change is not change into another theory such as
B, C or AO, but only change relative to itself. That is, facts
will change, but the grounds of truth won't.

So, why don't you take consideration to the ontological change of the theory of truth, such
as B, C or AO, instead of assuming it (truth) will always
be a neat and stable basis of A.
Continuing I said: Yes, some things will be seen as "crap"...perhaps even A if
truth change too much. Also A seems to be blurred with "fact" ("...some
truths will become crap seen and proved as being invalid. It already happened in the past,
more then a lot, it does now even more in such a manner that we get to be witnesses to these
changes within our lifetime and even from decade to decade, and if it's going to keep up that
way which I'm almost sure it will, these changes will occur even from month to month").





You're trying to explain yourself through statements from my initial post which I already took to account. Which you first disagreed.
However, your argue was about the truth being blurred about the fact. From the "A", "B", "C" and "AO" example you just gave me you didn't prove that fact can blur a truth. What you more likely did was to show that the lack of some parts the entire fact can cause the presence of many theories on the same subject. What you forgot to take to account is that this too happened in the past and when the whole "fact" was discovered plenty resembling theories joined.

Quote:

Well, I thought a bit of reading could help you along the way. What is one to think "freely" about
if one doesn't access more of what there is to think? Thinking isn't done alone.





That's not a solid argument for this thread.
It's like I'd be unable to come up with an explanation to your argues and tell you that you need to reconsider your thoughts. So kindly please explain the subjects of these books IF you think they have a relevance for this particular discussion.

Quote:

I haven't presented my view on truth. I've said that there are several ways of approaching truth. If
I was forced to give an answer I might say: truth is a nasty word and I don't like it very much,
it's too universalist and there are too many competing theories (and these hardly consider one
another); I can hardly take the idea(s) of truth as my groudig understanding of truth. However,
I do like the Ancient Greek idea of truth []aletheia. My view on truth is definitely not
universalist.

If something were incommesurable to me, how would I even detect it?




Well the Universe is incommensurable, you can't come up with solid arguments and proves that it measures a certain length, height...
the dust on our planet is incommensurable, since you can't tell me exactly how many particles of dust are there. Or can you?

"numbers, progressing by degrees, advance by
addition from that which is a minimum, and proceed to infinity (or
indefinitely); whereas the continuous quantities begin with a definite
(or determined) whole and are divisible (or subject to division) to
infinity (or indefinitely). If, therefore, a minimum cannot be found
in the case of the continuous quantities, it is evident that there
is no measure (or magnitude) which is common to all them,
as unity is common to the numbers ."
- Pappus


Edited by MushroomTrip (04/14/07 08:41 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: FrenchSocialist]
    #6786018 - 04/14/07 08:47 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

FrenchSocialist said:
Well I think a lot of what we consider more fundamental truths will remain less changed. But I think a lot of truth based on what we call science may change radically, perhaps not so much the content as the methodology.

I think the peer reviewed process may be supplanted as people are able to modify themselves so as to become individually more objective or connect to each other's thoughts/minds/personalities more directly. Also machines will begin making a lot of intellectual advances as well. What we call science may become one methodology among a variety.




Well put :thumbup:


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleLakefingers

Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Loc: mumuland
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6786175 - 04/14/07 10:27 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

I'm not using quotes, because it can get out of hand. I hope you know which things I'm
referring to anyhow.

Is it so that that what I wrote gives you no impression or point of criticism other than
that I didn't sufficiently take up blurring fact and truth?

How did you take those points into account? Give me a link to that entry.

Only one of my arguments was about a certain theory's truth being blurred with fact. I
would like to know what you have to say about the other arguments, or if you can, as I wrote
above, provide me with a link to where you talk about that. The blurring of truth and
fact is where you said "truths change".


What is "the entire fact"? Until you explain this I can't say anything about the following
sentence. Additionally, I can't understand the following sentence, maybe you can edit
it for me?

Please define fact and truth so I know what you're talking about.


What you say is not a solid argument is not a solid argument. It was not meant to be an
argument, but simply a pointer--you can look there for some answers and more thoughts. It
was a suggestion, not an argument. What is in that book is not necessary for me to
summarize, because it my arguments are not based on it. Once again, it was suggested reading
material that might help you develop your thoughts in the first post in the thread. And it
seems that you take this up, only because you don't want to discuss my arguments, but rather
would like to show why I can be dismissed. In other words it's a red herring since it's not
do directly related to the grounds of the topics of my arguments.

However, I can crudely summarize the subjects of this 500 page book. Hans-Georg Gadamer
truth by inquisition into the activity of human understanding. This article deals with
the tension between illumination and concealment--two modes of how truth is shown and
so on. However, the theory of truth that underlies this is not a correspondence or
universalist theory. There's also Charles Taylor and he discusses what is to come now that
the philosophy debate is in crisis, or ending, as many philosophers are now saying...some even
talk about post-philosophy. Taylor's article deals with the end of traditional epistemology,
which is the norm here in P&S. Paul Ricoeur summarizes his career working in different
philosophical traditions and how each of these approaches problems of explanation and how to
bridge gaps between theories. Hillary Putnam argues for pragmatic realism and states that
although what we say may be clothed in the language and understanding of the times, what we
talk about and the truth of it is found beneath the clothing (others in the book argue nothing
is there). Michel Foucault discusses in an interview his opinions of historical practices/knowledge
and how these create truth regimes. Lyotard talks about the general discredit to truth and
Richard Rorty talks about whether or not language refers to the world and how these statements
become rational, truthful and reasonable according to certain standards. There are
other articles in the book and they all deal with, in some way, the debate on the end of
philosophy, epistemology or metaphysics--the bed of truth and facticity.


"Well the Universe is incommensurable, you can't come up with solid arguments and proves that
it measures a certain length, height...
the dust on our planet is
incommensurable, since you can't tell me exactly how many particles of dust are there. Or can you?"

Please, define incommensurable and Universe. As I understand it what is incommensurable is not
measurable and is unlike anything else. Incommensurable does not mean irreducible or everything-
is-relative. There is a philosophical question that goes: If sentient beings made of silicon
came to earth and spoke an incommensurable language would we be able to call this a language?
After all it's incommensurable, thus we wouldn't detect, couldn't measure it and its structure
would not be anything like what we know of as language, so why would we call it language? If we call
it language it must be commensurable, i.e. it must have something detectably similar to human
languages. And would they be living beings? They are made of silicon, our definition of life
includes only carbon-based beings, are they recognizable as living beings? So what's life...
there are many more questions here and many answers have been proposed.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 8 months, 26 days
Re: Truth constantly changing [Re: Lakefingers]
    #6786253 - 04/14/07 10:52 AM (14 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

I'm not using quotes, because it can get out of hand. I hope you know which things I'm
referring to anyhow.

Is it so that that what I wrote gives you no impression or point of criticism other than
that I didn't sufficiently take up blurring fact and truth?

How did you take those points into account? Give me a link to that entry.




Read my previous post again and you'll find the arguments.

Quote:

Please define fact and truth so I know what you're talking about.




I'm talking about the truth from a philosofical point of view which is based on facts, reliable proves, not abstract notions. (which obviously the abstract notion of teuth is so different from the philosofical one)


Quote:


What you say is not a solid argument is not a solid argument. It was not meant to be an
argument, but simply a pointer--you can look there for some answers and more thoughts. It
was a suggestion, not an argument. What is in that book is not necessary for me to
summarize, because it my arguments are not based on it. Once again, it was suggested reading
material that might help you develop your thoughts in the first post in the thread. And it
seems that you take this up, only because you don't want to discuss my arguments, but rather
would like to show why I can be dismissed. In other words it's a red herring since it's not
do directly related to the grounds of the topics of my arguments.




If they had no meaning for this specific subject why did you even bring that into discussion?


Quote:

Please, define incommensurable and Universe. As I understand it what is incommensurable is not
measurable and is unlike anything else. Incommensurable does not mean irreducible or everything-
is-relative. There is a philosophical question that goes: If sentient beings made of silicon
came to earth and spoke an incommensurable language would we be able to call this a language?




We could conclude that it's a methid of comunicatin, a language, but still we'd have no clue what they were saying.
To make it more clear to you, we're aware of the Universe but we can't maesure it... at least not yet



Quote:

After all it's incommensurable, thus we wouldn't detect, couldn't measure it and its structure
would not be anything like what we know of as language, so why would we call it language? If we call
it language it must be commensurable, i.e. it must have something detectably similar to human
languages. And would they be living beings? They are made of silicon, our definition of life
includes only carbon-based beings, are they recognizable as living beings? So what's life...
there are many more questions here and many answers have been proposed.




As I stated, we could assume but we wouldn't have any certainty.
Assuming is not enough regarding philosofy.


Quote:

However, I can crudely summarize the subjects of this 500 page book. Hans-Georg Gadamer
truth by inquisition into the activity of human understanding. This article deals with
the tension between illumination and concealment--two modes of how truth is shown and
so on. However, the theory of truth that underlies this is not a correspondence or
universalist theory. There's also Charles Taylor and he discusses what is to come now that
the philosophy debate is in crisis, or ending, as many philosophers are now saying...some even
talk about post-philosophy. Taylor's article deals with the end of traditional epistemology,
which is the norm here in P&S.




Yup, but I didn't point any question regarding the spiritual matter.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* What is the truth behind Disney? tekramrepus 2,325 18 06/20/03 08:58 AM
by champ
* truth?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
deep_umbra 5,284 66 05/21/02 11:12 AM
by Anonymous
* What is the Truth?
( 1 2 3 all )
andrash 3,484 43 01/24/03 05:42 PM
by Anonymous
* Changing vibes?
( 1 2 all )
tekramrepus 1,381 22 05/07/03 06:01 PM
by Deiymiyan
* The Coming Changes
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Anonymous 4,972 76 11/26/02 06:53 PM
by Anonymous
* Drugs are a religon... It's a substance that never changes..
( 1 2 all )
whole9 2,129 25 09/28/05 12:28 PM
by MJF
* Change Gomp 782 12 09/25/04 12:53 PM
by Gomp
* Has anything really changed?? mr freedom 956 8 07/31/02 07:08 PM
by Anonymous

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, Jokeshopbeard, DividedQuantum
1,948 topic views. 2 members, 1 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.032 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 13 queries.