For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
No, I reject the conventional correspondence theory of truth.raw_thought wrote:Yes, on your part. So OK you now define truth as it is described by the correspondence theory of truth.creativesoul wrote:Since there seems to be a reading comprehension issue...
On my view, truth is correspondence.
Claiming that thinking about thought is different than thought suggests that one doesn't understand how English works.creativesoul wrote:Either thinking about thought/belief is different from thought/belief or it's not.
Whether it has any thoughts or beliefs or not, there's no reason to believe that they'd have thoughts or beliefs that are not present to their phenomenal consciousness.They only prove elusive if one has an emaciated understanding of what counts as thought/belief. Seems that you do not see how a creature could have thought/belief without being aware that of that. Do you think that the guard dog who barks at you has no thought/belief, or that it does and it is aware of it's own thought/belief?
I think what's rather clear is that there's no way that propositions can map to states of affairs on their own.Again, that's not question begging. Rather that is taking the right sorts of things into consideration. If what you say above is true then "The cat is on the mat" would be neither true or false until we checked.
Clearly that's not right.
If you had bothered to scroll back and were capable of grasping what's been argued, you would not be able to believe your own words quoted above...raw_thought wrote:
If anyone bothers to scroll back they will see that you never offered a new improved unconventional correspondence theory of truth.
We all have those problems.creativesoul wrote:I don't have those problems...Hobbes' Choice wrote:No. Facts are statements designed to describe states of affairs. The difference is crucial as that's where all the problems occur.creativesoul wrote:
Facts are states of affairs; events; the case at hand; the way things are; the way things were; etc.
Sigh. I don't. Now you're attempting to force an ill-conceived conceptual framework upon someone else. Thanks, but no thanks. History has shown it's weaknesses. As you say, that's where all the problem arise. Witt had something almost right in Tractacus. On my view, facts are states of affairs; events; happenings; the case at hand; the way things are; the things have been; etc.Hobbes' Choice wrote:We all have those problems.creativesoul wrote:I don't have those problems...Hobbes' Choice wrote:
No. Facts are statements designed to describe states of affairs. The difference is crucial as that's where all the problems occur.
A fact is not the state of affairs.
Londoner wrote:This is just to list synonyms. When we have listed all the synonyms for 'the truth' we will end up back where we started, so it all just amounts to saying 'the truth is the truth', which is not helpful.SpheresOfBalance wrote:Truth is that which is the 'actual' state of affairs!
Many of you confuse the 'Topic' in question with, "how one comes to know the truth." What 'truth is' and 'how one comes to know it,' are two entirely different questions. Truth is actuality, the facts!
Obviously your verbiage indicates that you are concerned with being able to find the truth, not defining what truth is. So I'll remind you all. The topic is: "What is truth?", (see up above), not "How does one come to know the truth."
There is no disembodied 'The Truth'.
Incorrect, if by disembodied you mean that it is not yet known by any human being. That the earth is a spheroid was always 'the truth.' Yet there was a time when all humans 'believed' 'the truth' was that it was flat. 'The truth' of the Higgs Boson seems to be known but only time will tell 'the truth.' With much human investigation 'the truth' of everything shall be revealed, that is, if because we won't admit 'the truth,' we don't kill ourselves off first. And that's 'the truth!'
The truth is always the truth about something. And if we are asserting the truth about something, we are asserting that we have reasons, evidence etc. So the meaning of any assertion 'X is true' is to be found by looking at how they come to make that claim.
Again you are simply talking about finding the truth, about knowing or coming to know it, not about what truth is. If one first doesn't know what truth is, they can never know it when they finally see it.
Truth is that which is actually the case. That which is devoid of all particular misconceptions or lies.