Philosophy Now Forum

In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity or charitable interpretation requires interpreting a speaker's statements in the most rational way possible and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest possible interpretation.

Philosophy uses the law of non-contradiction (P ∧ ¬P) ⇔ False to arbitrarily discard arguments as "wrong".
But the LNC is just an axiom. Like all axioms - it's arbitrarily chosen. So what happens if we make a different choice?

If one were to choose the axioms of dialethistic logic then all contradictions become theorems.

In practice, Dialethism accepts the axiom of unrestricted comprehension. Dialethism accepts that whatever is said (contradictory or otherwise) is true. The task before a Dialethist is to comprehend WHY it is true, despite the contradiction.

To this end Dialethists practice unrestricted comprehension. More formally, comprehension is studied by the field of reverse mathematics. In contrast to the ordinary mathematical practice of deriving theorems from axioms, reverse mathematics strives to arrive at axioms from theorems.

Less formally, it can be though of as arriving at your interlocutor's true premises from their conclusions.

Unrestricted comprehension (discarding the notion that your interlocutor is 'wrong', even in the face of contradictions), is the principle of charity applied.

For example;

Conclusion - Human beings do not need money to live.

Or,

Conclusion - The Universe is infinite and eternal.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:23 am Conclusion - Human beings do not need money to live.

Obviously. Humans lived long before money was invented. Money is just a token of value.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:23 am Conclusion - The Universe is infinite and eternal.

What do you mean by "the universe"?

I like to write in True 'paradoxical' ways, to expose; that if 'you', human beings, did NOT interpret what I write, in ANY way, but just asked me clarifying questions instead, then the actual and real Truth of things can be and WILL be revealed.

For example;

ALL current commonly known "paradoxes" are NOT real 'paradoxes' at all. Really they are nothing that can not be very easily and simply resolved.

Also, there are NO problems in Life other than the human being made ones, which can be answered and solved almost instantly.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:33 am I like to write in True 'paradoxical' ways, to expose; that if 'you', human beings, did NOT interpret what I write, in ANY way, but just asked me clarifying questions instead, then the actual and real Truth of things can be and WILL be revealed.

For example;

ALL current commonly known "paradoxes" are NOT real 'paradoxes' at all. Really they are nothing that can not be very easily and simply resolved.

Also, there are NO problems in Life other than the human being made ones, which can be answered and solved almost instantly.

We know that. The fact that you want to "teach us" this could only mean that you don't know that we know that.

We, humans, are ahead of you. Catch up.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:25 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:23 am Conclusion - Human beings do not need money to live.

Obviously. Humans lived long before money was invented. Money is just a token of value.

See how instead of 'interpreting', which is just ASSUMING, what I am saying, and instead just LOOKING FOR the Truth in it, then how QUICKLY, EASILY, and SIMPLY the actual and real Truth of things can be found and discovered?.

Although you say 'obviously', and it is absolutely obvious when you are OPEN, most adult human beings do NOT believe it is true, and thus are not at all open to even consider this seemingly absurd and contradictory proposition or statement to them.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:25 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:23 am Conclusion - The Universe is infinite and eternal.

What do you mean by "the universe"?

ALL-THERE-IS

See how also asking clarifying questions is also a much better (quicker, simpler, and easier) way to comprehend and thus understand what "another" is actually saying and meaning.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:35 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:33 am I like to write in True 'paradoxical' ways, to expose; that if 'you', human beings, did NOT interpret what I write, in ANY way, but just asked me clarifying questions instead, then the actual and real Truth of things can be and WILL be revealed.

For example;

ALL current commonly known "paradoxes" are NOT real 'paradoxes' at all. Really they are nothing that can not be very easily and simply resolved.

Also, there are NO problems in Life other than the human being made ones, which can be answered and solved almost instantly.

We know that. The fact that you want to "teach us" this could only mean that you don't know that we know that.

We, humans, are ahead of you. Catch up.

When did I ever say I want to teach 'you', human beings, any thing?

Where did you get the ASSUMPTION that I wanted to 'teach you human beings' this from?

What exact sentence have I said that led you to such an ASSUMPTION?

A link to WHERE I have actually said any thing like this would help support your answers if you are going to say that I have ever said such a thing.

Also, do ALL of 'you' KNOW 'this' yet?

If yes, then HOW?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:39 am See how also asking clarifying questions is also a much better (quicker, simpler, and easier) way to comprehend and thus understand what "another" is actually saying and meaning.

Again. We know this. It is you who believes that we don't.

War is only a problem if you want it to be.
Poverty is only a problem if you want it to be.
Famine, illiteracy, ignorance, death, human suffering etc. they are all only problems if we want them to be.

We could ignore them and the problem goes away.

But we don't want to ignore them.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:42 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:39 am See how also asking clarifying questions is also a much better (quicker, simpler, and easier) way to comprehend and thus understand what "another" is actually saying and meaning.

Again. We know this. It is you who believes that we don't.

War is only a problem if you want it to be.
Poverty is only a problem if you want it to be.
Famine, illiteracy, ignorance, death, human suffering etc. they are all only problems if we want them to be.

We could ignore them and the problem goes away.

But we don't want to ignore them.

Ignoring things OBVIOUSLY does NOT make them go away. If they are there, then they will stay.

If you see a 'problem' and 'try to' ignore, then 'it' will NOT go away.

It appears that what 'you' KNOW is NOTHING like what I am talking about.

To me, ignoring what 'you' see as a 'problem' is NOT a very good strategy at all. In fact, it can even make the so called 'problem' even far more worse.

See how by NOT asking clarifying questions, and just interpreting/assuming things instead, makes learning and understanding worse (slower, complicated, and harder).

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:42 am When did I ever say I want to teach 'you', human beings, any thing?

Where did you get the ASSUMPTION that I wanted to 'teach you human beings' this from?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:27 am I am teaching, through explanation, how the Mind and the brain work.

To me, it appears that you start a thread by stating how some things can be done, but you completely disregard and ignore those things yourself, and just back to your usual and the old slow, complicated, and hard ways of doing things.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:46 am To me, ignoring what 'you' see as a 'problem' is NOT a very good strategy at all. In fact, it can even make the so called 'problem' even far more worse.

We know this too. You are the one saying that problems can be solved 'trivially' and 'easily'.

You believe this. Most of us don't.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:50 am To me, it appears that you start a thread by stating how some things can be done, but you completely disregard and ignore those things yourself, and just back to your usual and the old slow, complicated, and hard ways of doing things.

Well, tell us then. What's the easy way to solve hunger and poverty?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:48 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:42 am When did I ever say I want to teach 'you', human beings, any thing?

Where did you get the ASSUMPTION that I wanted to 'teach you human beings' this from?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:27 am I am teaching, through explanation, how the Mind and the brain work.

Thank you, It is much appreciated when some one actually provides links to what they allege took place, instead of just completely ignoring it when it is questioned.

So, I said that I am teaching, through explanation, how the Mind and the brain work, which is fair enough. But it is obviously NOT what you said that you know and what 'this' was that I wanted to teach.

What 'this' was was completely different.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:51 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:46 am To me, ignoring what 'you' see as a 'problem' is NOT a very good strategy at all. In fact, it can even make the so called 'problem' even far more worse.

We know this too. You are the one saying that problems can be solved 'trivially' and 'easily'.

You believe this. Most of us don't.

Are you an idiot?

Have you ever read where I have said: I do NOT believe any thing?

If no, then now you have.
If yes, then WHY would you make such a STUPID comment as, "You believe this"?

Just to inform you, you have ABSOLUTELY NO idea what I want to say in relation to HOW ALL 'problems' can be very easily and very simply resolved.

Also, your opening thread goes on about interpreting and such. Yet here you are doing what you are.