1
   

Moore's Paradox

 
 
Pyrrho
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 01:22 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;137959 wrote:
I understand it just fine. It means that it is raining and the person doesn't believe it is raining. What don't you understand?


Try this: Describe in detail a situation in which someone would seriously and honestly say, "It is raining, but I don't believe it." If the person does not believe it is raining, the person will not say the first part: "It is raining". And if the person believes that it is raining, the person will not say the second part: "I don't believe it [is raining]." So there is no situation in which someone would seriously and honestly assert the statement, even though it may in fact be true in certain instances.
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 01:24 pm
@Pyrrho,
It's Easy just inflect the raining.
It is raining? I don't believe it.
Pyrrho
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 01:32 pm
@GoshisDead,
GoshisDead;137967 wrote:
It's Easy just inflect the raining.
It is raining? I don't believe it.


There is a vast difference between asking if it is raining, and asserting that it is raining. You are now talking about something other than Moore's paradox.
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 01:39 pm
@Pyrrho,
Am I? no context was given for the statement as was no audio provided. there is no paradox that is not artifically manufactured without context. If it is artificially manufactured it really isn't a language paradox it is a logical paradox, they are not the same thing.
0 Replies
 
Deckard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 01:42 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;137853 wrote:
G.E. Moore once remarked in a lecture that although it makes no sense to say, "It is raining, but I don't believe it", it can nevertheless be true that it is raining and I don't believe it. How can saying what can be true make no sense?


I suppose the speaker could be passed a note which says "It is raining". The speaker then reads the note out loud. Then the speaker says "I don't believe it."
0 Replies
 
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 02:49 pm
@Pyrrho,
Pyrrho;137966 wrote:
Try this: Describe in detail a situation in which someone would seriously and honestly say, "It is raining, but I don't believe it." If the person does not believe it is raining, the person will not say the first part: "It is raining". And if the person believes that it is raining, the person will not say the second part: "I don't believe it [is raining]." So there is no situation in which someone would seriously and honestly assert the statement, even though it may in fact be true in certain instances.


Just because someone would seem bizarre for saying such a thing doesn't mean we don't understand what the words mean.

The argument rests on an ambiguity of "makes sense".
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 03:06 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;137959 wrote:
I understand it just fine. It means that it is raining and the person doesn't believe it is raining. What don't you understand?


Oh, I understand that all right. But I would not understand what he meant when he asserted it. There are sentences that are meaningful, but which cannot be asserted meaningfully.

For instance, "I am in a coma". "I am dead". "I cannot speak a word of English". And so on. Their assertion is is conflict with what is being asserted. As I said, there is nothing puzzling about its raining and a person not believing it is raining. What is puzzling is a person asserting that it is raining, but he does not believe it is raining.
Egregias
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 03:16 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;137993 wrote:
There are sentences that are meaningful, but which cannot be asserted meaningfully.

For instance, "I am in a coma". "I am dead". "I cannot speak a word of English". And so on. Their assertion is is conflict with what is being asserted.

Their assertion is in conflict with a fact made apparent by their assertion. Aren't they thus false? And can a statement be both false and meaningless?
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 03:24 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;137993 wrote:
Oh, I understand that all right. But I would not understand what he meant when he asserted it. There are sentences that are meaningful, but which cannot be asserted meaningfully.

For instance, "I am in a coma". "I am dead". "I cannot speak a word of English". And so on. Their assertion is is conflict with what is being asserted. As I said, there is nothing puzzling about its raining and a person not believing it is raining. What is puzzling is a person asserting that it is raining, but he does not believe it is raining.


I still know what "I am in a coma" means. That's how I know that it's false and the person is lying.

Egregias;137995 wrote:
Their assertion is in conflict with a fact made apparent by their assertion. Aren't they thus false? And can a statement be both false and meaningless?


I would say that meaningless statements are neither true nor false.

"I am in a coma." is false.

"I am a Prep Gwarlek." is neither true nor false.
0 Replies
 
Deckard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 03:26 pm
@Egregias,
Certum est, quia impossible est - Tertullian

Another example of this sort of paradox?
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 03:26 pm
@Egregias,
Egregias;137995 wrote:
Their assertion is in conflict with a fact made apparent by their assertion. Aren't they thus false? And can a statement be both false and meaningless?


But it might be true that I am in a coma.

---------- Post added 03-09-2010 at 04:30 PM ----------

GoshisDead;137967 wrote:
It's Easy just inflect the raining.
It is raining? I don't believe it.


Oh yes. There is that sense in which the speaker is just registering astonishment that it is raining ("it has been such a nice day, how could it be raining now?") I mentioned that. But that sense is obviously not the one Moore had in mind.
0 Replies
 
Ahab
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 07:17 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;137853 wrote:
G.E. Moore once remarked in a lecture that although it makes no sense to say, "It is raining, but I don't believe it", it can nevertheless be true that it is raining and I don't believe it. How can saying what can be true make no sense?


Not sure why it is called a paradox. I think it is simply a contradiction. Two assertions have been joined. One is an assertion that it is raining and the other an assertion that it is not raining.
ughaibu
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 07:39 pm
@Pyrrho,
Pyrrho;137966 wrote:
Try this: Describe in detail a situation in which someone would seriously and honestly say, "It is raining, but I don't believe it." If the person does not believe it is raining, the person will not say the first part: "It is raining". And if the person believes that it is raining, the person will not say the second part: "I don't believe it [is raining]." So there is no situation in which someone would seriously and honestly assert the statement, even though it may in fact be true in certain instances.
See post number three.
Deckard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2010 08:02 pm
@ughaibu,
The speaker could be lying when he asserts "It is raining" then owns up to the lie "I don't believe it." But it turns out it actually is raining so both statements are true.

There is missing information of some kind. Without more information, context, some story beyond just the naked statement the meaningfulness or meaninglessness of the statement cannot be decided with any finality. The rules can be set up in such a way that the statement is in fact meaningless but then the statement is meaningless by virtue of those rules and the rules themselves are the missing information that decide this.
0 Replies
 
Pyrrho
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2010 09:16 am
@ughaibu,
Pyrrho;137966 wrote:
Try this: Describe in detail a situation in which someone would seriously and honestly say, "It is raining, but I don't believe it." If the person does not believe it is raining, the person will not say the first part: "It is raining". And if the person believes that it is raining, the person will not say the second part: "I don't believe it [is raining]." So there is no situation in which someone would seriously and honestly assert the statement, even though it may in fact be true in certain instances.


ughaibu;138043 wrote:
See post number three.


Post number three:

ughaibu;137863 wrote:
Perhaps the weather report says that it's raining but the speaker cant hear the sound of rain.


Then the speaker would not say that it is raining. Again, the proposed counterexamples fail to actually be cases of someone seriously and honestly asserting, "It is raining, but I don't believe it." That this is always so is explained in my own post quoted at the beginning of this post.
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2010 09:24 am
@Ahab,
Ahab;138037 wrote:
Not sure why it is called a paradox. I think it is simply a contradiction. Two assertions have been joined. One is an assertion that it is raining and the other an assertion that it is not raining.


There is no assertion that it is not raining.

---------- Post added 03-10-2010 at 10:28 AM ----------

Deckard;138048 wrote:
The speaker could be lying when he asserts "It is raining" then owns up to the lie "I don't believe it." But it turns out it actually is raining so both statements are true.

There is missing information of some kind. Without more information, context, some story beyond just the naked statement the meaningfulness or meaninglessness of the statement cannot be decided with any finality. The rules can be set up in such a way that the statement is in fact meaningless but then the statement is meaningless by virtue of those rules and the rules themselves are the missing information that decide this.


As I pointed out, what is said could easily be true. But what is problematic is the saying of it. Just as, the proposition, "I am dead" could easily be true, but what is problematic is the saying of it. There is no missing information. It is that the truth conditions for a proposition are not the same as the conditions for the utterance of the proposition, and sometimes they may conflict; as in the instance of the example.
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2010 11:14 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;138268 wrote:
As I pointed out, what is said could easily be true. But what is problematic is the saying of it. Just as, the proposition, "I am dead" could easily be true, but what is problematic is the saying of it. There is no missing information. It is that the truth conditions for a proposition are not the same as the conditions for the utterance of the proposition, and sometimes they may conflict; as in the instance of the example.


It's problematic but we still know what it means.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2010 12:29 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;138318 wrote:
It's problematic but we still know what it means.


I would not know what someone meant if he said it. I know what it means to believe something that is false, if that is what you have in mind.
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2010 12:31 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;138334 wrote:
I would not know what someone meant if he said it. I know what it means to believe something that is false, if that is what you have in mind.


If you know what the phrase means, how can you not know what the other person means when they say it? They mean what you think it means.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2010 12:35 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;138336 wrote:
If you know what the phrase means, how can you not know what the other person means when they say it? They mean what you think it means.


But I said I would not know what he meant. Just because I know what it means to believe something that is false doesn't mean that I would know that he meant. Just because I know what it means to be dead, doesn't mean I know what someone would mean when he asserted that he was dead.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Moore's Paradox
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 10/01/2022 at 09:35:25