@fast,
fast;170422 wrote:
Mrs. Anderson (the wife) asked handicaped little Annie if cats meow, and little Annie responds, "dogs bark." Mr. Anderson (the husband) shakes his head and says, "well, at least it's a true sentence."
A philosopher standing nearby thinks to himself, "not really." He thinks: The proposition expressed by the sentence is true, but the sentence itself isn't true, for it's not sentences (but rather propositions) that are true.
The philosopher later tells me what he thinks, and I wonder, should I believe him?
I don't know what sound deductive arguments can be made to show that sentences that express true propositions are therefore true sentences, but such an interpretation doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Is there a good inductive argument we can use?
If not, I think we should reexamine why it is okay to say that beliefs are true or false.
It is not propositons, sentences, words, or beliefs that are true or false, but people... If the object of communication is truth, if communicaiton is truth, and if false is miscommunication which is destructive of people and relationships, if truth is a virtue, and false is an injustice; then only people can be true, to themselves and to their ultimate objective, which is the survival of humanity... True people communicate the truth, that is, themselves, faithfully and truely... What is truth today in the sense of subject reflecting object may change, but our ultimate object and how we pursue that object should never change... We tell truth because it is essential to our well being...