Absolute truth?

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

....A pseudo-problem equivalent to Russell's Paradox. All that "question" indicates is that binary logic is a sub-field of general semantics.

What I mean by "absolute truth" is the transcendental truth of religion , which Rorty has pointed out is deemed "ineffable". All other "truths" are relative to axioms which are open to revision. A good example of that is the revision of parallel line axioms in Euclidean geoemetry leading to Projective geoemetry.

Mathematics is based on axioms, not philosophy. So anyone who denies the possibility of an absolute truth is committing philosophical suicide, which is confirmed by the insolubly contradictory nature of the statement, "There is no absolute truth."

1 Reply

@guigus,

That too. But I'm referring to the "mystical" sense of religion as re-ligare, to re-connect with the World.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

That too. But I'm referring to the "mystical" sense of religion as re-ligare, to re-connect with the World.

Ah, etymology... the gym of philosophy! Only that the music sucks.

But I understand your feelings.

0 Replies

@fresco,

Casi siempre estamos de acuerdo.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

That is odd for someone that opposes any state of affairs...do u get it ???

0 Replies

@guigus,

Quote:

Mathematics is based on axioms, not philosophy. So anyone who denies the possibility of an absolute truth is committing philosophical suicide, which is confirmed by the insolubly contradictory nature of the statement, "There is no absolute truth."

Sorry, but that appears to be word salad ! However, of you mean "analytical philosophy has died" following its dissociation from logical representationalism by Wittgenstein, Quine (et al) you are saying nothing new.

3 Replies

@fresco,

Its amazing how people can set aside logic with logic...common fresco give me a break...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Come on, Fresco. Give him a break.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

Here's the break.

The evidential support for the statement that "there are no absolute truths" is pragmatic in the sense that "truth" is "what works" and is always open to revision. That implies that "truth" has an aspect of temporality whereas "absolute truth" does not. So transcendentally "Absolute truth" is beyond the realm of any temporal agent seeking effective axioms, and it is from that transcendental level that "logicality" is being evoked. In the Wittgensteinian sense, the word "truth" has different meanings at the transcendental and pragmatic levels. (Just like in Russell's paradox "the barbers' self" has different meanings as "the shaver" and "the receiver of a shave")

2 Replies

@fresco,

If THAT doesn't do it, what will?

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

Catchphrases of biblical proportions, I suspect might do the trick..

0 Replies

@fresco,

If absolute truth doesn't exist, why is it that most people understand 1 + 1 = 2?

1 Reply

@fresco,

A billion years ago it was true that today you would write the above post as one billion years from now it still will be true that you did so today...

...there´s no playing around with truth ...
(I honestly regret that so many fairly smart people miss it)

As simple as this:
ANY statement on correspondence between knowledge and truth, either falsifying or asserting anything requires and imply´s a true state of affairs as a key base to any kind of assessment.
The best example being to state that "there´s no truth" which is a contradiction in terms...

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Because 1+1 is just another way of saying 2.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

And the "truth" of "1 + 1 = 2" rests on covert axioms about the nature of identity for the purpose of counting together with the meaning of the symbol "+". A trivial counter example to such axioms is when "two drops of water coalesce". The coherence of mathematical statements starts with experiential axioms.

1 Reply

@fresco,

...What coalesces ??? Laughing

( certainly not the TWO drops of water according to you )
...be mute is the end of that talk fresco...

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

A billion years ago

Oh! So there's "objective temporality" is there ? ....is that another "Absolute Truth"?

And of course the "two drops" coalesce....it's built into the definition of "coalesence".

1 Reply

@fresco,

1 - Of course there is...in the sense that any temporal fluctuation has its own unique context in the overall picture...do you really believe that was such a big challenge to answer ???
Temporal fluctuations don´t super impose only appear to...they have their "own space" if you indulge my metaphor...

2 - ...you just did mute the concept of "one" or "two" that was the essence of my remark fresco...the "coalesce" thing is beside the point ! there´s nothing to coalesce without "two"...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

I think the main point is that there is NO overall "picture", or at least there is nothing which can be said about it.

1 Reply

@guigus,

Check out:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mally/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nonexistent-objects/

It seems to be about what you are suggesting.

1 Reply

Absolute truth?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know