Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pmOne way to approach this question, which seems an important one for you, is to examine those things, or those areas, where the *truth* of something is not and cannot be in any doubt. You could list thousands of them and you would question the perception, and perhaps the motive, of someone who argued against your truth-facts.
Not as significant to me as you imagine. I usually state things in terms of probability, which is the reason I use the word so much. But there is a difference between what is true and truth per se, which is not unlike the difference between sea & land. Also, I never stated any "truth-facts". Though there may be very few, it's not in my nature or philosophy to state anything in those terms. Nevertheless, if something is a fact, it should be stated as such.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pmI was thinking about the issue of truth, of what is true, when I thought of the message in Macbeth and again in Othello. I assume you have read both. We know, beyond doubt, that the play of Macbeth is invented through-and-through and we might measure someone's ability to grasp what is true from what is false to the degree that they, too, agreed with us.
Except for some minor plays, I read all of Shakespeare. I also read Milton. Regarding Macbeth, it's not true that it was invented "through-and-through". The real story was distorted "through-and-through", in Shakespeare's play having almost nothing in common except a few names. The history plays suffer the same calamity regarding facts; Richard III is a very egregious example of that. Grasping what is true in most cases amounts to nothing more than an acknowledgement of one's opinion
Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pmYet it is I would say *undeniable* that the meanings so pertinent to truth and which express truth, weave in and out of what is represented in the play. So then how do we talk about those *truths*? What happened to this man Macbeth? Why does it make so much sense to us how he was destroyed -- led to destruction and then involved directly in choices that resulted in destruction?
The causes of that are already contained in the play, none of it unusual. What and how it happened is not exactly a mystery!
Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pmOr what about the issue of what is true and what is a lie when one considers Othello's falling into the lie-traps that Iago set for him? That is, Iago's consciously-concocted lies with which he infected the mind and spirit of Othello? What would have been the *antidote* to the poisons that Iago injected into Othello's mind? More lies? Or truth?
The antidote would have been Othello's own mind had he not succumbed to "the green-eyed monster" and his own hubris. It would be normal to have held Iago in suspicion as being resentful after preferring Casio as lieutenant instead. Infected with a surfeit of hubris and jealousy, the lies would have been,
and were, more potent than any truth attempting to annul his diseased suspicions. There's nothing mysterious about it. Shakespeare main tragedies are depictions of main human flaws that eventually destroy its host...with the usual collateral damage.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pmSo can you really say that in considering these matters that the interpretations that are made are merely inventions laid over 'reality'?
I never once stated nor could I imagine interpretations as being inventions. Where have I implied it? Based on the mental alchemy of the individual, experiences, to be effective, are automatically interpreted as received. They certainly are not inventions, neither, therefore, are its interpretations.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pmThe closer someone -- Shakespeare in this case -- pins down a Truth and perhaps I can say understands the difference between truth and falsity, as well as the consequence of a lie, the more likely it is that the truth revealed, if it is revealed, will seem constant, even eternal, and in this sense as a Truth of the sort we are referring to.
Well, when it comes down to Truth with a capital T, the consistency of that remains relative to the individual or on a grander scale, the society in which they live. Truth, as mentioned, is a label, a seal of veracity, of what's inside the envelope.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pm
Honestly, I have no idea what you’re asking for regarding an “active or propositional” side!
It is not so hard to grasp. I make the suggestion that what you are saying, what you are trying to present, must have an *active* side or aspect. What are you attempting when you make the declarations you do? What result do you desire? I would ask this of Lacewing as well.
...the same as anyone who philosophizes. To forge a conception, a perspective...or to use the most comprehensive term, a Weltanschauung as a reflection of the world at large however different they may be from individual to individual...and especially those differences between its Eastern and Western versions. One can therefore ask you the same question. What are your declarations on the subject!
Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:56 pmIn your case, and I cannot be sure why this seems so, I think the core of what you wish to present remains shadowed or obscured. It occurs to me that you may not even be al that clear about what your *intentions* are. Yet you are active in your assertions and I do not think it could be fairly said that your activity has no desired result. What do you have in mind? What am I to take away from your assertions? What are you up to?
I think it reveals something that you say "I have no idea" what I am asking you. Is the question a bad one? Does your answer mean you are asleep in some sense? Unaware of the *active* aspect you your own propositions? What do you think?
If you're asking for some academic certainty, forget it! It doesn't exist. If you're a theist, certainty, purpose, meaning, etc. are mostly provided for and pre-affirmed. The existential world in which we now live doesn't provide any of these historical securities. In the more alien world we now inhabit, propositions are merely glow-worms that flicker on and off. We face all kinds of "propositions" but none, or hardly any, are fixed in their place to establish a new order...whatever that will be.
Note these very simple few words from Yeats; I'm certain you'll get the meaning of the metaphor....
Now that my ladder's gone,
I must lie down where all ladders start,
In the foul rag and bone shop of the heart.
----> Do you want to continue or should we end it?