Philosophy undermines truth

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8529
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Sculptor »

Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:08 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:01 pmI did not read your above post fully. Soz.
No problem.
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:01 pmThe truth would seem to be a state of mind, a relationship between what is and what we perceive, and would have to be unique to each of us, though agreement can mean we share a state of mind very similar to one another.
By truth, in the above context, I simply "what is". Granted truth as a state of mind is mind dependent.
Since "what is" is not accessible to us it's a moot point whether we get to call that "truth."
And since we are in the habit of using this word so casually it is most useful for philosophy to offer and idea, or set of ideas upon what the word means and how we use it.
I think Hosper's has at least 6 categories of truth.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8529
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Sculptor »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:13 pm
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:10 pm
Flannel Jesus wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:03 pmI was addressing sculptor with that. I believe he didn't interpret your words the way you intended
Ah. To borrow from Sculptor:
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:01 pmI did not read your above post fully. Soz.
What a lovely couple of fellas you both are today
:D :D
Will Bouwman
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Will Bouwman »

Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pmSince "what is" is not accessible to us it's a moot point whether we get to call that "truth."
We get to call anything at all anything we like. Personally, I am happy to call "what is" the truth, even though it is not accessible. It's the ontology/epistemology thing - some set of circumstances obtains; we just don't know what they are.
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pmAnd since we are in the habit of using this word so casually it is most useful for philosophy to offer and idea, or set of ideas upon what the word means and how we use it.
I think Hosper's has at least 6 categories of truth.
Perhaps he does. I just don't find categories particularly useful. I'm comfortable in the 'I know it when I see it' camp, fully aware that others will view exactly the same scene differently.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by attofishpi »

Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 9:03 pm I'm comfortable in the 'I know it when I see it' camp, fully aware that others will view exactly the same scene differently.
But it still doesn't really cut the mustard does it? For example, I was sat on the bonnet of my old XB Falcon late at night in Kuitpo Forest, eating a pizza and staring up at the Milky Way.

I saw a shooting star streak across part of the sky. Then, where the trail of that streak ended, another shooting star shot back in the opposite direction to the original 'star' to where that original one had started..THEN another shooting star, repeated from the exact same point of the original, in the exact same streak direction!

So, basically, I am supposed to consider that from three space rocks\debris - two went in precisely the same part of the sky in the precisely the same direction, but the other went precisely the opposite direction. I can't understand how rocks from space can go in an opposite direction - odds at the same time, same place - rather slim.
(After that, three strobe lights on some 'craft' - "strobed" in the same area of the sky where these shooting stars had been - but travelling away from me into the distance!)

This was 1997/98 - I just laughed and blamed God for blowing smoke up my arse attempting to get me to believe there was a ship with little green men up there too!

Thus I don't believe ANY of what I was witness to beyond this entity (that I apologise to bring up again) - projecting this imagery to my perception of reality.

I think it always comes back to that Descartes statement. That's the closest to our certainty about what we know. :)
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Age »

Skepdick wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 12:14 pm
Age wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 11:58 am
Skepdick wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 11:41 am
I started this topic. When did you get to decide what's on topic?
WHENEVER I WANTED TO.

'you' do have a tendency "skepdick" to SAY and CLAIM 'things', then link us to some 'thing', as though doing this somehow backs up your CLAIMS and/or somehow shows that you KNOW what you SAID and CLAIMED. However, after reading some of your links they ONLY COUNTER and/or REFUTED your CLAIM, or do NOT even align with what was ACTUALLY being TALKED ABOUT and DISCUSSED
You appear to be fully committed to this intelelctual boxing match with yourself.

Claims. Refutations. Counter claims. What a stupid sport.

I hope you don't mind me watching from the spectator stand and throwing rotten vegetables at you while you are busy throwing punches.
Do as you want "skepdick". you have CERTAINLY FAILED to back up and support your 'CLAIM here.

The ONLY 'thing' you are PROVING here is just how much and how often you TWIST and DISTORT 'things' around while ATTEMPTING to ARGUE or FIGHT for what you BELIEVE is true.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Age »

Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
Age wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 11:13 amPeople who CLAIM TO KNOW the truth can NOT be UNDERMINED by ANY 'thing', if the CLAIM IS TRUE.
The problem is that even if a claim is true, there are other stories that will account for the evidence equally well.
ONCE AGAIN "will bouwman" you do NOT appear to YET be able to discern the DIFFERENCE between 'proof' and 'evidence'.

For example, if some 'thing' is only 'known' by or through 'evidence', then 'that thing' may or may NOT be true.if, however, a 'thing' is KNOWN through or by 'proof', then 'that thing' can NOT be refuted, and thus IS IRREFUTABLY True.
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm Take you, for example. There are any number of possible stories that will account for the words on this forum attributed to Age.
LOL "will bouwman". Just saying so does NOT necessarily make it so.

Are you BRAVE ENOUGH to provide just ONE example? Or are you just "ANOTHER one" who will CLAIM some 'thing', but then just RUN AWAY and HIDE?

After all you have done this MANY times ALREADY.

If you do NOT STAY and back up and support your CLAIM, especially on a philosophy forum, then your words, literally, mean NOTHING AT ALL
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm Hopefully avoiding any charge of "over-indexing on the “challenging” part", it is conceivable that you are some AI project being run by someone whose computer has a faulty caps lock, but I am quite prepared to believe that you, Age, are a person of some sort.
And here we are, ONCE AGAIN, "another one" who because 'it' can NOT refute NOR counter the ACTUAL WORDS that I SAY, WRITE, and USE here, 'it' will INSTEAD just 'try' and USE some kind of HUMILIATION or RIDICULE AGAINST 'me', as though this would have some king if ACTUAL effect.

Look "will bouwman" it IS PLAINLY OBVIOUS that you can NOT even CHALLENGE the WORDS I USE here, let alone ARGUE AGAINST them. And what you REALLY HATE about this Fact is that 'this' then PROVES your BELIEF about 'when people KNOW the truth that they then can be undermined' ABSOLUTELY and IRREFUTABLY False, Wrong, AND Incorrect.
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm What sort of person? Well, there's your version, the details of which escape me but are along the lines of you being some sort of time travelling messenger.
ONCE AGAIN, 'you', "will bouwman", FOCUS ON 'the person' and 'try' and ATTACK 'that', instead of FOCUSING ON 'the words' ALONE and QUESTIONING 'them'.

And as for some 'time travelling messenger' then that is A STORY MADE UP by 'you', people, here ALONE.

Have you EVER CONSIDERED WHY the 'details of MY VERSION OF 'me' ESCAPE you'?

The ACTUAL ANSWER WHY, by the way, IS Truly VERY SIMPLE and EASY
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pmThen's there's the view shared I think by most here, that you are a complete headcase. That's three possibilities already. Even if your version is the correct one, there is nothing you could say to eliminate the other options above, nor countless others.
The MORE you or ANY one else here spends their time LOOKING AT and FOCUSING ON 'me', and TALKING ABOUT, 'me', and NOT ON my ACTUAL WORDS, then the MORE this HELPS and PROVES MY CASE here

SO PLEASE CONTINUE ON AS you ARE here "will bouwman".

The Fact that you can NOT ARGUE AGAINST NOR COUNTER MY WORDS speaks for itself here.

The ONLY 'thing' you CONCENTRATE ON here IS 'me', AND LOL, to you, 'i' AM one of the three 'things';

An 'ai',
A 'headcase', or
A 'time traveller'.

LOL If only you KNEW. If only you KNEW.

NEXT you will be diagnosing 'me' WITH some 'condition' like "others" here DO.

How about ALL of you START CHALLENGING and QUESTIONING the ACTUAL WORDS I USE BEFORE you, you KNOW, like what is MEANT TO BE DONE in a philosophy forum?

For your information, MY VERSION OF 'me' has NEVER been expressed here and may well NEVER will be ALSO.
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
Age wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 11:13 amLOOK "will bouwman" just because one might CLAIM TO KNOW the truth does NOT equate to THAT CLAIM necessarily being False. So, WHEN are you going to START UNDERSTANDING and COMPREHENDING this IRREFUTABLE Fact here?
That would have been 1987 at the latest.
SO, WHY DO you KEEP MAKING RIDICULOUS CLAIMS like:
' What philosophy does is undermine people who claim to know the truth, by pointing out that there are alternative explanations, equally well supported by the evidence.' ?

SOMETIMES people who CLAIM TO KNOW the truth ACTUALLY DO. So, what this ACTUALLY MEANS IS there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, including so-called 'philosophy', which could undermine those. people.

Are you even AWARE that you ARE CONTRADICTING "yourself" here?

AND IF you HAVE an ACTUAL ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION for what I SAY and CLAIM here, then JUST PRESENT 'that explanation' SO THAT we CAN LOOK AT 'it'.

'TRYING TO' CLAIM that there are OTHER explanations for what one CLAIMS, and THEREFORE "the other's" CLAIM of KNOWING the truth is false, wrong, or Incorrect WITHOUT EVER PROVIDING ANY ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION IS JUST ANOTHER FORM IF DECEPTION you ARE SHOWING and DISPLAYING here.

You Keep CLAIMING TO KNOW the truth about there IS ALWAYS OTHER EXPLANATIONS YET you FAIL TO PROVIDE ABSOLUTELY ANY PROOF FOR THIS CLAIM OF YOURS here..
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
Age wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 11:13 am
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 10:02 amThe truth is sometimes difficult to find and sometimes impossible.
The ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS EXTREMELY SIMPLE and EASY TO FIND, and UNCOVER.
So you keep saying. The thing is there are potentially infinite untruths which are irrefutable.
Like WHAT, for example?

And, what has 'this' got to do with what I have been ACTUALLY SAYING and CLAIMING here?
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Age »

Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:01 pm
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:55 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:42 pmThat is hilarious.
Where is it?
I don't know. Nor do I believe anyone else does.
I did not read your above post fully. Soz.
The truth would seem to be a state of mind, a relationship between what is and what we perceive, and would have to be unique to each of us, though agreement can mean we share a state of mind very similar to one another.
FINALLY.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Age »

Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pm
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:08 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:01 pmI did not read your above post fully. Soz.
No problem.
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:01 pmThe truth would seem to be a state of mind, a relationship between what is and what we perceive, and would have to be unique to each of us, though agreement can mean we share a state of mind very similar to one another.
By truth, in the above context, I simply "what is". Granted truth as a state of mind is mind dependent.
Since "what is" is not accessible to us it's a moot point whether we get to call that "truth."
So, to you, what is is that 'what is' is NOT even accessible, right?

If no, then 'what is' could be accessible.

But if yes, then we have "ANOTHER one" who CLAIMS TO KNOW that there is NO (one) truth, but who ALSO FAILS TO SEE the BLATANTLY OBVIOUS CONTRADICTION, and HYPOCRISY here.
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pm And since we are in the habit of using this word so casually it is most useful for philosophy to offer and idea, or set of ideas upon what the word means and how we use it.
The 'truth' is just what is agreed upon and accepted by 'some', (by ANY one up to but NOT including ALL), which is still OPEN to being REFUTED.

The 'Truth', however, is AGREED UPON and ACCEPTED by ALL, which, OBVIOUSLY, literally, MEANS REFUTATION IS IMPOSSIBLE.

Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pm I think Hosper's has at least 6 categories of truth.
Which ONLY COMPLICATES 'what IS', essentially, VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY, INDEED
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Age »

Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 9:03 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pmSince "what is" is not accessible to us it's a moot point whether we get to call that "truth."
We get to call anything at all anything we like. Personally, I am happy to call "what is" the truth, even though it is not accessible. It's the ontology/epistemology thing - some set of circumstances obtains; we just don't know what they are.
BUT we DO KNOW what 'they' ARE, WHEN we DEFINE, SAY, AGREE UPON, and ACCEPT 'what' 'they' ARE.

Which IS CONTRARY to what you BELIEVE "will bouwman", as well as UNDERMINING what you CLAIM TO KNOW here.
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 9:03 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pmAnd since we are in the habit of using this word so casually it is most useful for philosophy to offer and idea, or set of ideas upon what the word means and how we use it.
I think Hosper's has at least 6 categories of truth.
Perhaps he does. I just don't find categories particularly useful. I'm comfortable in the 'I know it when I see it' camp, fully aware that others will view exactly the same scene differently.
And WHAT HAPPENS WHEN NO one IS SEEING 'the exact same scene' differently?

What do we then have, if NOT 'the Truth'?
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Skepdick »

Age wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 11:34 pm Do as you want "skepdick". you have CERTAINLY FAILED to back up and support your 'CLAIM here.
No, I haven't. I can't fail at something I haven't even bother to attempt.
Age wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 11:34 pm The ONLY 'thing' you are PROVING here is just how much and how often you TWIST and DISTORT 'things' around while ATTEMPTING to ARGUE or FIGHT for what you BELIEVE is true.
If you think I am trying to "prove" anything you've certainly misunderstood the OP. Try again.

It's certainly true that you keep twisting and distorting my words and then you keep blaming it on me.
Will Bouwman
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Will Bouwman »

Age wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:04 am
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pmThere are any number of possible stories that will account for the words on this forum attributed to Age.
Are you BRAVE ENOUGH to provide just ONE example?
Did you read the very next sentence before writing the above?
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm Hopefully avoiding any charge of "over-indexing on the “challenging” part", it is conceivable that you are some AI project being run by someone whose computer has a faulty caps lock...
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Skepdick »

Will Bouwman wrote: Sun May 28, 2023 10:54 am Well yes, there is more to philosophy than critical thinking, but in the context of Skepdick's question, it seems to me to be the unifying feature. As for people who claim to know probably being idiots, firstly consider what probably means. There are many more ideas than there are truths. Secondly, any trained philosopher who hasn't grasped that all ideas are theory laden is definitely an idiot.
Seems terribly important to develop a good theory of theorizing it seems.

Even if that's a little bit recursive.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8529
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Sculptor »

Will Bouwman wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 9:03 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pmSince "what is" is not accessible to us it's a moot point whether we get to call that "truth."
We get to call anything at all anything we like. Personally, I am happy to call "what is" the truth, even though it is not accessible. It's the ontology/epistemology thing - some set of circumstances obtains; we just don't know what they are.
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 5:07 pmAnd since we are in the habit of using this word so casually it is most useful for philosophy to offer an idea, or set of ideas upon what the word means and how we use it.
I think Hosper's has at least 6 categories of truth.
Perhaps he does. I just don't find categories particularly useful. I'm comfortable in the 'I know it when I see it' camp, fully aware that others will view exactly the same scene differently.
Then you will never know the truth. Would you say that about yourself?
Actually the basic three categories are "belief", "truth as correspondence" and "truth as coherence", with their own sub divisions.
They are VERY useful, very particularly useful. And help us unpack unwarranted truths.
Will Bouwman
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Will Bouwman »

Skepdick wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 9:41 amSeems terribly important to develop a good theory of theorizing it seems.
To you perhaps. If it works, use it, is good enough for me.
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Philosophy undermines truth

Post by Skepdick »

Will Bouwman wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 11:16 am
Skepdick wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 9:41 amSeems terribly important to develop a good theory of theorizing it seems.
To you perhaps. If it works, use it, is good enough for me.
Sure sounds like you need a way of deciding whether something works or doesn't.
Post Reply