You are very lost in philosophy.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 10, 2024 9:31 amNo, I propose a premise that entails a conclusion. There are no so-called abstract things - forms or (to update the myth) concepts - so philosophy - 'the love of wisdom from knowledge and critical thinking' - doesn't and can't deal with them.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri May 10, 2024 9:09 am The term 'philosophy' is now a very loose term.
What you are hinging on is the bastardized form of philosophy.
The origin definition of philosophy is actually inherent in all humans, i.e. the love of wisdom from knowledge and critical thinking.
Whatever of reality we are dealing with must be confined within its relevant framework and system, regardless of whether it is a concrete or abstract noun.
These Framework and System will have varying degrees of credibility and objectivity which can be assessed based on a set of criteria, of which the scientific FSERC is the gold standard [100/100].
So when we assess the Platonic FSK, it would be 10/100 in contrast to the gold standard due to the lack of reliance on empirical evidences.
Thus, whatever is claimed as reality, facts, knowledge or objective it has to have its specific human-based FSK and from there it can be contrasted with the gold standard.
Therefore, from the above, every thing will be covered and its credibility and objective can be assessed and rated.
Your claim of 'what is fact' is a personal subjective claim and cannot be placed within any Framework and System, thus it is very subjective and cannot be assessed and rated at all.
I kept asking you for your references and the specific FSK, i.e. its is Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, Armstrong, linguistic, ???.
You are unable to support your claim so what you keep postulating is your personal opinion.
Instead, it deals with the ways we do or could use some so-called abstract nouns, their cognates and related words. De-dazzle any philosophical question or 'problem', and you'll see that's what it's about. (Other discourses deal with reality outside language, such as the natural sciences.)
Happy to be disabused by anyone here who has even one counter example.
A dog chasing its tail needs to re-think the premise.
- abstract noun: a noun denoting an idea, quality, or state rather than a concrete object, e.g. truth, danger, happiness.
I would claim 'fact' is also an abstract noun.
You insist the above abstract nouns do not exist?
What I claim as fact, truth, knowledge, danger, wisdom, happiness are all contingent upon a human-based FSERC.
Here is another point you avoided above.
Your claim of 'what is fact' is a personal subjective claim and cannot be placed within any Framework and System, thus it is very subjective and cannot be assessed and rated at all.
I kept asking you for your references and the specific FSK, i.e. its is Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, Armstrong, linguistic, ???. So where is your reference point on this.
You are unable to support your claim so what you keep postulating as "what is fact" is your personal opinion.
Have you got any idea of the origin and history of the term fact up to the present?