I believe my intention was to say it wasn't "a pursuit of truth" as in, it wasn't merely a pursuit of truth. But, I take your point and can agree. Who...
Your logic goes way too quickly for me to follow, abruptly jumping to assertions of habit, addiction, rationalisation, and irrational desires, but no ...
Your comment was about reliability, and that was my focus. Surely, neither merely believing something is true nor believing that no arguments against ...
I voted yes to wanting it, but no if everyone else did. As I understand it, the invention the book came up with would do what I wanted, but not necess...
That's definitely not what truth is. Science makes use of language where truths are inherently pragmatic and goal-orientated. We can test the "effecti...
So, there are all of these different types of truths, dozens of them, potentially infinite, and science pursues only one of these. Why not just say th...
Not sure I agree with the premise of the OP to begin with, that "rational agreement is elusive", or what exactly that entails. I also don't see why th...
My claim was that arguments are a pre-requisite for transparency in philosophy (discussion), not the only pre-requisite or only factor. How can one be...
I was imagining philosophy as the context for my statement, and these things are context-dependent. Transparency in your example isn't the same as the...
There's certainly a relationship between being transparent and giving arguments, but surely it's just that an argument is a prerequisite to transparen...
I think you've largely just used the word "transparency" to refer to having an argument. Having reasons for one's assertions. Which is itself an argum...
The argument that I've made throughout the OP is that INTs aren't and can't be just meaningless names. I went through INTs such as self-driving cars o...
Truth is a quality given to "correct reference", it's "the right answer", and what's "right" is determined by the logic of the sentence and the words ...
I don't know how aware of it you are, but you're rattling off many alarmingly convenient oversimplifications. Philosophers often seem to overly rely o...
Duty is just as loyal a servant to evil as it is to good, that's something you'd do well to remember. Duty is the strongest motivator, you claim? It s...
You said rationality stipulates only that one must be consistent with one's ethics, and I took that to imply that one's ethical positions can be anyth...
Nope, goals must be rational as well, if your ethical position is invalid, inconsistent or illogical, then you aren't being rational by merely being c...
Me neither, which makes sense, given it doesn't have anything to do with your definition. I'm talking about the motivations for creating the word rati...
Yes, I am. In other words, I am saying an aspect of rationality is for one to act in accordance with one's values regardless of whether I think one sh...
Yep. I am not saying one needs to be consistent with their own values, I'm saying that's part of rationality. No, rationality by definition references...
Clarify something for me, are you trying to use the word "rationality" as though you invented it? To give it your own definition and understand it in ...
What do you think makes something part of rationality? Is something only part of rationality when we agree with it? What makes an understanding of the...
Yes, well, as I said, you're describing instrumental rationality. I didn't amend anything, I merely said it was unlikely and then gave some if stateme...
Rationality has a few aspects to it: 1) Logical thinking - One should think logically, and avoid unhelpful emotional and psychological influences. 2) ...
Okay. Your definition can't be taken literally, as it wouldn't make sense, and so I need to interpret what kind of manners of acting would "agree with...
Aren't (3) and (4) key components of rationality? As in, a rejection of rationality could target either of these points. Your thinking seems to have b...
Why? When you have the concept of a plum, and the concept of a box, and the conceptual understanding of what it would mean for a box to contain a plum...
Boring answer but I think the possibility you alluded to is correct, the word has separate definitions and the meaning depends on the context. A consi...
I have agreed that all we have is belief, and I agree that our concepts are part of our understanding of the world. I can talk about dogs, but that's ...
The opposite. A dog is a dog, an animal, a mammal, a loyal companion, a pet, but not a building. It's not true that a dog is a building, it's an incor...
I don't understand the criticism of "prelinguistic stuff making linguistic stuff true". What is prelinguistic stuff? To clarify, rain is a created cat...
I agree that all we ever have is belief, but truth is technically a function of logic, the term does not endorse or dispute but affirms or denies the ...
Contrasting capitalism to socialism is folly, instead, we should assume private ownership, and ask what level of government interventionism there is. ...
This question really shows a significant problem with truth in my opinion. The answer is, of course, yes. A correct reference is correct because it's ...
Your response covers a lot of ground, and I am starting to lose track of what we're arguing for/against. I'll focus on debating what truth is for now,...
Glad to hear it. It's clear that some miscommunication occurred, I delayed my response so we'd have a chance to collect ourselves. Unlike in most conv...
Yes, true statements refer correctly to states of the world, that's what truth is. If I make up some crap, for example, "If a human being has less tha...
As I argued previously, philosophy is thought funnelled through biases of justice, morality, group benefit, logic, rationality and so on. To me, it's ...
:groan: I see this as largely tangential so I'll resist going into any more detail on it. I'll tell you one thing for sure, whatever does make them tr...
Language meaning is changing all the time, culture is changing all the time, and it's possible to understand words and ideas differently despite the c...
There's no difference between the two. I would like to hear how you understand the idea of "truth" since you've heard mine and offered no counterargum...
Note: Philosophy is very broad and I'll be making some generalisations, I can acknowledge exceptions. Philosophy does not have an impractical interest...
I'll give that there's some faith involved in thinking of a mind-independent world, I don't experience it, but I believe it's there. On the other hand...
I can agree with that. The defining feature of philosophy for me is the universality of logic. We need to consider the greater repercussions beyond ou...
Is your thread basically just saying that to play tennis we need to abide by the rules of tennis? One must subjugate themselves to the rules of philos...
What are the significant characteristics involved with being reliant on the human nervous system? To tell you what you already know, we have a lot of ...
What are you referring to when you talk about "rationality" and "logic"? You said in another thread: So, I'll add, can you explain what "truly logical...
Yes, the problem is that any analysis of an ideology or religion will go beyond those specific, shared characteristics, and that's the problem. We sto...
Comments