Banno

He's no Gassendi.

I basically agree. Sand is arguably a dickhead, but if folk know he is a dickhead, it's their fault if they get caught.

Astonishingly, I find it was I who introduce Nietzsche into this thread: The post-truth era of Trump is just what Nietzsche predicted Ages ago.

But since this is a philosophy site, you might consider what would occur if we were in a post-truth society. Or join me, in arguing that the very noti...

I'm not playing.

Thank you for causing a family feud. Wife had rearranged the books, so that when I went to check the date of publication, the Annotated Alice had been...

Well, that's not what the OP was about; though that is the direction in which the thread has been driven. The OP is about truth, lies and bullshit; an...

Can a post-truth society last?

A few day ago I tracked the sub-thread back to a throw-away comment; if there is something in Heidegger or Nietzsche that's relevant, let's have it ou...

That sort of thing.

Recent discussion here inadvertently cuts to the core of the topic of this thread.

Well, does it? And even if it does, it does not follow that the world has a cause; the wold is not in the world.

Thanks for trying, Creative. I can't see how re-defining "truth" as something like "historical belief" could be a good thing.

SO how does this Heidegger stuff relate to the thread?

:-| Or you realised what I was saying...

The bullshitter does not care what happened. That's the point.

No. Firstly, thinks/believes is an ambiguous term of your own invention. But even taking it as what the rest of us call belief, a speaker who tells a ...

The Bullshitter is different to the lier in that neither the truth or falsehood of the statement, nor their belief in the truth or falsehood of the st...

I'm not too keen on talking 'bout truth conditions with you, since your conception of them has seemed a bit odd in the past. But obviously belief and ...

But "Hamlet" was either written by Bacon, or it was not. Such truths are independent of belief. One of us must be right.

A truism - "I like vanilla" may be true for me but not for you; or a falsehood - that this post is written in English is true for both of us. Sometime...

Ignoring the explicit contradiction, it's import is that there are no truths, only beliefs. This could be believed with a sort of internal consistency...

We tend to talk about Big Truths at the expense of little ones. It's the little ones that come back to bite. Truth is still there after the lie. There...

Or we could accept that he was wrong. Just a suggestion.

You neatly set out the difference in kind that cannot see. I quite liked your point about deniability.

In my defence, Trump is not mentioned in the OP. I think his election has more to do with popular fascination by a sociopath. An "I told you so" to La...

https://philosophynow.org/issues/121/Beyond_Bullshit_Donald_Trumps_Philosophy_of_Language

Yeah, you are right, Not a problem, hey?

Give him time. It's difference in kind because it is not occasional; the lies are presented even for trivialities like the inauguration; or speaking t...

You might disagree, but to my eye there is a difference not just in degree, but in kind, between the lies of previous presidents - which I do not deny...

ON BULLSHIT See the discussion of Pascal's comment. What seems to have disgusted Wittgenstein is not that Pascal is lying, but that she is not even co...

You never changed your mind? The Ship of Theseus remains Theseus' Ship, despite such changes, if it is rigidly designated.

Not sure what 10% of a fermion would be. Are you the same as you were as a child? Your life can be divided into parts, so we might take pause before d...

Claiming that your mental state is not the same as your brain state begs the question. The right vs. wrong argument needs filling out. If your thought...

IT is self evident and yet needs justification?

I might agree, and add that that's a good thing. Philosophy is tangled words.

Excellent. But I'm not sure that this is a physical question, so much as a philosophical one. My argument is that, contra , it is an abuse of language...

And when not observed - it is not a cup? I don't see why we must make that conclusion.

are you familiar with Aphorism #47 - 48 from Philosophical investigations? It's about what counts as a simple, as not being composite, elemental. It s...

Why not?

It's an important point. I don't see why it can't be both a cup and a quantum thingy.

Silence, then.

I think that dubious. Help me. If I take the cup and put it into the cupboard, are you saying that when I close the door it ceases to be a cup?

Ann and Beth see the same movement, when they take the relativistic equations into account. The cup and the hologram are likewise the same, given the ...

Your first paragraphs is pretty much my view. I would instead say that the question is without a sense; it is an example of language pushed too far. T...

No, there is no ambiguity. That is removed by the mathematics.

What?

Where did we get to? I suppose that the approach you are taking is fine, so long as it is presented as speculative, and not as a consensus view among ...

That ain't right. Both Ann and Beth can make true statements, and the transformations Einstein developed show us that they are describing the very sam...

:D