Michael

What are you talking about?

So? The redundancy theory isn't a theory about the syntax of truth statements. It doesn't say that any sentence of the form "X is true" is equivalent ...

How does that show that the redundancy theory is a failed theory?

Yes, I'm being sincere. The main forms of moral nihilism are expressivism, which is a form of non-cognitivism, claiming that moral statements do not e...

Dishonest, much? I said that redundancy is truth nihilism if by "truth nihilism" you just mean that truth isn't a real property. If, however, you mean...

What about with chess?

If by "truth nihilism" you mean something like "moral nihilism" (as you suggested earlier) then you're just wrong. Moral nihilism is the position that...

That's the problem with quine's claim that "All blue dogs are dogs" is true by virtue of its logical form, i.e. all X-type Ys are Ys. Meaning matters.

What about "all former students are students"?

No, that's not what we agree on. Under the redundancy theory, truth is a redundant concept. Given that "it is true that it is raining" means the same ...

That's why it's called the redundancy theory. The point is that the word "true" is redundant; the claim "it is true that it is raining" is just the cl...

If you just mean that the word "true" only has a social function, then yes. But if you mean that whether or not something is true, then no. A redundan...

That doesn't matter. If the correspondence theorist were to say "it is true that it is raining" then their statement has the practical function of sig...

The quote only says about agreement that "the word true in these sentences may have the practical function of signaling to one's audience that one is ...

Yes. The redundancy theorist just says that "it is true that it is raining" means "it is raining". If you then want to say that "it is raining" signif...

I don't disagree with any of that. I disagree with your earlier claim that the redundancy theory says that truth is agreement.

If you just mean that saying "it is raining" indicates that the speaker believes that it is raining, then sure. But if you mean that the expression "i...

No, when I say that it is true that it is raining I'm just saying that it is raining. The "it is true that" part is superfluous. That's the reductioni...

Redundancy doesn't say that truth is agreement.

That they exist and happen even though we don't know about them.

It doesn't talk about unknown truths. It talks about unknown things happening or existing.

Which is why the redundancy theorist isn't a truth nihilist.

That's still the redundancy theory of truth. As the Wikipedia article explains, "The strategy of Ramsey's argument is to demonstrate that certain figu...

The moral nihilist claims that nothing is moral. But the redundancy theorist doesn't claim that nothing is true. So if you're using moral nihilism as ...

But you're asking about how the redundancy theorist would define "truth". That you use "truth" to refer to accuracy is not that they would. The proble...

So to be a truth nihilist just is to believe that "truth logical role, has no descriptive content of its own, and so does not contribute to the conten...

The position that nothing satisfies the requirements to be true? Or that all claims are false? E.g. Nietzsche: "Every belief, every considering someth...

Then I don't know what you mean by "truth skepticism". To me, it would mean to question the claim that it is true that it is raining, which according ...

The Deflationary Theory of Truth And it's not skepticism, as the redundancy theorist can happily accept that it is true that it is raining – which is ...

The redundancy theory is deflation, and isn't skepticism.

I can prove you wrong on that account.

Do you think heterosexuals watch porn with homosexuals for fun?

My own take on the issue is that it is more fruitful to ask what function the phrase "it is true" performs. And the function it seems to perform in a ...

Isn't this like asking what "set" means in the general, not in the particular, and being unable to offer the same meaning for "set" in the examples of...

I don't think it's a quibble. The meaning of "I have a right..." is quite different to the meaning of "You should...". Although we might say that you ...

If the Pythagorean Theorem is causally efficacious then it just isn't an abstract object according to Frege's definition (even if it's an abstract obj...

Can the White House even go a week without some massive fuck up?

I don't think that a higher authority is required. We can talk about it being unfair for women to have to compete with men in certain sports without r...

Just as we might say that I don't have the right to kill my neighbour because the law forbids it we might also say that a child doesn't have the right...

Although I agree with the general idea, I think you're forgetting non-legal rules that are recognised and enforced, e.g. employment, family, religion,...

Great quote from a girl at work: "He's not a man; he does yoga."

I'm aiming for a zero-hour work day.

Chicago man fatally shoots son over dog-walking Yes, an armed society is a polite society... ;)

You can also filter what shows on the front page by clicking on Categories and then unticking the boxes on the right.

So in other words all counterfactuals are trivially true (if physically possible) because we can simply stipulate that they refer to the possible worl...

So I was right in saying that we have to abandon the principle of bivalence if we are to adopt this understanding of truth. And as the OP suggests, co...

The problem with this is that it entails that both "if I had opened the box at earlier time t I would have found the cat to be dead" and "if I had ope...

You're not solving the problem. You haven't explained how the statement ""if I had opened the box at earlier time t I would have found the cat to be d...

That's not the statement I used. You're changing it to avoid addressing the problem. The statement is a counterfactual claim about the one world that ...

This is ambiguous. Are you say that it doesn't have a truth value, or only that we can't determine what that truth value is? If the former then we've ...