Objectivity, logic and criteria for acceptable empiracal evidence

[IvanKaramozov]

This is a thread for me, JoyousGuard, and anyone else to discuss the above topics in the title.

Might be interesting.

Anyone can start, JoyousGuard is welcolme to come in anytime.

What is the acceptiability for empericle evidence, and when can argument from authority be used if ever?

 

[Joyousguard]

For Ivan only: If you copy from other sources the purpose of this will be pointless. Respond to these questions and we’ll move on from there.

Your first question is “What is truth?”

Where does truth come from?

How do we know what is true and what is false?

Is truth absolute?

Do human beings all seek the truth?

If human beings all seek the truth why does evil occur?

 

[ateista]

1. Your first question is “What is truth?”
2. Where does truth come from?
3. How do we know what is true and what is false?
4. Is truth absolute?
5. Do human beings all seek the truth?

6)If human beings all seek the truth why does evil occur?

Answers:

1. Truth is the correct assessment of reality.
2. Observation, hypothesis forming, testing.
3. Testing.
4. No.
5. No.
6. Irrelevant, because the answer to 5 was “no”.

 

[ateista]

What is the acceptiability for empericle evidence, and when can argument from authority be used if ever?

Argument from authority can be used as a shortcut. We simply do not have time or the knowledge to investigate every claim. The authority is someone who can substantiate his claim, if necessary.

 

[East_and_West]

Answers:

1. Truth is the correct assessment of reality.
2. Observation, hypothesis forming, testing.
3. Testing.
4. No.
5. No.
6. Irrelevant, because the answer to 5 was “no”.

#1 and #4 don’t really seem to go together. If truth is not absolute, then how can you say there is an assesment of reality taht is true?

 

[ateista]

#1 and #4 don’t really seem to go together. If truth is not absolute, then how can you say there is an assesment of reality taht is true?

It all depends what one means by “absolute” truth.

I was thinking about scientifically true statements - which of course rely on the subject being studied. I agree that there are some “absolute” true statements, but they are largely trivial or axiomatic.

The true statements of mathematics (which is as abstract as it gets), are all conditional. Every mathematical theorem starts with something like: “let ‘x’ have a propery ‘p’…” and then continues with: “then ‘y’ is true…” - so all of them are conditional, not absolute.

How do we know that the assessment of reality is true? We test it and rely on our senses. Suppose we are in the desert on a hot day. We see something in the distance which looks like a lake. We assume that it is a lake. We approach it, but it never gets nearer. We amend our assessment and arrive at a conclusion that all we saw was a mirage.

In very general terms this is how we decide if our assessment of reality was correct or not.

 

[East_and_West]

It all depends what one means by “absolute” truth.

I was thinking about scientifically true statements - which of course rely on the subject being studied. I agree that there are some “absolute” true statements, but they are largely trivial or axiomatic.

The true statements of mathematics (which is as abstract as it gets), are all conditional. Every mathematical theorem starts with something like: “let ‘x’ have a propery ‘p’…” and then continues with: “then ‘y’ is true…” - so all of them are conditional, not absolute.

How do we know that the assessment of reality is true? We test it and rely on our senses. Suppose we are in the desert on a hot day. We see something in the distance which looks like a lake. We assume that it is a lake. We approach it, but it never gets nearer. We amend our assessment and arrive at a conclusion that all we saw was a mirage.

In very general terms this is how we decide if our assessment of reality was correct or not.

Does deductive reasoning, not just empirical evidence come into play for you?

 

[ateista]

Does deductive reasoning, not just empirical evidence come into play for you?

Of course it does. But those are applicable only in an axiomatic system - like mathematics.

 

[East_and_West]

Of course it does. But those are applicable only in an axiomatic system - like mathematics.

So you don’t believe that deductive logic applies to reality outside of Mathematics (I am a Mathematician, btw )?

 

[ateista]

So you don’t believe that deductive logic applies to reality outside of Mathematics (I am a Mathematician, btw )?

Glad to hear it. So am I… small world. Mathematics was an example. I was talking about all the exact sciences, which are axiomatically defined.

 

[IvanKaramozov]

Your first question is “What is truth?”

Truth is what is the case

Where does truth come from?

I don’t know

How do we know what is true and what is false?

well this presupposes that we can “know” something to be the case, I’m hesitant to assume that.

Is truth absolute?

How do you mean?

Do human beings all seek the truth?

No

If human beings all seek the truth why does evil occur?

They don’t

I gave trite answers because they are a bit vague and I didn’t want to assume to much into your questions

 

[IvanKaramozov]

Argument from authority can be used as a shortcut. We simply do not have time or the knowledge to investigate every claim. The authority is someone who can substantiate his claim, if necessary.

That, I would agrea with

 

[Joyousguard]

IvanKaramozov;3102210]Truth is what is the case

So would a murderer killing someone because he enjoyed it be truth?

I don’t know

If you don’t know where truth comes from how do you recognize truth?

well this presupposes that we can “know” something to be the case, I’m hesitant to assume that.

SO truth is subjective?

How do you mean?

Is there a set standard for truth across the board. Are things true no matter what the situation?

No

How do you know that all human beings do not seek the truth?

They don’t

Again, how do you know that all human beings do not seek the truth or have not already found teh truth and do not need to proceed further?

 

[IvanKaramozov]

So would a murderer killing someone because he enjoyed it be truth?

If he did indeed kill someone because he enjoyed it, then it would be the case(i.e. true) that he killed someone because he enjoyed it

If you don’t know where truth comes from how do you recognize truth?

I don’t know where my computer comes from, I can still use it

SO truth is subjective?

I don’t think I ever said that

Is there a set standard for truth across the board. Are things true no matter what the situation?

well, are we talking about contingent truth or necessary true?

How do you know that all human beings do not seek the truth?

Not all human beings seek the truth
-(x)Th<–>(Ex)-Th

I have at times not sought the truth, and preferd a lie or falseficationto truth, therefore, not all human beings seek truth all the time

Again, how do you know that all human beings do not seek the truth or have not already found teh truth and do not need to proceed further?

see above

 

[Joyousguard]

IvanKaramozov;3105204]If he did indeed kill someone because he enjoyed it, then it would be the case(i.e. true) that he killed someone because he enjoyed it

But is murdering someone because you find it enjoyable a moral truth (not true, but truth)?

I don’t know where my computer comes from, I can still use it

Then an objective good like a computer is the same as an objective moral good and is only dependent upon the fact the ends? (where a computer comes from and where truth comes from are no where near compatibale in analogy)

I don’t think I ever said that

Would you say that if truth is not objective it must be subjective and vice versa?

well, are we talking about contingent truth or necessary true?

objective truth

Not all human beings seek the truth
-(x)Th<–>(Ex)-Th
I have at times not sought the truth, and preferd a lie or falseficationto truth, therefore, not all human beings seek truth all the time

Is the pursuit of the good the same thing as the pursuit of the truth. That is to say that when we look for something that we see as being good, are we seeking the truth as well?

 

[IvanKaramozov]

But is murdering someone because you find it enjoyable a moral truth (not true, but truth)?

Ok, are we talking about truth, criteria for truth, or morality.

It wasen’t meant to be.

I don’t know what the foundations of mathematics are, and we haven’t known for thousands of years, yet we still have a fairly good sense that, while we don’t know exactly where it comes from, we can use it.

You haven’t provided an rgument for why we woulden’t be able to use truth simply because we don’t know where it comes from, you simply threw out the question.

Would you say that if truth is not objective it must be subjective and vice versa?

Sure

objective truth

I’m wearing black, Karate pants, that is an objective, contingent truth, hence, you’re response dosen’t answer my question.

Is the pursuit of the good the same thing as the pursuit of the truth.

My Platonism wants me to say yes

No, and those two are not nearely the same thing.

No offense, but you seem a bit confused for someone who is going to rebuild my knoledge of truth, and we have not even toutched upon authority

[/QUOTE]

 

[Joyousguard]

IvanKaramozov;3109785]
Ok, are we talking about truth, criteria for truth, or morality.

Truth is what is the case

There is criteria for judgeing what is true

and then there is morality

You want to smash them all together, let’s be clear please

So morality isn’t a part of truth?

I don’t know what the foundations of mathematics are, and we haven’t known for thousands of years, yet we still have a fairly good sense that, while we don’t know exactly where it comes from, we can use it.

You haven’t provided an rgument for why we woulden’t be able to use truth simply because we don’t know where it comes from, you simply threw out the question.Let me get to that part.

So you have no idea what truth is based on but you know how to recognize it when you see it and use it when you see it. By what standards do you know how to use and recognize truth?

I’m wearing black, Karate pants, that is an objective, contingent truth, hence, you’re response dosen’t answer my question.

Absolute truth/objective truth- all things that are one way for they can be no other way. I’ll leave it at this for now or simply put “reality as it is”

No, and those two are not nearely the same thing

.
So you will not find the truth in the pursuit of the good or good in the pursuit of truth?

No offense, but you seem a bit confused for someone who is going to rebuild my knoledge of truth, and we have not even toutched upon authority

And you should be abit more humble for a guy who admits he doesn’t know where truth comes from. Just laying the ground work. I want to see where you stand first, then move from there. I’ll get to your misunderstanding of authority later:thumbsup: .

 

[Joyousguard]

Is truth subjective, that is to say, is truth relative?

 

[IvanKaramozov]

And you should be abit more humble for a guy who admits he doesn’t know where truth comes from. Just laying the ground work. I want to see where you stand first, then move from there. I’ll get to your misunderstanding of authority later:thumbsup: .

I don’t think I’ve been unhumble, however you informed me that it was necessary for you to tear down my preconceived notions and set me straight, which seems fairly haughty to me, especially saince you seem to be a tad confused yourself

"Is the pursuit of the good the same thing as the pursuit of the truth. That is to say that when we look for something that we see as being good, are we seeking the truth as well? "

The question of wheather seeking the good is the same as seeking the truth is quite another issue from “when we look for something that we see as being good, are we seeking the truth as well”

If you want to know where I’m comming from you can just ask.

I’m an epistemological Solipsist, and I suppose a rationalist of sorts. I don’t claim to know anything for an absolute certainity, that dosen’t mean I beleive truth is subjective, it just means I haven’t seen anything knowiable that is beyond doubt.

If you have any questions about my beleifs that’s fine

 

[IvanKaramozov]

are we still going with this?