re: Fact

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andrew_Lorimer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Andrew_Lorimer

Guest
Hi Folks,

I’ve posted the following on a number or www sites and had no comments. I wonder if any one here finds that the proposition is of worth or helpful. As I have constructed it; it follows:

re: “fact”, p129, “Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy” SECOND EDITION REVISED, SIMON BLACKBURN, Oxford University Press 2008, ISBN 978-0-19-954143-0; > Facts are constructions upon an appearance {that it is the case that p, is because of a true construction upon an appearance}.

So, to help those who do not have access to the quoted source of the ‘seed’; the proposal is:

Facts are constructions upon an appearance {that it is the case that p, is because of a true construction upon an appearance}.
 
“All I have seen teaches me to trust the Creator for all I have not seen” Ralph Waldo Emerson
 
Well you have helped in the sense that you do not disapprove. Is my first post ‘simple’ or a truism?
 
Well, yes! (Or at least, not overtly). Because then I would ponder, and wonder if I am deluded: and it would help me to discover the truth about my comprehension.
 
I should have an answer sometime tomorrow. it’s midnight where I am, so I’m going to bed.
 
Thanks for your attention. Have a good night. (if you see this in time).
 
I’m sorry, but your post seems vague to me. What do you mean exactly?
 
A fact is a phantasm that is reflective of that object to which it is oriented.
 
A fact is a truth that is difficult, if not impossible, to dispute, such as:

“Night follows day and day follows night.”

or

“I am writing this sentence in a Catholic Answers forum.”

or

“Abortion is the killing of a human being.”

Facts may be distinguished from beliefs by the ease with which they are proven. However, the difficulty of proving a proposition is no argument against the proposition, unless the proposition is absurd. The difficulty of proving the existence of God is no argument against the existence of God. However, the difficulty of proving the existence of a round square is because the idea of a round square is absurd. Nobody disputes this fact.
 
Charlemagne_II said:
. However, the difficulty of proving the existence of a round square is because the idea of a round square is absurd. Nobody disputes this fact.
Click to expand...
don’t be so sure of this. I often find myself thinking about round squares, despite the fact that I know it is in a sense illogical. I think it is a current trend in philosophy and in our culture to deny logic, who’s to say that a square can’t be round? That’s awfully judgmental to our dear square who just wants to be round so he can be more friendly and not so sharp around the edges…
 
*That’s awfully judgmental to our dear square who just wants to be round so he can be more friendly and not so sharp around the edges… *

I agree. Desire is the mother of invention! :rotfl:
 
Andrew_Lorimer said:
Is my first post…a truism?
Click to expand...
JackVk said:
I should have an answer sometime tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Hi JackVk and Others,

Since I need to contribute to this thread and you have not answered the question, (I understand that we cannot always do as we plan): I trust that you will not mind if I continue to post.

I have answered myself: the proposal is not a truism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top