|existentialism ° art ° poetry ° exquisite corpse ° chat ° search engine|
|( the cry ) Philosophy Discussion Board|
Posted by km on Thursday, December 12, 2002 at 01:30:03 :
In Reply to: silence posted by INSpECT on Wednesday, December 11, 2002 at 01:09:19 :
"Why, if we don't have access to the truth, are we endowed with the ability to speak?"
I'd only like to point out that you seem to be confusing "truth" with something like "object reality." In other words, you are confusing the concept of truth with the metaphysical issue of realism/ non-realism. Technically speaking, truth is a property of a statement, belief, proposition, etc (depending on who you ask). Although it might sound like I'm nitpicking, this is an important distinction, for it is possible for there to be "truth" without accepting that we have access to some objective reality that stands outside of all of our conceptual schemes. A theory of truth of this sort would hold something like the truth of a belief consists in its being verified or being consistent or coherent within a given set of beliefs, etc.
You seem to be saying that you won't accept anything as legitimately true unless the belief, statement, etc. can be said to "correspond" in some absolute way to some absolute, objective reality.
So when you say that we may not have access to truth, I think this really means something like "objective, non-human reality." But to impose this as a necessary condition for truth seems unnecessary, if not asking for an impossible requirement.
Post a Followup