Hi Horse and all,
JONATHAN
> > Horse brings up the TRUTH word again in its objective sense, to
which I must
> > give my oft repeated statement that TRUTH and REALITY are not the
same.
>
HORSE
> No. I used the TRUE word. TRUTH (for me) is a whole other kettle of
philosophical fish.
>
Maybe we are arguing about semantics. I basically go with the version
that TRUTH is what is TRUE. Horse, if you want them to be different,
then I can live with that, and limit the discussion to what is TRUE.
A assume that you agree that nothing is true in isolation, but always
true TO something.
Manufactured articles are expected to be TRUE to specifications, the
Earth sticks to its TRUE orbit around the sun, and most of remain TRUE
to our spouses etc. etc.
JONATHAN
> > However, in answer to Horse, it might be better to
> > use more value-laden stories as an example e.g. Aesop's Fables.
> > I *believe* in those stories - NO, NO not that the hare and tortoise
really had
> > a race, but that the story presents a truth that transcends the
plot.
>
HORSE
> It would seem that the TRUTH word is being (mis)used more by you than
me. Remember
> that for me the TRUTH word represents an absolute and you know my
position on absolutes.
>
I could say that the fables are true to certain principals. I think that
I share that position on absolutes. The only difference is that you
consider the word TRUTH to represent an absolute and I don't.
HORSE
> Aesop's fables and the 'truth' (your word, not mine) of the
confirmation and verification of
> scientific method are miles apart on the faith/dogma/belief scale.
Note here that I do NOT
> use the TRUTH word in reference to this scale. Confirmation and
verification of/by scientific
> method as an essential part of science and as such is of enormously
high intellectual value.
> Aesop's fables I see as much more indicative of social value.
Mostly yes, but not entirely. I think that fables and fictions do indeed
often portray social values, but sometimes they get on to other levels.
I don't think that you can dismiss all fictional litereture as social
value (or as "mere" SoPV, as some of the dicussants tend to do)
> When you submit a report on a
> particular piece of work that you have performed in your professional
capacity do you submit
> a nice cosy fable involving cuddly creatures or something that has a
particular, acceptable
> structure and an evaluation of the results etc. in line with
scientific methodology. TRUTH is
> unlikely to come into it, unless we're talking about contingent Truth.
I will admit to often loading reports with a particular slant. You know,
there are many ways to write up the same set of data! When it comes to
verbal presentations and teaching, I do indeed sometimes relate to
fictional constructs as metaphors to illustrate certain points.
Typically, the choice of examples reveals my own bias.
JONATHAN
> > Thus, what it comes down to is not an issue of True vs. False, but
of True
> > Values vs. False Values, or to put it another way, Good vs. Bad.
HORSE
> That seems much more reasonable. [snip] But
> please leave out out any references to TRUTH.
>
>From now on I will try and stick to using TRUE, to avoid any confusion
...
JONATHAN
> > Faith must ALWAYS be questioned, including faith in logic and
> > science.
> > Furthermore, any social order that denies the value of questioning
is suspect.
>
HORSE
> I must agree with you here, but would say that Faith IS Belief that is
unquestioned. All
> beliefs must be continually questioned or they _become_ Faith and/or
Dogma.
Again, I think that we argue about the semantics, but I think that we
have similar views.
I think I can reduce it all to a single short sentence:
TRUE IS AN ADJECTIVE.
Be true ;-)
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:40 BST