Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
For materialists, do you believe that truth exists independent of mind? If so, how?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostNo, truth is not a thing that exists, its an abstraction, an expression of the mind regarding the characteristic nature of the concrete reality. Stars exist, they are what they are, and we call what they are the truth.Originally posted by JimL View PostNo, the reality of the world is what it is, is true, whether there exist a mind able to grasp that reality or not. Truth is simply the reality of existence, and the minds correspondence with that realty.
Which one is correct?-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by firstfloor View PostAs Feynman said – “nature cannot be fooled” meaning that nature is truth. The human mind is the dynamics of a natural physical object but the dynamics have degrees of freedom that the physical entity does not have (like the difference between music and a musical instrument) and therefore mind is independent of truth. Consequently, as everyone knows, a mind can be attracted to false ideas and not know that they are false.-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostThe first statement defines Truth in terms of mind (i.e. Truth, whether it's a thing or not, requires that a mind exist, by definition), the second says that there is something that is true whether or not the mind exists (i.e. Truth, whether it's a thing or not, exists independent of mind).
Which one is correct?Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostIf nature is Truth, then can statements be true?Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostThe first statement defines Truth in terms of mind (i.e. Truth, whether it's a thing or not, requires that a mind exist, by definition), the second says that there is something that is true whether or not the mind exists (i.e. Truth, whether it's a thing or not, exists independent of mind).
Which one is correct?
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostYou are expecting primates to be human and that is an outrageous expectation. Please note, I said the presence of mind, consciousness, will and intelligence are shown to in primates at the primitive level. I will start a thread on the evolution of intelligence in science to save this thread from an off topic journey into Lala Land.
As you said yourself, expecting an ape to grasp mathematical truth is outrageous.
So what exact proposition of "truth value" do you suppose apes can have?
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThe nature of our physical existence and Natural Laws, as the evidence indicates. The evidence remains, that our mind progressively evolved from life forms that lack a mind.http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html
Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!
Comment
-
Originally posted by hansgeorg View PostI think this is on the contrary very on topic.
As you said yourself, expecting an ape to grasp mathematical truth is outrageous.
So what exact proposition of "truth value" do you suppose apes can have?
On your view, the mind depends on physical existence and Natural Laws. How then exactly could it get a grip on any such thing as evidence?
This will end the discussion on this topic in this thread for my part. I am working on proposing another thread for a discussion more on topic concerning the evolution of the mind consciousness and will.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostMinds of primates and other animals need not 'get a grip on any such thing as evidence' to have minds and consciousness.
If you open a new thread, don't forget to make language evolving from non-human ancestry without it part of the thread.http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html
Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostNo, truth is not a thing that exists, its an abstraction, an expression of the mind regarding the characteristic nature of the concrete reality. Stars exist, they are what they are, and we call what they are the truth.
In terms of "truth" the nature of our physical existence is considered uniform and predicable, and determined by the ultimate "truth" of Natural Laws.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostI don't think you are getting my point, truth isn't a thing in itself, isn't something that has existence, it is just the minds correct interpretation of the reality it percieves.-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostIf Truth is an empty set, then it is true that Truth is an empty set. Thus, there it at least one truth and Truth is not an empty set. Which seems contradictory. So I don't think that Truth being an empty set works as a definition.
That said, I would stick to the (imo) more salient point that 'truth' doesn't actually exist in the first place. It works pretty well as a category, but that doesn't make it any more real than kingdoms or phyla. They're just groupings we use.
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostSo what kind are you? Neutral monist? Dual aspect?I'm not here anymore.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostBut facts would exist without minds. The existence of the sun would not depend on minds grasping that fact. The propositional truth "the sun exists" is mind dependent. Correct?
It's really messy since literally everything we say is a proposition, even when we're claiming that the proposition matches reality. A claim of 'fact' isn't so much a claim about the territory itself (though it's presented as such) but a statement which conveys the strength of our belief in the claim.
All we ever have is a map. The map doesn't affect the territory. We just feel really confident sometimes about what the territory looks like.I'm not here anymore.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Carrikature View PostI'm not sure I follow. "It is true that Truth is an empty set" is a statement. It would require a mind. You couldn't make any statement about Truth sans a mind, so there's not a point at which Truth is an empty set that includes a statement about itself.
That said, I would stick to the (imo) more salient point that 'truth' doesn't actually exist in the first place. It works pretty well as a category, but that doesn't make it any more real than kingdoms or phyla. They're just groupings we use.-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostBut if you claim that Truth was an empty set, then you're saying that it was true that truth existed as an empty set (it's implicit in the statement). Also, if Truth is just a category and does not exist, then there was nothing true about anything before consciousness came to be. So, for example, it was not true that consciousness would eventually exist.
Question: Are fallible humans able to comprehend 'Absolute Truth,' or what is 'Absolutely True' from the human perspective?
I would consider the proposition the 'Truth is an empty set' is the relative truth claim from the human perspective. I believe that an 'ultimate absolute truth set' does exist. If God exists than the 'ultimate absolute truth set' exists with God. If God does not exist than it exists with the ultimate nature of Natural Law and the nature of our physical existence.
Yes, from the fallible humans perspective there are true objective facts (ie the sun exists.), and relative concepts of truth, which exist, but as described before as the 'mind being map dependent ( relative truth),' but the mind does not affect the the territory (Absolute Truth)' this exists from the human perspective. You cannot logically claim that observed 'true objective facts' is the same perspective of Absolute Truth claims of the existence of a 'Mind' some call God.
It would be fallacious to claim that the human perspective must be able to reflect absolute Truth to be considered True and and not reflect a relative truth, concerning the nature of our existence. That includes all belief, assertions, propositions, assumptions and claims on Tweb.
The possibility of a fallacy of 'Truth' claims is described in the following.
There is no certainty in Absolute Truth claims from the human perspective.Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-03-2016, 06:40 AM.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
160 responses
508 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Yesterday, 07:28 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
|
88 responses
354 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-01-2024, 09:27 AM
|
||
Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
|
21 responses
133 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-25-2024, 10:59 PM
|
Comment