RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
January 14, 2017 at 5:59 pm
(This post was last modified: January 14, 2017 at 6:04 pm by emjay.)
(January 14, 2017 at 5:51 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Direct and indirect realism, are not positions on the properties of objects, but the nature of our knowledge (specifically the manner in which we arrive at it) regarding the properties of those objects. U;timately, a direct and indirect realist have no need to disagree on the properties of the object in order to express their dissenting POVs. The same object with the same properties, can be discussed by either. Focusing on the object, in the context of d vs id realism is to miss the disagreement.
Cool... well I've only been reading about it for two days so I hope you'll forgive the misunderstanding
but there will come a time when I'll be having to do an exam on this, so hopefully I'll get it soon but what you say there sounds a bit like what I was saying... that there seems no difference re the actual object and it's properties... so I agree you can both talk about it, and pretty much in the same terms.Eta: thank you for the clarification
