RE: A question about Truth
May 4, 2014 at 6:39 pm
(This post was last modified: May 4, 2014 at 6:55 pm by bennyboy.)
(May 4, 2014 at 11:59 am)whateverist Wrote: But there is no hypothetical consideration about the nature of 'truth' which will make the slightest dent in my confidence in my experience of reality or the beliefs which arise as a result.
Experiences are intrinsically true-- as experiences. It is attributions about the source of those experiences which is in question.
(May 4, 2014 at 12:19 pm)Coffee Jesus Wrote: Our concepts of "solid" and "99.9999999% empty space" can be reconsiled[sic], otherwise they couldn't both be true of the hammer.It is reconciled by realizing that our experience of things and the actual nature of those things are not the same. Solidity, uniform surfaces, and the other properties of objects as we perceive them exist only as ideas.
Don't believe me? Describe what a plane is, in geometry, then describe what the surface of a desk looks like, close up. So where is the flatness of the desk? Its context is not defined by the collection of (possibly real) particles, but by the nature of human perception.
