5 ms·

> There's no such thing as true reality Interesting. When you say "there's no such thing as X", aren't you imagining a sphere of existence in which, whether we

> There's no such thing as true reality Interesting. When you say "there's no such thing as X", aren't you imagining a sphere of existence in which, whether we want it to or not, "X" does not appear? Would you not call that sphere of existence "reality"? If you're saying we can't perceive reality, well, that's what's being argued about in the article. If you're saying reality doesn't exist, you're contradicting yourself. To put it another way, "there's no such thing as truth" is a claim about what's true. Imagine that you say "there's no such thing as truth" and I say "yes there is". What can you say? "You're wrong"? I would reply, "if I can be wrong, it means there is a Real Truth for my statement to contradict."

shkkmo 11y ago
Or he could be viewing the phrase "true reality" as a linguistic construct without a referent. This even makes sense since 'truth' is more of a property of represenations of reality rather than a property of reality itself. > What can you say? "You're wrong"? I could say "ok, show truth to me or explain why you think truth exists" I could also say "What value (fitness) does believing that assertion provide me"? Obviously, if you assume that truth is necessary to evaluate statements or beliefs, then stating that truth doesn't exist will lead you to contradictions. However, there are plenty of other methods of evaluation are frequently used. I would in fact argue argue that 'truth' is very rarely directly among the properties of an idea that we commonly use when evaluate it. The reputation of the source, coherence with other beliefs, effects on social identity, and cognitive efficiency seem to be the most common properties.
- nathan_long 11y ago
  > I could say "ok, show truth to me or explain why you think truth exists" The idea that I can explain or argue anything presupposes that some things are true and other things can be shown to follow logically from them or be disproved by contradiction. > I would in fact argue argue that 'truth' is very rarely directly among the properties of an idea that we commonly use when evaluate it. Whether people commonly seek truth is a separate question from whether truth exists. "Do people evaluate ideas based on whether they're true or whether they make them feel good?" is a valid question, and you may be right in your answer. But look - "you may be right" means "your description may conform to the actual truth." We just can't even form sentences without assuming that some things are true and others aren't.
  - shkkmo 11y ago
    > The idea that I can explain or argue anything presupposes that some things are true and other things can be shown to follow logically from them or be disproved by contradiction. The idea that communication is dependent on pre-existing notions of truth and logic is flatly false. Now you might presuppose those notions when you communicate, but that doesn't make that presupposition necessary for communication. > Whether people commonly seek truth is a separate question from whether truth exists. True :). I'm not trying to convince you that truth doesn't exist. I'm trying to convince you that you can evaluate the phrase "truth does not exist" without pre-supposing the existence of truth. This is because you can (and people commonly do) evaluate such a phrase on attributes other than their 'truth'. The phrase "you may be right" can mean all KINDS of things from "I don't have a definitive counter argument" to "It is possible your statement is true" to "I don't want to argue about that anymore". I think you are too focused on how you tend to perceive the world and communicate about it. People don't all think and talk the same way you do and assuming that they do is doing them and yourself a disservice.

shkkmo 11y ago

Or he could be viewing the phrase "true reality" as a linguistic construct without a referent. This even makes sense since 'truth' is more of a property of represenations of reality rather than a property of reality itself. > What can you say? "You're wrong"? I could say "ok, show truth to me or explain why you think truth exists" I could also say "What value (fitness) does believing that assertion provide me"? Obviously, if you assume that truth is necessary to evaluate statements or beliefs, then stating that truth doesn't exist will lead you to contradictions. However, there are plenty of other methods of evaluation are frequently used. I would in fact argue argue that 'truth' is very rarely directly among the properties of an idea that we commonly use when evaluate it. The reputation of the source, coherence with other beliefs, effects on social identity, and cognitive efficiency seem to be the most common properties.

nathan_long 11y ago
> I could say "ok, show truth to me or explain why you think truth exists" The idea that I can explain or argue anything presupposes that some things are true and other things can be shown to follow logically from them or be disproved by contradiction. > I would in fact argue argue that 'truth' is very rarely directly among the properties of an idea that we commonly use when evaluate it. Whether people commonly seek truth is a separate question from whether truth exists. "Do people evaluate ideas based on whether they're true or whether they make them feel good?" is a valid question, and you may be right in your answer. But look - "you may be right" means "your description may conform to the actual truth." We just can't even form sentences without assuming that some things are true and others aren't.
- shkkmo 11y ago
  > The idea that I can explain or argue anything presupposes that some things are true and other things can be shown to follow logically from them or be disproved by contradiction. The idea that communication is dependent on pre-existing notions of truth and logic is flatly false. Now you might presuppose those notions when you communicate, but that doesn't make that presupposition necessary for communication. > Whether people commonly seek truth is a separate question from whether truth exists. True :). I'm not trying to convince you that truth doesn't exist. I'm trying to convince you that you can evaluate the phrase "truth does not exist" without pre-supposing the existence of truth. This is because you can (and people commonly do) evaluate such a phrase on attributes other than their 'truth'. The phrase "you may be right" can mean all KINDS of things from "I don't have a definitive counter argument" to "It is possible your statement is true" to "I don't want to argue about that anymore". I think you are too focused on how you tend to perceive the world and communicate about it. People don't all think and talk the same way you do and assuming that they do is doing them and yourself a disservice.