Re: [ontolog-forum] Truth

[Chris Menzel <chris.menzel@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:58 PM, John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'd like to cite the following article as an antidote to some
of the recent discussions about truth:

   http://www.indiana.edu/~educy520/readings/haack96truth.pdf
   Concern for truth:  What it means, why it matters

The author, Susan Haack, is a philosopher who specializes in issues
about logic and the philosophy of science.  She frequently quotes
C. S. Peirce, who has far more cogent arguments on these topics than
the philosophers she is arguing against.

There is another point of view, which is very different from the
ones that Haack is discussing in that article.  It is based on the
observation that

  "p is true" if and only if p.

Misplaced right quote there; should be:

   "p" is true if and only if p.

This observation does not deny that there are true statements.
It merely defines the adjective 'true' without claiming that there
is an abstract entity called Truth.

Well, now that doesn't follow at all. The schema above is completely independent of how one understands truth, as all (or nearly all) instaces of the schema should turn out to be consequences of *any* understanding of truth, whether deflationist or platonic.

-chris

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)