On 06 Nov 2012, at 03:42, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/5/2012 8:13 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Even with the Theaetetus’ definition of truth, which I find to
be highly original and amazingly ingenious, we are still left
without an explanation as to how the accidental coincidence of a
Platonic Truth and an actual fact of the world occurs. Your idea
reminds me of Spinoza and Whitehead's attempt at an Occasionalist
explanation of mind-body interactions.
That's why most philosophers don't consider true belief to
constitute knowledge. Gettier's paradox implies that something more
is needed - usually a causal connection between the belief and the
fact that makes it true.
A causal, or a deductive relation (which is already a form of
"cause"). This was already answered by Theaetetus, when he get the
true *justified* opinion.
Bruno
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
