On 11/22/2013 3:24 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno:
Brent's dichotomy - as you pointed out - about exist and true may go deeper in
my opinion:
If we *_THINK _*of something: it DOES *_exist_* indeed */(in our mind)/* but may not be
true. I refrain from calling T R U E anything in our restsricted (partial) knowledge
capability. "WE THINK IT IS TRUE" is in our belief system.
Now it is up to you to call the "EXISTING" thought as 'truly existing'???? We fabricate
'truth' in this respect but only in this respect. Otherwise I am just waiting for
additional input disproving what I 'beleived-in' so far.
John M
PS I read this remark of mine to my wife who asked: if somebody KILLS a person (cuts her
throat):
is it TRUE, or NOT? (pointing to the more convoluted sides of the topic). I tried to
save face by saying:
Don't you apply our 'wisdom-concepts' to practical life! We seek the theoretical truth!
(laugh).
(As a matter of fact 'true' is not confoundable with 'truth' just as conscious is not
the adjective representing consciousness - in most cases)
JM
In my meta-physics "true" is an attribute of a sentence meaning that the sentence
expresses some fact. Facts do not depend on sentences, they can be facts even though no
one says so in a sentence. "Exist" has different meaning in different contexts. In
physics the essential parts of a model are thought to exist just in case the model is true.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
