On 10/26/2018 11:50 PM, Philip Thrift wrote:
Logical consistency is a relation between sentences. It's not
about existence. The sentences might be about the existence of
something, but that's different. Or the sentences may have
variables quantified by existential quantifiers, but that's
different too. To say logical consistency is needed for existence
would be a category error.
Brent
In other words:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v08/n07/richard-rorty/the-contingency-of-language :
/As long as we think that there is some relation called ‘fitting the
world’ or ‘expressing the real nature of the human self’ which can be
possessed or lacked by vocabularies-as-wholes, we shall continue the
traditional philosophical search for a criterion which will tell us
which vocabularies have this desirable feature. But if we could ever
become reconciled to the idea that *reality is indifferent to our
descriptions of it,* and that the human self is created by the use of
a vocabulary rather than being adequately or inadequately expressed in
a vocabulary, then we should at last have assimilated what was true in
the romantic idea that truth is made rather than found. What is true
about this claim is just that*languages are made rather than found,
and that truth is a property of linguistic entities, of sentences.*/
- pt
But what is true about the sentence, /"What is true about this claim is
just that languages are made rather than found, and that truth is a
property of linguistic entities, of sentences."/? Is it not
correspondence with some physical events, i.e. facts?
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
