Steve said to dmb:
...I think the pragmatic method *does* help us settle disputes about what is 
true (that's why I am a pragmatist), but it does so not by characterizing what 
it means for something to be true (a theory of truth) but rather by doing 
something more basic...


dmb replies:

It seems to me that you replied without really thinking much about the points 
you're responding to. I mean, your claim that pragmatism doesn't characterize 
what it means for something to be true was boldly asserted in the face of James 
doing exactly that. Again, James says, "This is the practical difference it 
makes to us to have true ideas; that therefore is the meaning of truth, for it 
is all that truth can be known as". And your objection to this, that it doesn't 
"solve the problem of settling once and for all what actually *is* true" hardly 
makes sense because the pragmatic theory of truth never claims to settle 
anything once and for all. That might be what an absolutist or objectivist 
means by truth but that is very clearly NOT was James or any other pragmatist 
would claim. As James says, "the truth of an idea is not a stagnant property 
inherent in it". 


Steve said:

If he accepts that truth is agreement with reality, then a belief either agrees 
with reality or not. It isn't MADE to agree with reality by verifying it. 
Before verifying it, it either agreed or disagreed with reality. It is through 
experience that we come to know which one is in fact the case--to know whether 
or not a belief is justified--but we are not forced by the pragmatic method to 
see agreement or truth as the same thing as the process of justification.


dmb says:

I'm heading out for a meeting and maybe I'll come back to your reply later but 
I gotta say one more thing that might help. It seems pretty clear from your 
comments here that you are thinking of truth in terms of objective truth and 
rejecting James claims based on that. But, of course, the pragmatist has 
already rejected that whole notion and this pragmatic theory of truth is 
supposed to replace that. See, the reality that our ideas are suppose to agree 
with is not a pre-existing reality but rather experience itself. That's why 
ideas are MADE true by experience. To a pragmatist that's what agreement with 
reality means. Further, this cannot be construed as relativism because 
experience is not whatever we want it to be, experience is the reality that 
constrains our beliefs. 


Later,
dmb                                       
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390706/direct/01/
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to