Edwina, List,
I agree with you...
but, by putting 'just' I meant we are 'just' humans and not God
(something that I wanted to avoid to say)
If God exists... He would know the FACT by REAL truth
All the best
Claudio
Edwina Taborsky escribió el 26/03/2017 a las 11:48:
The FACT that the content of the immediate and dynamic object are
different indeed 'makes us just humans' but I'd say that it makes us
'humans'. That is, I'd remove the 'just' from the phrase. That means
that our cognitive capacity, our capacity to learn, to 'have
knowledge' means that we, with that capacity for reasoning and
analysis, can think about that dynamic object; can think about our
immediate object - and, the three interpretants.
Without such a capacity, we would be unable to do anything other than
mechanically react. We would have no capacity to change both that
dynamic object or our interactions with it.
Edwina Taborsky
--
This message is virus free, protected by Primus - Canada's
largest alternative telecommunications provider.
http://www.primus.ca
On Sun 26/03/17 10:22 AM , Claudio Guerri [email protected] sent:
List,
forgive me for jumping in only very shortly
but...
I agree that that there can not be "alternative facts"
but for sure, there are only alternative interpretations.
And both concepts of immediate and dynamic object are a very clear
explanation of that difference that makes as just humans...
All the best
Claudio
Helmut Raulien escribió el 25/03/2017 a las 20:05:
List,
In common language the word "truth" is used for two different
things: The fact and it´s representation (the truth independent
of observation, and the truth as represented- correct
representatrion). In philosophy it mostly is only used for the
representation, and means a correct representation of a fact.
With one exception: Having looked at Wikipedia: "Truth": I would
say, that the redundancy theory uses the term for the fact,
otherwise "truth" would not be redundant (tautology, ok.).
I would say, that "truth" in the sense of the fact is
semantically redundant, because a fact is one of the things of
which there can only be one. I think, there is only one person in
the world who claims that there may be "alternative facts".
Examples:
"It is the truth, that Alice and Bob have married": "Truth" means
the fact, and is redundant as a term, because you might as well
just say: "Alice and Bob have married".
"Paul told the truth when he said that Alice and Bob had
married": Fact, redundant, because to tell means to speak about.
"About" is the bridge between representation and fact, adresses
the fact. The sentence can be said like: "Alice and Bob have
married, and Paul has told that".
Though the redundancy is not complete regarding the connotations:
The first version of the statement implies the suggestion, that
Paul does not always adress facts correctly (tell the truth),
which the second version does not imply.
"Paul spoke the truth when he said that Alice and Bob had
married": representation, not redundant. The truth here is not
the fact, but what Paul spoke.
Anyway, I guess it is very dangerous, that there are two
completely different things which may so easily be conflated and
confused, because they share the same term. Eg. the said person
who claims alternative facts is a danger.
I guess, that language in general is somewhat blurry about the
distinction between representation and the represented. But in
the case of the term "truth" it is a major problem, leading to
confusion and misconceptions, even ideologies: Ideologies work
with forged "facts", and are only able to do so, because the term
"truth" is not clear. If there were two words for the two things
(representation and represented), then it would be much more
difficult to establish myths and conspiracy theories, which both
are necessary for ideologies.
I had thought about proposing to call the two types of "truth"
dynamical and immediate truth, but this is confusing, I guess,
because a dynamical object may be an immediate truth. Or
"trueness" and "truth"? I dont know.
Best,
helmut
--
*Prof. Dr. Arq. Claudio F. Guerri*
Facultad de Arquitectura, Diseño y Urbanismo
Universidad de Buenos Aires
Domicilio particular: Gral. Lemos 270
1427 BUENOS AIRES
Telefax: (011) 4553-7976/4895
Celular: (011) 15-6289-8123
E-mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
