From: Erin N. (enoonan@kent.edu)
Date: Tue Jan 14 2003 - 14:33:01 GMT
>To demonstrate this distinction, consider a shuffled deck of cards spread
>face down. One is selected at random but is kept face down. What does it
>mean to say that the statement "The selected card is the queen of hearts" is
>true? An Aristotlean would say the statement is true if the card *is* indeed
>the queen of hearts. A pragmatist would say that the truth of the statement
is
>the passing of a test (such as turning the card over) to determine if the
card
>is the queen of hearts. To an Aristotlean, there is a distinction between
>truth and methods for deciding a truth. To a pragmatist, there is no
>difference.
I am not sure if I can't express it clear but something
about the language-truth relation is bothering me here.
It seems Aristotlean wants to say there is a literal
truth (the card is the queen of hearts) to believe
regardless of test but you have to interpret that
statement nonliterally for it to be true.
----So of course you can argue just change the sentence
that the "the picture on the other side of the card is
of the queen of hearts".
But this seems to be getting back to methods and such
It just seems like the only "truth" is the card is a card and
that any description of the truth has to noted with who and
how it was described.
erin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 14 2003 - 14:25:53 GMT