From: Erin N. (enoonan@kent.edu)
Date: Wed Jan 15 2003 - 05:56:47 GMT
James redefined truth as the passing of a test. So
>when James says, "Truth *happens* to an idea. It becomes true,
>is *made* true by events", he is just describing truth under the
>new definition where passing a test is involved.
>
>
>Rorty wants us to discard this notion, but according to Gardner,
>not James. James essentially agreed with the correspondence theory
>of truth. There is instead a lateral shift in the pragmatist
>*description* of the correspondence theory. James believed all along
>that the card had a number and suit that was fixed "out there" before
>it was turned over, it's just that after his re-definition of "truth"
>it became cumbersome for him to say this.
>
Determine whether a card "truly" is spades?
Can you say that is true in a visual sense, meaningless in an auditory sense?
The truth of it being spades does seem to be *made* by events..of the visual
system. To grant it as absolute truth is to grant truth is visual in nature
right?
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 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 05:49:28 GMT