Posted by Spratley on September 23, 1998 at 01:28:33:
In Reply to: Re: Can't have both. posted by Four Degreez on September 22, 1998 at 20:53:06:
Every (almost every) treatise written by a philosophical giant of the past, every careful and rational argument for some metaphysical system is, by definition, an assertion of THE TRUTH. The philosopher beleives they have discovered something that is reality, is true. They think they have captured the absolute truth. So it is inferred that they beleive that there is absolute truth. I come along and point out that each (most) of these treatises has been refuted by equally careful and rational means, And each (some particular ones) of these refutations believes itself to be an assertion of an absolute truth.
So there is the belief that there is an absolute truth to be found through rational discourse, and the beleivers beleive this to be absolutely true and construct arguments to support it (they beleif these arguments prove the claim.)
I say there cannot be any absolute, final answer to these questions --and while I have been searching for an intelligible, reasonable proof of this, I don't really need one becasue such an answer is what I set out to spoil. So when you, YOU 4 degreez, when you say that there is no proof of either assertion, you are actually agreeing with one of the assertions, my assertion. See, there is someone out there who believes that there IS proof that philosophical questions do have a final answer. You saying that they cannot prove it is just as dogmatic a statement as theirs.
The question then becomes, "if you are so sure there is no proof that philosophical questions can be answered, how can you be sure you're right?"
I know you've said that there is no right or wrong, its all faith, but even if that is right (which you've argued yourself that it cannot be) it cannot fit reality. Even if reason brings us to know that nothing can be true or false (which reason cannot becasue that assertion can't be true or false according to itself), people don't follow that conclusion. They still hold truths.
What you require to understand this is a new way of seeing truth. You come close by calling it faith becasue the surest truths are those that we decide to beleive in despite an argument against it. In fact such faithful truth is better than one that relies on reason.
Post a Followup