Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Is this a criterion of truth?

Page 1 of 2 [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 Aug 2008, 3:23 pm

Human comprehension.



patternist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,606
Location: at my computer

21 Aug 2008, 3:40 pm

I wouldn't say so, no. People didn't know about microbes during the plague years, yet they existed. They were true.



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

21 Aug 2008, 3:42 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Human comprehension.

if Truth is a relative concept, then yes.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


Last edited by greenblue on 21 Aug 2008, 3:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Phagocyte
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,757

21 Aug 2008, 3:42 pm

I say no, as well. Can you go into greater detail?


_________________
Un-ban Chever! Viva La Revolucion!


skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

21 Aug 2008, 4:11 pm

obviously not.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

21 Aug 2008, 4:25 pm

What do we mean by human comprehension????

I mean, I suppose human comprehension is not a necessary criterion for truth, but I have a difficult time imagining a truth that is incomprehendable by human beings, for a simple reason: it can often be accepted that truths must be logical, and if human beings can understand things that are logical, it then follows that truth must be understandable according to human comprehension(although perhaps very befuddling to human intuition).



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

21 Aug 2008, 4:34 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
What do we mean by human comprehension????

I mean, I suppose human comprehension is not a necessary criterion for truth



that's made obvious by the fact that many people lack the ability to comprehend different things and yet that doesn't change facts.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

21 Aug 2008, 6:46 pm

skafather84 wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
What do we mean by human comprehension????

I mean, I suppose human comprehension is not a necessary criterion for truth



that's made obvious by the fact that many people lack the ability to comprehend different things and yet that doesn't change facts.

Well, right, but the other issue is whether something nonsensical can be true. I mean, some theists love to point to the "human comprehension is not a criterion of truth" in order to defend ideas such as the trinity and all, but the issue is what is meant by human comprehension as the issue with the trinity is not that a specific person cannot understand it, but that human logic cannot.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

21 Aug 2008, 6:50 pm

Objectively, no. For all practical purposes, yes.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 Aug 2008, 7:21 pm

Phagocyte wrote:
I say no, as well. Can you go into greater detail?


I just like to start things and get people thinking. If I stay around, I just kill the thread (not to mention all the flaming that occurs.)



Phagocyte
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,757

21 Aug 2008, 7:29 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Phagocyte wrote:
I say no, as well. Can you go into greater detail?


I just like to start things and get people thinking. If I stay around, I just kill the thread (not to mention all the flaming that occurs.)


I dunno, the question was kind of vague, we have a starting point but nowhere to go. I feel like a rate in a maze.


_________________
Un-ban Chever! Viva La Revolucion!


twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

21 Aug 2008, 8:06 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Human comprehension.

Sure. Anything a person can't understand can't from a statement in a logical dialectic, and thus its truth value cannot be determined, so it certainly can't be said to be true. And there can be no truth where "true" cannot be said because truth describes something's relationship to other propositions so it doesn't exist where there can be no logical language.

If a human cannot understand it, the proposition is nonsensical. If the proposition is not nonsensical, then it can be formed into a notion which is in principle possible for a human to understand it, even if it is in practice astronomically difficult.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 Aug 2008, 10:03 pm

Phagocyte wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Phagocyte wrote:
I say no, as well. Can you go into greater detail?


I just like to start things and get people thinking. If I stay around, I just kill the thread (not to mention all the flaming that occurs.)


I dunno, the question was kind of vague, we have a starting point but nowhere to go. I feel like a rate in a maze.


If you look in most of the threads, is it really the opening post that directs the conversation?
I see it more as like trying to steer the Titanic with a spoon.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 Aug 2008, 10:05 pm

twoshots wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Human comprehension.

Sure. Anything a person can't understand can't from a statement in a logical dialectic, and thus its truth value cannot be determined, so it certainly can't be said to be true. And there can be no truth where "true" cannot be said because truth describes something's relationship to other propositions so it doesn't exist where there can be no logical language.

If a human cannot understand it, the proposition is nonsensical. If the proposition is not nonsensical, then it can be formed into a notion which is in principle possible for a human to understand it, even if it is in practice astronomically difficult.


So, what if a person doesn't understand physics or Spanish? Does that make those aspects of knowledge any less real?



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

21 Aug 2008, 10:15 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
So, what if a person doesn't understand physics or Spanish? Does that make those aspects of knowledge any less real?

Spanish is a LIE!! !!



claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

21 Aug 2008, 10:29 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
I just like to start things and get people thinking. If I stay around, I just kill the thread (not to mention all the flaming that occurs.)


I would like to know your opinion. I think truth is a verified or indisputable fact and would have little to do with comprehension.