Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:49:37 02/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 1999 at 15:21:26, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: [snip] >I felt that *I* had to pop in this discussion as it touches upon some issues I >dwell on in my University courses :)) -- if you postulate some sort of absolute >truth, then you have to postulate an absolute being as well. I disagree. While I do believe in an absolute being, I do not think the existance of such follows from the existance of absolute truth. >Since that absolute >being is such on the basis of being singular, then it can safely be inferred >that no one else can have any idea about one, single, immutable truth. So >simple. Actually, I tend to go along with Fernando and, perhaps, even go a step >further: I claim that truth is actually a negative value in terms of human >cognition and human progress. Because, if you keep on thinking that you have >reached the last stone in your everlasting quest, you won't find other stones >which do exist, only a little beyond. A square. It has 4 sides of equal length and 4 angles of 90 degrees. It lies completely in a plane. It is impossible to construct a perfect square, but it does exist mathematically. All attempts to make one come up varying degrees of perfection away from the ideal. >If you have time, find Paul Feyerabend's >book *Against Method* and read it, please. I am not even interested in the book. Sorry. Perhaps in an email you can summ up his arguments for me. Since we are completely off topic now, I suggest that further discussions be held via private email. I am actually not terribly interested in debating these points, but am willing to bounce a few messages back and forth.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.