tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post5060260085280649638..comments2024-01-24T10:39:27.668-05:00Comments on Coming Untrue: The Trouble with the TruthDr. S. L. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06303707167715370504noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-85099161696051035522017-08-16T11:10:50.037-04:002017-08-16T11:10:50.037-04:00I see what you mean. It's definitely not delib...I see what you mean. It's definitely not deliberate. They simply vanished when I posted your comment. Will try to figure it out when I'm back home. My Kindle is useless for troubleshooting technical probe.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00346761712248157930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-7678346193578107382017-08-16T10:39:48.194-04:002017-08-16T10:39:48.194-04:00Btw, lately I have noticed that reference web link...Btw, lately I have noticed that reference web links, like I had provided after the From for the above Einstein quotes, no longer show up here. I don't remember this being the case previously. So is it a housekeeping change, was it always standard procedure, or is it my OS (Windows 10).Qmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-79537955906619625342017-08-15T00:52:30.865-04:002017-08-15T00:52:30.865-04:00Communities tend to be guided less than individual...Communities tend to be guided less than individuals by conscience and a sense of responsibility. How much misery does this fact cause mankind! It is the source of wars and every kind of oppression, which fill the earth with pain, sighs and bitterness. (Albert Einstein, 1934)<br /><br />From <br /><br />Only the individual can think, and thereby create new values for society, nay, even set up new moral standards to which the life of the community conforms. ... The ideals which have lighted my way, and time after time have given me new courage to face life cheerfully, have been Kindness, Beauty and Truth. (Albert Einstein, 1954)<br /><br />From <br /><br />Interesting that this topic comes up again, probably because it is indeed becoming more and more relevant even though it has been recognized already for a long time as Einstein's quotes above show. I actually have a bit more to add to it. As to your points namely the tendencies you describe, and your suggestion that they are getting worse implies to me that they therefore must in themselves already contain their solution. The reason I am using the word Must is because let us not forget who we are dealing with when you use the word Truth. You are dealing with what the physicist describes as an irresistible force and by no means is there the danger of an immovable object stopping that force except under the object's own free will. I see the solution as having the nature of a control circuit feedback loop (like a thermostat) so that when things get too hot (too wrong) the control circuit will lower the temperature. The two world wars certainly got too hot but the circuitry worked. I think this is built in, inevitable, and unchangeable even if it looks hopeless for the moment. In other words, it is foreordained that good will triumph over evil no matter what. To me that is consolation.<br />Qmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-38675309854220753742016-03-22T07:22:03.652-04:002016-03-22T07:22:03.652-04:00I don't think anybody's got anything bad t...I don't think anybody's got anything bad to say about being "practical," Q. In fact, objective definitions of truth aim at that very thing. The tight link between reality and truth assures that...for nothing is more "practical" than to conform one's views to the truth about reality -- whether that reality is about abstractions or concrete things.<br /><br />The problem I see is that, as you say, "A philosophical discussion involving truth is simply not what motivates most people in their daily living." That is probably accurate to say, but it means something rather problematic for our grasp of reality, and hence of our ability to be genuinely practical: it means we're lying to ourselves about truth, and that "most people," as you put it, are simply unwilling to exercise the minimal level of "philosophical" inquiry to question that. <br /><br />If what you say is true of the general public (i.e. "most people"), I'm going to step forward in faith and say it might not be so true of the average reader of this blog. I'm not so cynical as to believe people cannot think, should they choose to do so. <br /><br />The point of these two posts is to show just how far the "most people" kind of understanding of the truth concept has moved away from common sense, and indeed, from anything practical. And it's a necessary argument to make, I think; because people can hardly correct for the self-contradictory and absurd postmodern views of what truth unless they interrogate the suppositions of those views, right?<br /><br />In short, it's not practical to proceed on a definition of truth that is simply untethered from reality. I think we'd both agree on that.Immanuel Canhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11580529966007662214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-62569044060749406282016-03-21T22:45:45.988-04:002016-03-21T22:45:45.988-04:00Perhaps I should have used the word Practical inst...Perhaps I should have used the word Practical instead. A philosophical discussion involving truth is simply not what motivates most people in their daily living. In addition there is also a time horizon involved when choosing whether or not to abide by the truth. When the consequences are far off, as with smoking or gluttony, then the truth about those habits is ignored, at least for now. It often seems to come down to Pilate's "What is truth" which itself is a catch 22 because you need the truth to answer it and that will trip you up later on when you have to face the consequences for asking that question. <br /><br />With regard to Pragmatism :<br />Actually I don't see anything wrong with the definition of pragmatism starting with the second sentence of the definition (see below). Starting there it describes exactly the approach and methods I used in my technical work without having had the negative connotations that you imply. As a matter of fact that portion of the pragmatic definition seems to be exactly what is needed in any field that requires a thoughtful and analytical approach. However, I strongly disagree with the first sentence since it is self-contradictory with the next two sentences. That is because describing, representing and mirroring reality is precisely the function and end result of the approach outlined in those last two sentences. I am therefore amazed by the self-contradictory nature of this definition and attribute it to the fact that it was created by someone with little practical experience, namely a philosopher ^_~.<br /><br />From Wikipedia - <br /><br />Pragmatism rejects the idea that the function of thought is to describe, represent, or mirror reality.[3] Instead, pragmatists consider thought an instrument or tool for prediction, problem solving and action. Pragmatists contend that most philosophical topics—such as the nature of knowledge, language, concepts, meaning, belief, and science—are all best viewed in terms of their practical uses and successes.<br /><br />From Qmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-16256403447007138882016-03-21T07:08:12.206-04:002016-03-21T07:08:12.206-04:00There are both formal (philosophical) and informal...There are both formal (philosophical) and informal (common-usage) definitions of the term "pragmatism," Q. I think you might be using the two interchangeably, which, if I'm correct about that, would incline you to non-sequitur conclusions. <br /><br />What I'm aiming at here, in mentioning pragmatism at all, is the philosophical framework, not the common usage. But my mention of it is very brief, intended only to cover those with the philosophical background, who are not my main audience. So pragmatism isn't the core of the argument. Rather, it's an aside.<br /><br />Philosophically, I doubt you're a pragmatist. For pragmatism is, by it's very nature, amoral -- and I have found you to be both morally earnest and spiritually interested...things philosophical pragmatists are not.<br /><br />Finally, from the perspective of the study of truth and what we know about it (i.e. epistemology), pragmatism is very easy to defeat. For as I suggested above, it cannot even begin to ground a definition of what "works" that cannot be quickly assailed and devastated by anyone who thinks differently from any particular pragmatist. So if you were thinking of camping on pragmatism yourself, let me suggest you'll find it an uncomfortable place, one ill-suited to your personal lifestyle, and also philosophically a "house of straw."Immanuel Canhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11580529966007662214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-11722259138512332382016-03-20T15:16:51.427-04:002016-03-20T15:16:51.427-04:00Anecdotal, yes, but your friend is wrong if implyi...Anecdotal, yes, but your friend is wrong if implying that such evidence is therefore automatically without proof and not well established. Anecdotal evidence can of course also add to a well established and proven body of evidence, which is the case here. See excerpts below from provided link concerning that. My conclusions concerning how truth can be and often is/is not incorporated into a person's outlook and life therefore stand.<br /><br /><br />Initiatives to Motivate Change: A Review of Theory and Practice and Their Implications for Older Adults<br /><br />Unhealthy behaviors and the disorders they cause pervade modern life. As even a cursory review of Healthy People 2010 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2001) makes perfectly clear, significant improvements in physical and mental health critically depend on changes in human behavior. The reductions in disease morbidity and premature mortality that would come from increased rates of physical activity; improved compliance with medical recommendations; reduced rates of obesity; and reduced rates of utilization of tobacco, alcohol, and other controlled substances are tantalizing. Moreover, these changes would result in meaningful improvements in quality of life and also increase the potential for dramatic reductions in health care costs. ...<br /><br />From:<br /><br />http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK83765/?report=reader<br />Qmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-20119833421577849742016-03-20T05:21:53.421-04:002016-03-20T05:21:53.421-04:00A couple of good stories, Q, but as a good friend ...A couple of good stories, Q, but as a good friend of mine is fond of saying, "The plural of anecdote is not data".Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5596708332568087278.post-80123270763941192882016-03-20T00:18:47.607-04:002016-03-20T00:18:47.607-04:00Of course, if a philosopher wants to explain or de...Of course, if a philosopher wants to explain or deal with human behavior it will be with philosophical terminology and with the assumption that people care about and/or understand what the philosopher is trying to get across. Since I think that that is a tenuous assumption, I will add something that I think is a bit more realistic, namely a bit of pragmatism. From my (pragmatic) observations I have concluded that human behavior is mostly determined by what I have previously called the convenience factor in a person's life, or the converse, how inconvenient (and less comfortable) life will be for me if adopting a viewpoint and/or perform, or do not perform, a certain action. <br /><br />(Actual) case study 1:<br /> <br />Morbidly obese person, 6 ft. tall male, friendly, verbose, socially connected and weighs 450 lbs. His job involves quite a bit of public speaking. Advise, encouragement and concern by friends to make different lifestyle choices falls on deaf ears for years. Lately considerable difficulties standing during speaking engagements, needs to sit down. Then, one day a call to management office where an alternative is given, accept help in improving the weight problem or face the consequences. The offer is to attend a paid-for 3 week seminar at a weight clinic for actual weight reduction and concomitant follow up strategies or lose your job. Offer is accepted. Following the seminar the person adopts a methodology of light exercise (mostly in pool) and caloric intake reduction using the calorie counting techniques learned in the seminar. No other strategies are used other than primarily counting calories with a greater emphasis on vegetables and fruit. Within 3 to 4 years the person has reached a weight of 200 lbs and is holding steady. The job has been saved and there is a substantial increase in personal pride and satisfaction. <br /><br />(Actual) case study 2:<br /><br />Same circle of friends and acquaintances this time involving a morbidly obese female 5ft 4" tall at 350 lbs. She is familiar with and has observed the progress of the aforementioned male. Similar continual concern and encouragement from friends are without avail. Doctor suggests he can help even surgically but insists she must first lose some weight before the procedure. Offer is declined. Friends suspect a pathology is underlying the behavior. When eating out, a rare one inch thick slab of prime rib or steak is the consistent fare with no moderation concerning accoutrements and deserts. Mobility, movement and demeanor is that of a handicapped person using walker and wheelchair eliciting sympathetic responses wherever the person goes. The pathology is a complete denial of excessive caloric intake and an apparent relishing of the attention and sympathy due to the perceived handicap status. Suggestions by friends to adopt the strategy of the successful male acquaintance are angrily brushed off. This person does not have a job but was working at one time. There is not even a slight acknowledgement that a change in attitude and behavior would be beneficial. <br /><br />The point here is that a philosophical perspective of truth is completely irrelevant to most people and what counts is that human beings are mostly reactive to external circumstances concerning how they affect their comfort and convenience, which means they react to external and internal pressure. This is why people go along with a holocaust, abortion, overpromising leaders and charlatans. That's why it is possible to intimidate or to seduce people. These traits among other things are clearly linked to mental sluggishness, weak will, selfishness and lack of altruism, all the niceties brought about by the biblical fall. So, philosophers are probably better off maintaining a conversation among themselves then thinking that the general public will benefit from their conclusions. <br />Qmannoreply@blogger.com