But if you, MacIntosh, were to say exactly the same thing to McGillicuddy—“It’s raining, but I don’t believe it is”—your friend would rightly think you’d lost your mind. Why, then, is the second sentence absurd? As G.E. Moore put it, “Why is it absurd for me to say something true about myself?” — Wheatley
It's raining, but I don't assert that it is.
"I believe" adds nothing to "it is raining outside" during sincere speech acts. — creativesoul
Macintosh watches a video his third friend made of the evening showing himself and the window behind him, he exclaims - perfectly coherently - "Look at me getting up to leave without even reaching for my coat. It’s raining outside, but I don’t believe it is”
The statement can be made perfectly coherently narrating in present tense the recollection of a past discrepancy, which is all his friend was doing in the first place — Isaac
If one misuses verb tense. — creativesoul
Statements are statements of belief, assuming sincerity. — creativesoul
Thus, one who thinks, believes, and/or says "It is raining outside" cannot also think, believe, and/or otherwise say "it is not raining outside", or "I do not believe it is raining outside" without self-contradiction.
Statements are statements of belief, assuming sincerity.
— creativesoul
What does sincerity have to do with it? I can say "My name is Andrew" which has a meaning and a truth-value that has nothing to do with whether or not I believe it. — Michael
Thus, one who thinks, believes, and/or says "It is raining outside" cannot also think, believe, and/or otherwise say "it is not raining outside", or "I do not believe it is raining outside" without self-contradiction.
I can believe one thing but say the opposite. It's called lying. — Michael
You're conflating the meaning of a sentence with the beliefs of the speaker. They're not the same thing....
...It is not a contradiction for "it is raining" to be true and for "I believe that it is not raining" to be true and so it is not a contradiction for "it is raining and I believe that it is not raining" to be true. — Michael
To combine them into a single sentence however, is to treat two separate claims about completely different things as if it is a single claim with one set of truth conditions. — creativesoul
To combine them into a single sentence however, is to treat two separate claims about completely different things as if it is a single claim with one set of truth conditions.
— creativesoul
No it isn't.
My name is Michael and water is H2O. — Michael
(M) I went to the pictures last Tuesday, but I don’t believe that I did.[...]
The common explanation of Moore’s absurdity is that the speaker has managed to contradict himself without uttering a contradiction. So the sentence is odd because it is a counterexample to the generalization that anyone who contradicts himself utters a contradiction.
The more fundamental way of setting up the problem starts from the following three premises:
It can be true at a particular time both that P, and that I do not believe that P.
I can assert or believe one of the two at a particular time.
It is absurd to assert or believe both of them at the same time.
[Additionally, the absurdity arises only when stated as a first-person, present-tensed belief; e.g.] "It is raining, and I don't believe that it is raining. — Wikipedia
"It is raining outside" is true if and only if it is raining outside. "I believe it is not raining outside" is true if and only if I believe it is not raining outside. One cannot believe both that it is raining and that it is not at the same time. Thus, stating "It is raining outside, but I do not believe it" is incoherent in every situation I can think of aside from the example Isaac provided earlier. — creativesoul
...why does it matter if "one cannot believe both that it is raining and that it is not at the same time"? — Michael
Because it sounds absurd. Doesn't it? — Luke
Because that is what makes it incoherent and/or self contradictory when one claims both at the same time. — creativesoul
The claim I have made is that the meaning and truth of the sentence "it is raining outside" has nothing to do with the speaker's belief, and that it is possible to believe that it is not raining outside even if it in fact is. Therefore there is no logical contradiction in the sentence "it is raining outside but I believe that it is not raining outside". — Michael
That's all true, but the absurdity is when one asserts both together. Even if I were to lie about it raining outside, it still is (and/or sounds) absurd to make that dual assertion. — Luke
The claim I have made is that the meaning and truth of the sentence "it is raining outside" has nothing to do with the speaker's belief... — Michael
"It is raining outside" - when and if if spoken sincerely - is spoken by a language user who believes that it is raining outside. When spoken insincerely, it is uttered by one who believes it not. — creativesoul
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.