David Hume is wrong. Empiricism is wrong. — René Descartes
Example:
1. All observed swans have been white
2. There is a natural law that ensures that swans must be white
C. Therefore all swans are white
A more truly tautologous form which basically says the same thing would be:
If there is a natural law that ensures that swans must be white then all swans must be white.
It does depend on the definition of 'tautology' though. Are tautologies simply true by definition? — Janus
If who I am at a given moment is completely determinate then is any choice possible? — Perplexed
However by making explicit the implicit premises in inductive arguments I.e. regularity, invariance, you can render them as tautologies. — Janus
1. All observed swans have been white
2. There is a natural law that ensures that swans must be white
C. Therefore all swans are white — Janus
FYI there are black swans BTW. — charleton
Banno always likes to argue from a trancendental absolutist perspective - that there is a fact of the matter. — apokrisis
I was in a similar position. Via cognitive neurobiology, theoretical biology and paleoanthropology, I had arrived at a generally semiotic position. And then decent digests of Peirce's voluminous unpublished thoughts began to pop up. Along with a whole circle of biologists and systems scientists, it just became obvious that Peirce had sorted out the metaphysics 100 years earlier. Within a few years, we were all calling ourselves biosemioticians. — apokrisis
And in doing so two things happen. The first is that it is no longer an inductive argument, but an deductive one. The second is that the premise used is itself dubious. — Banno
The second premise is not just dubious, but wrong, as is the conclusion. And indeed, at least in my case, so is the first premise. — Banno
On the other hand why not simply: "there are black swans" and "this sentence is in English"? — Janus
Yes, indeed. "there are black swans" and "It is true that there are black swans" are truth functionally equivalent. You and I can say either. Apo, is restricted to one but not the other by his metaphysics. — Banno
I think apo could say that his metaphysics is true is he were to assert that his metaphysics fairly represents what the community of enquirers will ultimately come to believe at the culmination of human metaphysical speculation. — Janus
Speaking things that cannot be spoken, such as "it is true that there are black swans"! He says that some statements can be true! — Banno
OK, bottom line is I could not put my faith in any of the grand philosophical schemes of the nineteenth century. — Banno
The analytic turn - which is now ubiquitous - offers instead a set of rational tools with which to take philosophical issues apart... — Banno
Does anyone else find it odd that Apo can't actually say that his metaphysics is true? He acts as if it is true, and speaks as if it is true; but it binds him never to utter that truth. Indeed, he can't make any truth claims. — Banno
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.