If facts ought to be believed/acknowledged then the OP argument works, stating that if there are no objective values then there can therefore be no facts. It seems obvious that there are facts, so there must be objective values. — AJJ
We can just see contradictory things and believe them both. — boethius
And my earlier point was that if we do ascertain beyond doubt that something is a fact, then I remain unconvinced, despite what has been said by ↪boethius that we can acknowledge that the something certainly is a fact, and yet disbelieve it. — Janus
It's not clear what sort of things you have in mind; could you give some examples to clarify your point? — Janus
‘then a day would come when a nation of citizens would arise which would be welded together through a common love and a common pride that would be invincible and indestructible forever.’ — Hitler, A, Mein Kampf, p. 387
My view is that statements and propositions are true when they correspond to things that are capital T True.
Your view seems to be that statements and propositions are true when they correspond to something that is neither true nor false (so how do they ever correspond?)
It seems to me I’m stating the obvious here. — AJJ
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.