I am pointing out the contrapositive consequence of your claims about the absence of truth value. — m-theory
I have explained it as clearly as I can. — m-theory
It wouldn't be possible to talk about contrapositives where there is no truth value.I am talking contrapositives where there is no truth value. — m-theory
It is a circular argument. — m-theory
I am talking contrapositives where there is no truth value. — m-theory
How could it be true that there is no logic in world x if there is no logic in world x? — m-theory
I also pointed out another possible issue with Terrapin's views.
Terrapin might hope to argue that we can be sure that truth is entirely and exclusively dependent upon minds, because minds exist now and thus the truth of what is said about anything depends entirely and exclusively upon them and there is no issue because as of now those minds do exist.
This would be circular argumentation.
That minds exist now proves only that there are minds now, it does not prove that truth is entirely and exclusively dependent upon those minds and these are not logically equivalent things. — m-theory
??? I'm not and I wouldn't be arguing anything about certainty. That doesn't imply that I'm not (psychologically) certain about something. But certainty for empirical claims is just a completely misplaced concern in my view.Terrapin might hope to argue that we can be sure . . . — m-theory
It is not a fact that is true in world x — m-theory
How could it be true that there is no logic in world x if there is no logic in world x? — m-theory
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.