So, is vagueness itself a philosophy? — Don Wade
I guess vagueness can be absorbed by two big branches of philosophy — javi2541997
I'd start with the question, defining/refining, testing, until I had an answer. Then seeing if that in fact answered the question.Is there a metric as to how one would do that? — Don Wade
Nevertheless, vagueness, itself, it is already absorbed previously by nihilism because this is the main premise or thought about uncertainty. — javi2541997
Vagueness is often illustrated by the sorites paradox, or "problem of the heap". — Don Wade
There seems to be a problem with our (human) ability to think in terms of exactness (focus) - as in a grain of sand, and in terms of generalities - such as a pile of sand - (at the same time). — Don Wade
So, is vagueness itself a philosophy? — Don Wade
If you're asking is there is some direct method, I think there is not, and there are results in some areas of study that suggest that generally there cannot be. What do you think? — tim wood
Or do you mean, has anyone thought of basing their philosophy on vagueness? Yes, all the time, because it's a feature of language. — bongo fury
I recommend a book which I read a few years ago on the usefulness of fuzziness in thinking, by Bart Kosko (1993), 'Fuzzy Logic.' — Jack Cummins
Research in my country says that about one third of the people believe in something. We call it 'somethingi — TaySan
So, is vagueness itself a philosophy? — Don Wade
But, of course, we face so much uncertainty in life. — Jack Cummins
For the last 2,500 years man has pretty much accepted the findings of the early philosophers (especially Aristotle). We looked at objects as being defined as having boundaries (whole objects). — Don Wade
I am not sure that it is helpful to go as far as saying that, but it does seem that we need to live with some flexibility because reality is unpredictable. — Jack Cummins
I find that the more I try to plan life, with possible courses of action, something different to what I expected seems to arise. — Jack Cummins
This developmental view is thus semiotic, or brings the further question of meaning and purpose into play within logic or ontology. Vagueness becomes negated to the degree there is some larger interest in play. — apokrisis
:fire:"Reason" in language – oh, what an old deceptive female she is! I am afraid we are not rid of God because we still have faith in grammar. — Twilight of the Idols
:up: Yeah, much like Tarski's unraveling of the "Liar's Paradox" (i.e. truth-values of self-referential sentences) by differentiating the meta-statement (2nd order) from the object-statement (1st order).In the sorites-paradox example the group of sand-grains is at one level, and the sand-pile is at another level. We can have knowledge that both can exist at the same time but they exist, in the mind, only at different levels - hence the paradox. The concept of levels solves the paradox. — Don Wade
but I do think a systems approach does provide some basis for sketching some foundations amidst our uncertainty. — Jack Cummins
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.