And this is exactly right. Not right or wrong, but nonsensical. And this being fully realized, one is almost entirely innoculated against dogma of all and any kind.the question of the existence of God from a nonreligious person makes no sense in a religious game. — Eskander
Another application would be in religious language game, the question of the existence of God from a nonreligious person makes no sense in a religious game where the whole language is based around the usage of the word ,"God" . — Eskander
I may relatively presuppose my bicycle is in the entry or on the street. If not one then the other. But that I have a bicycle I absolutely presuppose. If my bicycle is neither on the street nor in the entry, I may well then question where it is. Stolen? Borrowed by a friend? Left by me somewhere else and I forgot where? But the question if I have one never arises. And if it did then the enterprise of wondering where it is would be rendered nonsensical. — tim wood
Hinge propositions seeming to be what R. G. Collingwood calls absolute presuppositions. — tim wood
And later:341. That is to say, the questions that we raise and our doubts depend on the fact that some propositions are exempt from doubt, are as it were like hinges on which those turn.
342. That is to say, it belongs to the logic of our scientific investigations that certain things are in deed not doubted.
343. But it isn't that the situation is like this: We just can't investigate everything, and for that reason we are forced to rest content with assumption. If I want the door to turn, the hinges must stay put.
655. The mathematical proposition has, as it were officially, been given the stamp of incontestability. I.e.: "Dispute about other things; this is immovable - it is a hinge on which your dispute can turn."
Hinge propositions have to be taken as factual or given in the language game you are playing and you cannot change their usage/status with certain moves in a language game. — Eskander
An axiom, postulate, or assumption is a statement that is taken to be true, to serve as a premise or starting point for further reasoning and arguments. The word comes from the Greek ἀξίωμα (axíōma) 'that which is thought worthy or fit' or 'that which commends itself as evident'.[1][2]
The term has subtle differences in definition when used in the context of different fields of study. As defined in classic philosophy, an axiom is a statement that is so evident or well-established, that it is accepted without controversy or question.[3] As used in modern logic, an axiom is a premise or starting point for reasoning.[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom
"Is not to be doubted" is ambiguous. Do you mean undoubtable, as with the chess bishop? Or do you mean doubtable but not in this circumstance to be doubted?The key difference is that a hinge proposition is not to be doubted.
An assumption might be subjected to subsequent rejection, as in a reductio argument. An axiom is taken as self-evident.
That the bishop stays on the same colour is neither subject to refutation nor self-evident, but it is a hinge for the purposes of playing chess.
A small distinction, but worth noting. — Banno
Do you mean undoubtable, as with the chess bishop? Or do you mean doubtable but not in this circumstance to be doubted? — tim wood
Searle points out that hinge propositions set out what something counts as for the purposes of the game. Moving the bishop diagonally counts as a move in chess. It sets up what it is to move the piece in the game. It rules many possible moves - putting the piece back in the box, for example - as not being moves in the game. Of course such moves might be moves in some other game or activity - tidying up. — Banno
They're not truths, — Sam26
While there are issues with unjustified knowledge I don't see an issue with unjustified truth. The alternative would presumably be some sort of antirealism. — Banno
If some proposition is true, then how would you know it's true without a justification? — Sam26
There's a mission to Mercury by the ESA and JAXA. Part of the mission is to decide if there is water at the poles - something hinted at by previous observations.
Both the realist and the anti-realist will agree that we do not know that there is water at the poles of Mercury.
A realist will say that either there is water at the poles, or there isn't - that either the statement or its negation is true.
An anti-realist may say that the statement "There is water at Mercury's poles" is neither true nor not true, until the observation is made. — Banno
One might read "Here is a hand" as a definition of what counts as a hand, or as a real object. That's a way of understanding Moore - "This counts as a real object, therefore there are real objects". Moore would be seen as setting out the rules for discussions of reality.
While there are issues with unjustified knowledge I don't see an issue with unjustified truth. The alternative would presumably be some sort of antirealism. — Banno
An anti-realist may say that the statement "There is water at Mercury's poles" is neither true nor not true, until the observation is made. — Banno
Although, it seems, we can make more sense of the question, "Do bishops move diagonally?" - than we can of the question, "Do I have hands?" — Sam26
What does "unknown" mean in this use? Other than we don't know if the statement is true or false. What third option is there? There are unknown truth values, but that again, just means that the proposition/statement can be true or false.
— Banno
But that is not the same as there being propositions which do not have a truth value. — Banno
But as a final comment, if a hinge proposition is not true, then we could not make any deductions from them - hence rendering them pointless. — Banno
There are circumstances; phantom limbs, numbness or paralysis, alien limb syndrome, perhaps some virtual reality aps, where the possession of a hand becomes a real question. But these situations where the question becomes real and meaningful, are outside the realm in which one discusses philosophy — unenlightened
Wouldn't a language with no factual basis that is nonsensical just be a private language? It seems so.
I guess it's just what we mean by nonsense. — Cobra
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.