I think the extremes fail and the ultimate social consensus will be found somewhere in the middle ground. — Baden

realpolitik will prevail, of course. I anticipate sports organisations dithering between the reactionary and progressive approaches until some level is found where few folk complain, and a new stasis is reached. — Banno

But any truth has relevance only insofar as it could be seen to be true, or stipulated to be true in a fiction. — Janus

I'm not understanding what you]re saying here; can you explain further? — Janus

It's true regardless of being seen or imagined. — Banno

Let's call you a correspondence theorist, then. — Luke

You are now creating further issues by drawing a distinction between a truth bearer without meaning (i.e. string-of-words) and a truth bearer with meaning. — Luke

When I read "the cat is on the mat" I picture a cat on a mat. — Janus

A more progressive response would be to re-assess the way in which capacities are grouped, removing the questionable place of gender or sexuality as a proxy. — Banno

...The binary system (wo/man) set by the medical establishment to reinforce white supremacy and gender oppression, usually based on genitals and sometimes chromosomes. Because this is usually divided into ‘male’ and ‘female,’ this category ignores the existence of intersex people and natural sexual variations within the two broader recognized categories.

e.g. The falsehood of “biological sex” is a driving force behind the debates around trans people in sports, even though all research shows there’s virtually no difference between them and their peers.

1. the fundamental distinction, found in most species of animals and plants, based on the type of gametes produced by the individual; also the category to which the individual fits on the basis of that criterion.

>>A "man" is what is socially recognized as a man. A "woman" is what is socially recognized as a woman. Since there is no overwhelming social consensus, it's up to us to argue one into existence. — Baden

"The cat is on the mat" is a symbolic expression, or representation of that seeing or imagining, and the two are thus associated, although not in any absolute or essential sense, but just because we do associate them — Janus

That the cat is on the mat is a fact, not a sentence. "The cat is on the mat" is a sentence. — Banno

If the "picturing" is true, in the sense of hitting the mark, of being accurate, then we have truth, if not, then we have falsity. — Janus

I see people who lie and deceive as being couched in fear and not fully alive — Janus

Perhaps one can find ones way through supposedly incompatible beliefs by further articulating one’s own approach such that it is capable of subsuming alternative beliefs? — Joshs

Much of the progress of science consists not in correcting ‘wrong’ theories from the past , but in producing concepts in areas where they were no concept
at all . — Joshs

The actuality that corresponds to "the cat is on the mat" is the cat being on the mat. This is exactly the logic of the T-sentence. Or Aristotle's formulation: “To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true”.

Both express the logic of correspondence, the logic of common usage; it is basic, what more do we need? There is no need to complicate matters, when it comes to something even children easily understand, it seems to me. — Janus

In whatever way we may be conscious of the world as universal horizon, as coherent universe of existing objects, we, each "I-the-man" and all of us together, belong to the world as living with one another in the world; and the world is our world, valid for our consciousness as existing precisely through this 'living together.' We, as living in wakeful world-consciousness, are constantly active on the basis of our passive having of the world... Obviously this is true not only for me, the individual ego; rather we, in living together, have the world pre-given in this together, belong, the world as world for all, pre-given with this ontic meaning... The we-subjectivity... is constantly functioning. — Husserl

Is Heidegger also too Cartesian? He rejected truth as correctness in favor of truth as whatever discloses itself to Dasein. — Joshs

I am attracted to naturalistic models that don’t cut corners , either by reifying materiality through reductive physicalism , or by making the manifest image of conceptualization unaccountable to the empirical world. — Joshs

We co-inhabit the partially shared construction we call a space of reasons, within which we invent, discover, agree and disagree. — Joshs

What one creates or co-creates in language implicates and is reciprocally dependent on material changes in one’s world. — Joshs

Sacred, then, is the highest essence and everything in which this highest essence reveals or will reveal itself; but hallowed are they who recognize this highest essence together with its own, i. e. together with its revelations. The sacred hallows in turn its reverer, who by his worship becomes himself a saint, as likewise what he does is saintly, a saintly walk, saintly thoughts and actions, imaginations and aspirations, etc.

It is easily understood that the conflict over what is revered as the highest essence can be significant only so long as even the most embittered opponents concede to each other the main point,—that there is a highest essence to which worship or service is due. If one should smile compassionately at the whole struggle over a highest essence, as a Christian might at the war of words between a Shiite and a Sunnite or between a Brahman and a Buddhist, then the hypothesis of a highest essence would be null in his eyes, and the conflict on this basis an idle play. Whether then the one God or the three in one, whether the Lutheran God or the être suprême or not God at all, but "Man," may[Pg 50] represent the highest essence, that makes no difference at all for him who denies the highest essence itself, for in his eyes those servants of a highest essence are one and all—pious people, the most raging atheist not less than the most faith-filled Christian.

In the foremost place of the sacred,[26] then, stands the highest essence and the faith in this essence, our "holy[27] faith."

You have spirit, for you have thoughts. What are your thoughts? "Spiritual entities." Not things, then? "No, but the spirit of things, the main point in all things, the inmost in them, their—idea." Consequently what you think is not only your thought?[Pg 45] "On the contrary, it is that in the world which is most real, that which is properly to be called true; it is the truth itself; if I only think truly, I think the truth. I may, to be sure, err with regard to the truth, and fail to recognize it; but, if I recognize truly, the object of my cognition is the truth." — Stirner

Why? To me all it entails or suggests is that for every actuality a true corresponding proposition can be formulated. — Janus

Husserl argued that there is no veil between subject and world. What appears to us, in the mode that it appears to us, is not a proxy or representation of something independent of what directly appears, but is the thing in itself ( whether imagined, perceived, remembered). — Joshs

If instead of a formal fact , we were to take ‘no independent facts of the world’ as a performative act arising from within the midst of contextual sense-making, obliged to re-validate itself the same differently in each new contextual instantiation of its use, then we would have a way of thinking and talking about what happens to notions like truth and belief when they are examined from a radically contextual vantage. — Joshs

This is born out by the ambiguity of the word 'fact', as it refers to both states of affairs and propositions about them. — Janus

But it seems that "crystalline web of concepts just is the world that is the totality of facts, while the things are the sensations, impressions and images. — Janus

If there are no independent facts of the world to fix our concepts to, them concepts liken pragmatic relevance, consistency, anticipatory compatibility and coherence replace true and false belief as expressions of how we cope with our world. This is self-creation rather than a fitting of language with fact. — Joshs

the general categories that would be called ‘truth’ and ‘belief’ are not themselves stably fixed by their relation to the facts of an empirical world. — Joshs

My apologies. — Banno

If "the meaning of a word is its use in the language" for a large class of cases, then the same or similar can probably be said for the meaning of a sentence. — Luke

The deflationist cannot have statements/beliefs on one side as distinct from the world on the other side without committing themselves to a non-deflationary theory of truth. — Luke

I'm not sure for what reason a deflationist would say that "snow is white" is true; it's not because of any facts of the matter. — Luke

Sticks and stones may break my bones... — Luke

I think that because rationality and science rely on objectification, which is an abstraction from experience, a judgement of it, so to speak, they cannot touch the essence of religion and the poetical making of sense. — Janus

Getting the life back into life could be, is in my understanding, getting beyond projects, ideals and meta-narratives, getting back to a kind of experience that was essentially there in childhood: getting back to the enchantment of the world, just as it is. — Janus

we all live differently in the one world. — Janus

The salient point is, that common world is not something we ever experience, but is a formal stipulation based on resemblance and memory. — Janus

we never perceive a whole object, we only perceive impressions or images, the continuity and resemblance of which lead the rational intellect to posit the object as the (transcendent) origin of the impressions, — Janus