To me, that's a narrow and shallow view of philosophy. Propositions and refutations. Poor Socrates. He's been shrunk. He's been mistaken for a paperweight.

I don't understand. Just what view is narrow and shallow? If you read Socrates, that was exactly his method. Advancing hypotheses, and then seeking counter-examples so as to try to reach a satisfactory definition. That is how Aristotle described it.

If Socrates had written a book, I probably would have read it. But I know what you mean. If we are talking of Plato, I don't hear you mention his Ideas much. Also, Plato certainly used tropes, as well as arguments. He strikes me as half-mystic, or a mystical rationalist.
It seems that you want to reduce philosophy to argument. You don't like Nietzsche or Heidegger or Rorty, etc. I'm all for criticism, but to not see their merits is something else. To each his own.

It is not the conclusions that philosophers reach (which are generally pretty prosaic) but the arguments they provide for those conclusions which are central.

But, what does that mean? That you realize that something is true? Can you give an example of "truth realized by someone"?

I just realized that Quito is the capital of Ecuador. Quito is the capital of Ecuador. I realize the truth of this statement. I did not know that this statement was true until about five minutes ago.

I just realized that Quito is the capital of Ecuador. Quito is the capital of Ecuador. I realize the truth of this statement. I did not know that this statement was true until about five minutes ago.

If we only have two choices (invent vs discover) I have to support discovery.
Because one thing I have seen raised here yet is 'conditionality'. It if was feel free to correct me that I missed it.
Any statement of truth or falsity can only be accepted under the conditions that statement includes certain conditions.
As we can never be sure we have considered ALL possible conditions there can never be what might be called an "absolute" truth.
We can only state that under ALL conditions we have discovers AND all conditions we can IMAGINE, that a statement is true. But that 'truth' that statement is limited by our knowledge & imagination.

...Truth is not invented but speech about the Truth is dynamic...
(do in the end I find it circular...)

yes, but it is a rather trivial form of "truth" dont you think? Not at all the kind of metaphysical "Truth" which sages, scientists and philosophers seek albeit imperfectly.

Not trivial for the inhabitants of Quito, I imagine. One interesting metaphysical truth would be the truth about what it means to say of something that it does not exist. Don't you think? But I think I know the answer to that one.

I just realized that Quito is the capital of Ecuador. Quito is the capital of Ecuador. I realize the truth of this statement. I did not know that this statement was true until about five minutes ago.

I have to guess (because you do not say plainly) that you are implying metaphysical truth does not "exist". That you are on the side of truth is invented and man is the creator and the measure of all "truth". Please clarify your position.

Quito is the capital of Ecuador because it was designated as such. In a few decades some other city could become the capital of Ecuador. This kind of truth is a sort of logical tautology and a philosophical triviality.

There are in my view more enduring and permanent types of truth. Just as the moon existed before it was perceived by man, the rational structure and mathematical intelligibility of the universe existed before it was discovered by man. For me the universe speaks of reason and therefore of truth. There are truths which are not human defintions or human inventions.

I prefer Plato, beauty is the splendor of truth to the Vienna Circle.

Quito is the capital of Ecuador because it was designated as such. In a few decades some other city could become the capital of Ecuador. This kind of truth is a sort of logical tautology and a philosophical triviality.

And here again we see the evidence of the relativity of truth.
As here we have introduced the factor of time. Time changes many things. What is 'true' if it were agreed upon at this moment, may no longer be by the time I finish writing this.



GS

Ahhhhhh,

But you see - this 'truth' is only a 'relative' truth
If you are an aboriginal of that area you likely to have a completely different name for that conglomeration of buildings, people, machines etc.
And the term 'capital' is simply only another man made manifestation relating to their concept of boundaries - boundaries that define "Ecuador". And those boundaries are only 'relative' to those that believe and honor them.
But all of this is simply relative !

GS

Proper names ideally refer to the same thing. But words like "rock" or "chair" are already abstract. As soon as we move on to "truth" or "justice," the limits of language become pretty obvious. We hope that the idea in the speakers head (which is arguably as much about emotion as thought) gets across the air and becomes an idea in the hearers head. How do we test this transmission? By the means of more words. And, perhaps more important, the behavior that follows hearing. Facial expression, body language, actions, etc.

Speech should not be considered in isolation. Meaning is a part of social practice. We do the best we can with these marks and noises. How different they are from integers.

Proper names ideally refer to the same thing. But words like "rock" or "chair" are already abstract. As soon as we move on to "truth" or "justice," the limits of language become pretty obvious. We hope that the idea in the speakers head (which is arguably as much about emotion as thought) gets across the air and becomes an idea in the hearers head. How do we test this transmission? By the means of more words. And, perhaps more important, the behavior that follows hearing. Facial expression, body language, actions, etc.

Speech should not be considered in isolation. Meaning is a part of social practice. We do the best we can with these marks and noises. How different they are from integers.

I think it would be more interesting and more to the point of the thread to know your position of truth as a human product or truth as a property of the universe. I wish you would imply something.

Quito is the capital of Ecuador because it is designated or defined that way by the people of Ecuador and acknowledge as such by other countries (consensus). It is a trivial truth, a contingent, and changing truth, a matter of little philosophical concern.

---------- Post added 02-12-2010 at 05:47 PM ----------

There are many experiences and probably many concepts which can only be paritally and inadequately expressed or communicated by language but what other tools do we have.
I think the question of truth as invented or truth as discovered is a fundamental question of philosophy in some ways the fundamental question. The universe is inherently rationally intelligible in my view and this speaks to reason and intelligence preceeding material essence, existence or being. In the begining was the word (Logos).

Truth is discovered, and not invented. Invented truths are lies. I have posted that several times.

Whatever you think the philosophical concern is, that Quito is the capital is not a tautology, or a definitional truth. There are such truths. For example, that bachelors are unmarried men, which is a definitional truth (called an analytic truth) but that Quito is the capital of Ecuador is not a definitional or analytic truth.

I don't understand most of what you are saying in your last paragraph, so I won't try to answer it.

"Richard Nixon" and "Barak Obama" do not refer to the same thing. And those are proper names. Maybe you mean that two proper names may refer to the same thing? Well, that is true. "Mark Twain", and "Samuel Clemens" refer to the same person. And so do, "H.H. Munro" and "Saki". I don't understand what it is you are saying about "truth" and "justice", though. No one says they refer to the same thing so far as I know. Wat are you saying about the words, "truth" and "justice"?

Truth is discovered, and not invented. Invented truths are lies. I have posted that several times.