Truth is a White Lie

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;110070 wrote:

To show some honor toward my influences, here's some Nietzsche from Beyond Good and Evil, chapter called On the Prejudices of Philosophers.

"The falseness of an opinion is not for us any objection to it: it is here, perhaps, that our new language sounds most strangely. The question is, how far an opinion is life-furthering, life- preserving, species-preserving, perhaps species-rearing, and we are fundamentally inclined to maintain that the falsest opinions (to which the synthetic judgments a priori belong), are the most indispensable to us, that without a recognition of logical fictions, without a comparison of reality with the purely IMAGINED world of the absolute and immutable, without a constant counterfeiting of the world by means of numbers, man could not live--that the renunciation of false opinions would be a renunciation of life, a negation of life. TO RECOGNIZE UNTRUTH AS A CONDITION OF LIFE; that is certainly to impugn the traditional ideas of value in a dangerous manner, and a philosophy which ventures to do so, has thereby alone placed itself beyond good and evil. "

The falseness of an opinion is not for us any objection to it:

One need read no further.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;109752 wrote:

Then what is all this business about "propositional statements"? What are they? And what has programming computers to do with it?

Unlike people, computers have to behave logically...People really are the limits of logic...It is good to get a sense of what we do and why we do it; but because variables cannot be effectively eliminated as they might be in a laboratory, it is fairly useless when applied to morals...

If I can tell you the truth of what is going on in society all the time it is this: When people forms societies, or reform them with some great defense and enthusiasm, they are inclined to have reflex reactions to the signs and symbols of their society, because they view their society as themselves, as the embodiment of truth, and truth has meaning...

In practical terms, this reflex is like the bell ring for pavlov's dog... The bell ring told a certain truth, that dinner was served...Now; ring the bell often enough, so that the dog realizes the bell has no relation to the food, and the reflex ends... The meaning in relation to food has went out of the bell....

Invarably, some people in society convert the meaning of our signs and symbols as they use them to enrich themselves...The flag and the constitution can be seen not as the blessing of a former age bestowed upon the present, but as a failure which has led only to despair and misery...The meaning of laws, the meaning of our institutions, the meaning of nation can all be pulled out of a people with their wealth and security...

@Reconstructo,

I see your point, but in my view: Nietzsche himself was a sort of ironic mystic. He suggest that truth is a woman (Sophia?). He defines himself as a tragic philosopher and is never finished conjuring Dionysus. I see as a religious reformer. Of course this is counter to the usual perception of him, but such is my current interpretation. He wept for humanity like any prophet in the wilderness. He gnashed his teeth at the world's bad taste like any Romantic. I see him as the type of man who challenged the letter of the law in the name of its spirit -- not unlike his supposed boogey-man Christ.

Smile

@Reconstructo,

I ask it again: is it wishful thinking for us to think we can escape wishful thinking?

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;110868 wrote:

I ask it again: is it wishful thinking for us to think we can escape wishful thinking?

Those who dare must work, and those who will not work must wish...Accidents happen...That is straight from the Latin...Accidentio means: happen... Knowing stuff does not simply happen, but that bad stuff does happen without proper attention to detail, one must be ever vigilent against natual forces, one of which is human greed and laziness...

@Fido,

Fido;110955 wrote:

Those who dare must work, and those who will not work must wish...Accidents happen...That is straight from the Latin...Accidentio means: happen... Knowing stuff does not simply happen, but that bad stuff does happen without proper attention to detail, one must be ever vigilent against natual forces, one of which is human greed and laziness...

But is this too wishful thinking? I suspect that reason is subordinate to life, both social and personal. That being said, there is much truth in post.

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;110868 wrote:

I ask it again: is it wishful thinking for us to think we can escape wishful thinking?

It depends on the person who is doing the thinking. The answer is, sometimes we can. Sometimes we can't. It depends on what the individual is thinking about. And it is, of course, a matter of degree.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111025 wrote:

It depends on the person who is doing the thinking. The answer is, sometimes we can. Sometimes we can't. It depends on what the individual is thinking about. And it is, of course, a matter of degree.

But is this wishful thinking? I'm not trying to be difficult. I think there is a spectrum. Some thinking is obviously wishful. In other cases it's difficult to determine.

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;111029 wrote:

But is this wishful thinking? I'm not trying to be difficult. I think there is a spectrum. Some thinking is obviously wishful. In other cases it's difficult to determine.

Is what wishful thinking? I suppose there is a spectrum. There generally is. That something is hard to determine does not mean it isn't (or is). It just means, it is hard to tell which.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111030 wrote:

That something is hard to determine does not mean it isn't (or is). It just means, it is hard to tell which.

But we might wish there were a thinking that was purified of wish. We might crave this sort of perfect truth. It might be a white lie, this truth that transcends wishful thinking.

"I think there's a car in my driveway" is not the sort of statement I would normally worry about. "I think there is absolute truth" is more the kind of statement that might be wishful thinking.

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;111036 wrote:

But we might wish there were a thinking that was purified of wish. We might crave this sort of perfect truth. It might be a white lie, this truth that transcends wishful thinking.

"I think there's a car in my driveway" is not the sort of statement I would normally worry about. "I think there is absolute truth" is more the kind of statement that might be wishful thinking.

I don't get what you are trying to say. I am trying to figure out a natural deduction in formal logic. No wishful thinking there. And I don't care particularly what the answer is to whether there is absolute truth, although I would be astonished if there is a sensible answer.

@Reconstructo,

All our forms are absolutes... The idea of a dog is an absolute dog, and a perfect dog...As a form, it 'dog' would not work if it were part cat...But we only concieve of the world through perfect forms, realizing reality does no measure up to our conception of it...If you say there is no abolute truth, then you mean that in reality no example of a perfect truth can be demonstrated...In our minds there is a perfect conception of truth by which we judge reality...

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111038 wrote:

I don't get what you are trying to say. I am trying to figure out a natural deduction in formal logic. No wishful thinking there. And I don't care particularly what the answer is to whether there is absolute truth, although I would be astonished if there is a sensible answer.

I'm saying people tend to lie to themselves, except that whatever we believe is the truth for us until we stop believing it. It exist as the view of the world we react to. Outside the land of well-fed philosophers (who tell themselves their own sort of pretty truth-lies) is a world full of disagreement and second opinions. Think of first dates, visits to doctors who are vague, the speeches of politicians, journal entries, talk show laughter, all the messy half-ignorant (rather than quarter ignorant) noise of it all. Of course we want logic. Of course we want an island of sanity. But the more certain that logic becomes, the less applicable to real life. Of course logic can be part of a more comprehensive rhetoric in the engagement of life, and this is good. But the more formal and mathematical, the less reality equipped it is. For human reality is anything but binary. We are dealing with spectrums and half-educated guesses. Is this mechanic cheating me? Is this expert lying or foolish or is his warning to be taken seriously? Is the preacher really a con man? Does my daughter use birth control like she swears she does? (I don't have kids. Save the jokes for later.) Can't know all it would be useful for us to know. We have motives for our best guesses. Sometimes too optimistic, and for some, sometimes masochistically pessimistic. So maybe we really like logic as an oasis and we pretend it's more meaningful for life and philosophy than it really is. This would be wishful thinking.

@Reconstructo,

although, by way of contrast to this viewpoint, if you were any kind of philosopher in the bygone days, you would be beyond all this. That is why traditional philosophy was really a rather austere and demanding occupation. Because by renouncing the personal, all these kinds of devices could be left behind, and you can ascend to a realm of somewhat more general issues.

---------- Post added 12-14-2009 at 06:45 PM ----------

all of which could be wishful thinking on my part.

@jeeprs,

jeeprs;111140 wrote:

although, by way of contrast to this viewpoint, if you were any kind of philosopher in the bygone days, you would be beyond all this. That is why traditional philosophy was really a rather austere and demanding occupation. Because by renouncing the personal, all these kinds of devices could be left behind, and you can ascend to a realm of somewhat more general issues.
all of which could be wishful thinking on my part.

I think there's a lot of truth in what you're saying. And perhaps I lower myself when I bother to argue epistemological questions that are no longer of real interest to me, having been settled to my satisfaction long ago.

It should be noted that many philosophers of the bygone days were not beyond this. And much of the Western tradition was quite concerned with epistemology, as far as my reading indicates. I almost think you must be referring to someone like Pythagoras, who was essentially a religious leader --from what I have read. Perhaps gnostics. Is myth/mysticism more important than epistemology? I think so. But it's a dangerous age to have no epistemological sophistication in. I know this does not apply to you. Surely you will admit the world has no shortage of false prophets? Some of the folks with their hands out on TV....Some of them in lab coats?

Thanks for your sincerity on the matter.

@Reconstructo,

Sorry if I come off as sanctimonious. It is a reaction to the post above. Again, I can see the point you are making. I am just trying to find the golden thread out of the labyrinth.

@jeeprs,

jeeprs;111145 wrote:

Sorry if I come off as sanctimonious. It is a reaction to the post above. Again, I can see the point you are making. I am just trying to find the golden thread out of the labyrinth.

No offense taken. I sometimes ask myself why I bother arguing the epistemology stuff, as the issue is mostly dead for me. It's an indulgence of my aggressive /competitive side. I can't see keeping it up. I've actually got more of a serene temperament in the non-virtual (or the less-virtual) world. I suppose it's because this is the first forum I've joined and it's been fun to do a little verbal knife-fighting, as well as to enjoy the better-tempered exchanges. So much of the not-quite-friendly argumentative side of this forum is motivated by personal rivalries rather than the sincere pursuit of increased knowledge. It's so often a pi**ing contest. There's a part of me that participates and a part of me that studies this participation. I'm the least expensive guinea pig I can find for myself.

You don't strike me as sanctimonious. I respect you for keeping your eye on the goal of wisdom. Blake says some brilliant things that hint at how trifling epistemology can be. "The questioner who sits so sly, shall never know how to reply." It's a higher goal to "know how to reply," to find something. I once used doubt and analysis as a sword to hack off all the false religion and prejudice I grew up around. But at some point I started backtracking. Thesis: superstitious acceptance. Antithesis: doubt to the point of nihilism. Synthesis: a more sophisticated appreciation of the tradition once abandoned -- a deeper experience of such.

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;111158 wrote:

No offense taken. I sometimes ask myself why I bother arguing the epistemology stuff, as the issue is mostly dead for me. It's an indulgence of my aggressive /competitive side. I can't see keeping it up.

having been settled to my satisfaction long ago.

Maybe it is because you have a "heart too soon made glad". Robert Browning.

@jeeprs,

jeeprs;111140 wrote:

although, by way of contrast to this viewpoint, if you were any kind of philosopher in the bygone days, you would be beyond all this. That is why traditional philosophy was really a rather austere and demanding occupation. Because by renouncing the personal, all these kinds of devices could be left behind, and you can ascend to a realm of somewhat more general issues.

---------- Post added 12-14-2009 at 06:45 PM ----------

all of which could be wishful thinking on my part.

When people used philosophy to escape reality theology was the benifactor...The proof any truth is how well people relate through it...When you look at Nietzsche you see such a philosophy devoid of the personal, and all he drew of mankind were stick figures and cruel characatures... Without the personal you never see what we need or who we are...Truth has to work for people...Or the alternative is that people work for some abstract version of truth, and it becomes the means to their enslavement...

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111204 wrote:

having been settled to my satisfaction long ago.

Maybe it is because you have a "heart too soon made glad". Robert Browning.

I see the joke, of course, but doesn't this stink of a certain resentment? Is this not the voice of one who lives on grasshoppers in the wilderness? It is holier for us to suffer for the Truth? You can play John the Baptist. I always preferred Christ. I don't suffer for the truth, I am the Truth. Life is the truth. Now showing: Escape from Planet Calculator!

Philosophy Forum

Truth is a White Lie

Quick Links

My Account

able2know