|
|
Re: various comments
Juan C. Garelli (Garelli@ATTACH.EDU.AR)
Wed, 4 Oct 1995 21:18:55 +0000
The following methinks rereading Tarski's "Logic, Semantics,
Metamathematics"***, particularly page 178 (Definition 12) and page 156,
note 1, would not do much harm, particularly for those who still hold
that truth is attributable to sentences ( a meaningless string of
words), instead of "meaningful sentences" corresponding to the facts.
***Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1956
---Juan Carlos Garelli
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
E. Taborsky <ETABORSK@ARUS.UBISHOPS.CA> wrote:
> I am first replying to John McCreery, re my division of various
> thinkers into Direct and Mediated. My categories are such that Direct
> means to have an understanding that Truth exists, in itself, and that
> it is accessible as such. Whether one accesses that Truth via one's
> senses (positivist..and also empiricist) or one's reason (Plato,
> Descartes..and also Kant)..is irrelevant. The point is - IT exists,
> in itself and is accessible. As for any differentiation between Plato
> and Descartes, I can't see much. Cartesian rationalism, to my
> inadequate understanding, suggests that one can go through a Socratic
> dialogic experience, 'purge' oneself of one's inadequacies, and then
> experience Truth..free, finally, of doubt. Ditto Plato. His Forms are
> the architectonic 'guide' to the inadequate copies on earth/within
> our mind. But they do exist, and one can, presumable, access them,
> even if it has to be via the help of one's 'demiurge'.
>
> But the Mediated concept of Truth, is that it first admits that there
> is no such thing as absolute, pure Truth. there is a reality, which
> may be abstract or sensual..but one cannot access it/know it ..'in-
> itself'. One can only 'know' it within the socially constructed (or
> species-constructed) 'mediative-habits' of one's particular
> society/species/whatever. That is why I take Kant out of the Direct
> list. Kan'ts knowledge was developed within mediation, his 'synthetic
> a priori'..which I would compare with the 'active intellect' of
> Aristotle/Aquinas, and of course, Peircean Thirdness. The
> epistemology (the how) of accessing this Truth is not the
> point..ie..it is not relevant too these Two Categories of Direct and
> Mediated, whether one uses the senses or reason to access Truth. I
> differentiate analyses on the basis of whether they first, assume
> that Truth-In-Itself exists..and then, whether they assume that one
> can access it at all. The Direct says 'yes'..to both concerns; it
> exists and it can be directly accessed/known; the Mediated says
> 'Maybe' to the first, and 'no'..to the second--ie..it cannot be
> accessed and what we consider Truth/Knowledge is actually a mediated
> transformation of 'out there'.
********************************************************
J.C. Garelli, M.D., Ph.D.
Department of Early Development
University of Buenos Aires
Juncal 1966, 1116 BA, Argentina
Tel: 54-1 812 5521
Fax: 54-1 812 5432
|