Timeline for What is the division of philosophical doctrines with respect to absoluteness/relativity of truth?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2020 at 4:00 | comment | added | user37981 | @Dcleve- Since you personally are acquainted with most philosophers and speak with absolute authority on what has been dismissed, my only recourse is to kowtow to your absolute self-acknowledged superiority! Thanks for the tuition on the history of philosophy | |
| Nov 14, 2020 at 23:58 | comment | added | Dcleve | @CharlesMSaunders -- answering a question on PhSE consists of more than "read X, and it will answer everything." And particularly when X is some 400 years old, and been dismissed with reasons by most philosophers, "X will answer everything" is implausible. Worse, when X claims to provide CERTAINTY, it is refuted by example by the rejection by most philosophers, as a definitive argument for certainty by definition would be convincing, and X, in the circumstances described has not been, for centuries now. | |
| Nov 14, 2020 at 19:36 | comment | added | user37981 | The analytic/synthetic distinction is in effect, a shadow of dualism and still persists today. The reference to Spinoz's TIE and a careful reading of it, by setting preconceptions aside, can go a long way to answering your questions. Cheers, | |
| Nov 14, 2020 at 19:10 | comment | added | Dcleve | Providing links to the references would improve this answer. Also, the vast majority of 20th and 21st century philosophers are monistic materialists -- the claim that philosophy is dominated by Descartian dualism is absolutely false. If Spinoza, and his claims to directly apprehend truth are not accepted today, it would be useful to reference the reasons why, and counter-arguments that make the critiques of Spinoza invalid. | |
| Oct 31, 2020 at 3:29 | comment | added | user37981 | For Spinoza the epistemic and the ontological are inseparable. To know and to be are one and the same capacity. As for any search for 'absolute truth' in the annals of philosophy, all the names you list from 5.2 -5.3.9, each in their own right incrementally serves up reflections which when accrued to a baseline of accumulating data or reflective knowledge lead the pilgrim to an appreciation for and an acceptance and appreciation for the store of 'absolute certainty' which brought these people's thoughts to the attention of the world to begin with. | |
| Oct 30, 2020 at 6:14 | comment | added | მამუკა ჯიბლაძე | Thank you for the thorough and accurate answer! It is a pity though that you only address the epistemic aspects of truth and say nothing about stances of philosophers regarding its ontological status. I wonder if you could (maybe in a separate answer) at least briefly mention those who investigate (non-/)existence of absolute truth, regardless of its reachability by us. | |
| Oct 29, 2020 at 23:05 | history | answered | user37981 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |