Deron Stewart mentioned in a recent message that there is an implicit
Virian belief in one objective truth that is true for all people. I think
that is true (for all people :-). The claim that truth is subjective is
self-inconsistent. Either that proposition is an objective truth (which
obviously makes it false) or it is a subjective truth. If it is subjective
then it implies that someone else can truthfully claim that truth is
objective, which again makes the original claim false. This seems to imply
that there is indeed a way that things are: an objective truth.
>certainly seems historically that anytime that there has been a period where
>things seemingly could be explained by a particular paradigm along comes a
>response that says no you can't. This centuries flavor of that is
>postmodernism, it denies ultimate truths and explanations, as I've said. And
Sounds like logical positivism is the thesis and postermodernism is
the antithesis. What if there is an objective truth but no theory can
even theoretically become identical to it? Because theories are necessarily
constructed of ideas, concepts, words, and memes. No matter how sophisticated
or accurate they are, theories cannot become what they describe. This allows
for pluralism: there can be many maps of the territory, all accurate but all
focussing on diffent aspects of Truth(tm). Is that a reasonable Hegelian-like
synthesis?
-- David McFadzean dbm@merak.com Memetic Engineer http://www.lucifer.com/~david/ Merak Projects http://www.merak.com