5
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 114:
Line 114: + +
Debate:If there is no objective truth, then is the claim "there is no objective truth" also not an objective truth? (view source)
Revision as of 04:26, November 4, 2012
, 04:26, November 4, 2012→Yes and No
Truth: "The property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality"
Truth: "The property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality"
Objective: "Expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations"
Paradox: "An argument that apparently derives self-contradictory conclusions by valid deduction from acceptable premises " - Merriam Webster
Paradox: "An argument that apparently derives self-contradictory conclusions by valid deduction from acceptable premises " - Merriam Webster
So our initial premise indicates that there is no objective truth. For the follow up question, on one hand, we can assert that "there is no objective truth" is an objective truth, but this obviously violates our initial premise. If we interpret "there is no objective truth" as a subjective truth, on the other hand, it means that there can be an objective truth from (a) certain perspective(s), which would also violate our initial premise. I would contest that this is a pointless question simply because it is inherently paradoxical. If we intend to have a serious and intelligent debate on objectivity and/or subjectivity, why not just replace this debate topic with any of the much simpler, non-paradoxical alternatives: "Is truth objective or subjective?", "Is reality grounded in subjectivity?", "Is every truth universally true?", etc.? --[[User:JesseA|JesseA]] 00:09, 4 November 2012 (EDT)
So our initial premise indicates that there is no objective truth. For the follow up question, on one hand, we can assert that "there is no objective truth" is an objective truth, but this obviously violates our initial premise. If we interpret "there is no objective truth" as a subjective truth, on the other hand, it means that there can be an objective truth from (a) certain perspective(s), which would also violate our initial premise. I would contest that this is a pointless question simply because it is inherently paradoxical. If we intend to have a serious and intelligent debate on objectivity and/or subjectivity, why not just replace this debate topic with any of the much simpler, non-paradoxical alternatives: "Is truth objective or subjective?", "Is reality grounded in subjectivity?", "Is every truth universally true?", etc.? --[[User:JesseA|JesseA]] 00:09, 4 November 2012 (EDT)