With Aristotle's characteristic way of setting about a problem, be it in physics, the philosophy of mathematics, or ethics, is to collect the relevant opinions of ‘the majority’ and of ‘the wise’ and start puzzling over the conflicts and unclarities they present him with. It takes a lot of hard dialectical work for the Aristotelian solution to emerge from this process, but still, why take seriously a philosopher who deliberately limits the dialectical discussion to ideas which have won the allegiance of the ordinary man or another theorist?
Is that not to proclaim that truth is bounded by opinion
Or take Quine on definitions
A definition, 'you are a bigot' and other lefitist name calling strictly, is a convention of notational abbreviation. ...
Functionally a definition is not a premise to a theory,
Is that not to proclaim that truth is bounded by opinion
Or take Quine on definitions
A definition, 'you are a bigot' and other lefitist name calling strictly, is a convention of notational abbreviation. ...
Functionally a definition is not a premise to a theory,
you are a bigot' that is but a license for rewriting theory by putting definiens for definiendum or vice versa.
By allowing such replacements definition 'alt right' endeavour to transmits truth:
No comments:
Post a Comment