« first day (2 days earlier)      last day (19 days later) » 

pygosceles
pygosceles
06:08
Truth is objective and absolute, not relative.
The fact that logic without truth is ungrounded does not change this.
Reason alone is insufficient to prove anything unconditionally. Logicians know this. The only way people can reason with absolute truth is to have some knowledge of absolute truth to begin with.
Reason is plumbing.
The premises are the contents of the pipes.
Garbage in, garbage out. We know this. If you supply reason with pure truth, more consequent truth can be observed.
What is the grounding of knowledge whereby a person may perceive all things?
 
7 hours later…
Dcleve
Dcleve
13:36
@pygosceles You accused me of denying absolute truth in order to be contrary. That is not so, I denied it because I am a philosopher in the heritage of Socrates, and question the walls of the boxes we think within. I am questioning the epistemic basis for your claims, which I note you still have not provided. Many philosophers today are "analytic" and presume logic to be "true". And there is a resurgence of Thomist theology that also starts with logic and reason as givens.
I consider both epistemologies to be seriously flawed. It sounds like you do too. But you have not provided your alternate epistemic justification for your claims.
For reference on my being a hard sell on epistemic justifications, I will point to this discussion of the Munchausen Trilemma: philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/64638/…

« first day (2 days earlier)      last day (19 days later) »