[MD] Demanding Evidence From Theists

[david buchanan]

Hey Ron:
I really don't know what you mean here. Pragmatic truth for Rorty is biologically dominated? Huh? The theory behind the axiom of non-contradiction? Huh? I seem to be requiring a kind of social value good? Huh? Couldn't say what that means if my life depended on it. As I understand it, Rorty abandons the notion of truth in favor of intersubjective agreement while pragmatic truth in the MOQ is neither social nor biological but intellectual. (Truth is an intellectual species of the Good.) 

> Ron said:
> Aristotle makes almost the exact same arguement leading up to the theory behind
> the axiom of non-contradiction and it is precisely how you explained above that
> truth and falsity have any meaning, which is an arguement distinct from the one
> Rorty as you characterize his position above,truth as a means to serve personal
> interests, Socrates in Platos Protagoras makes a similar arguement with Sophism,
>  it is a love
> for wisdom that allows pragmatic truth to have it's highest quality meaning.
> 
> There is a wisdom that comes along with pragmatic truth, for a metaphor
> you may appreciate, the distinction is quite like the distinction between
> biological and social quality. Pragmatic truth is thought by Rorty to be
> biologically dominated and requires a wisdom of social level patterns
> a love of wisdom a social desire for goodness, excellence, as a first
> principle to come to the kind of social value good you seem to be requiring.




 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/