99% — khaled
...Davidson’s suggestion of locating a shared background of beliefs would fail miserably in dealing with anything but the most superficial level of thought. — Joshs
The problem I see with this is not the scope so much as the "really".
Take it out and the statement is clearly wrong: "Nothing is 'true', except this statement. — Banno
I think scepticism is given far more prominence than it deserves. A cultural extrusion form fablsificationism, itself an overrated notion. — Banno
To be a law of logic, a principle must hold in complete generality
No principle holds in complete generality
____________________
There are no laws of logic.
— Gillian Russell
There are two ways to deal with this argument.
A logical monist will take the option of rejecting the conclusion, and also the second premise. For them the laws of logic hold with complete generality.
A logical pluralist will reject the conclusion and the first premise. For them laws of logic apply to discreet languages within logic, not to the whole of language. Classical logic, for example, is that part of language in which propositions have only two values, true or false. Other paraconsistent and paracomplete logics might be applied elsewhere.
A few counter-examples of logical principles that might be thought to apply everywhere. — Banno
...Davidson’s suggestion of locating a shared background of beliefs would fail miserably in dealing with anything but the most superficial level of thought.
— Joshs
His interest is in statements of what is the case, and in that regard he limits his discourse, but we can have some fun extending it. One way to proceed while keeping some of his conniving relevant would be to look at direction fo fit, as discussed in Anscombe and Searle and elsewhere. One might characterised Davidson's interest as word-to-world rather than world-to-word. — Banno
But in politics we change the world to fit the word. — Banno
Davidson might be understood as pointing out that we agree on the presence of a board and the pieces; on the squares, and perhaps even on the initial arrangement of the pieces on the board. But suppose someone does not recognise castling. The disagreement here is not as to how the world is, but how the world might be changed. — Banno
One might describe the situation as incommensurable; one player wishes to castle; the other does not recognise this as a legitimate move. This is not a disagreement as to what is the case, but as to what is to be done. — Banno
All logical laws have exceptions (counterexamples) must itself have (an) exception(s). — TheMadFool
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.