Question by Elvis Fan: Are we too scared to construct a rich theory of Truth because of the failure of reality-based Metaphysics?
Do the arguments against a Reality-Based Metaphysics hold for a Truth-Based Metaphysics? I assure you I have read hundreds of Philosophy books on truth and other subjects.
Best answer:
Answer by ? Brian ?
I don’t even really understand your question clearly. And I have studied philosophy for over 2 years. “Failure of reality-based metaphysics?”
What?…what’s that mean exactly.
Give your answer to this question below!
truth is never a theory.fix that in your mind
We are too scared only to accept a theory of truth based on reality-based metaphysics. Aristotle was not wrong to say “To say of what is that it is, is true.” While it sounds like a tautology, a tautology is an axiom.
“An axiom is a proposition that defeats its opponents by the fact that they have to accept it and use it in the process of any attempt to deny it.” http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/axioms.html
We are too scared to accept such black-and-white concepts because we prefer to think in terms of fuzzy metaphysics. It saves us the act of responsibility.
The genius of Aristotle’s theory of truth is that to deny it, you must use it, thus defeating your own denial. If we deny correspondence, nothing has to be anything at all except what we want it to be.
We are so scared that we have constructed many rich theories of Truth.
Do we really understand fear, or have we arrogantly dismissed it as an idea?