- Joined
- 07 Mar 09
- Moves
- 28919
30 Sep 09
Originally posted by josephwOr we can more more about each other than for either of us to insist on being right (especially when honest opinions differ and no incontrovertible proof can be offered.)
In any debate:
1. We can both be wrong.
2. One of us is wrong.
3. We can't both be right.
Does anyone see any other option(s)?
30 Sep 09
Originally posted by josephw(3) only holds if the debate concerns propositions that are mutually incompatible. Perhaps you intended 'debate' to refer to only cases of this sort, but often what appear to be debates are not of this sort. Often people equivocate upon or poorly understand crucial terms in their discussions, and when clarity is achieved the putative debate is dispelled.
In any debate:
1. We can both be wrong.
2. One of us is wrong.
3. We can't both be right.
Does anyone see any other option(s)?
30 Sep 09
Originally posted by bbarrThen, when there are mutually incompatible propositions, one is right or one is wrong, or both can be wrong, but both can't be right.
(3) only holds if the debate concerns propositions that are mutually incompatible. Perhaps you intended 'debate' to refer to only cases of this sort, but often what appear to be debates are not of this sort. Often people equivocate upon or poorly understand crucial terms in their discussions, and when clarity is achieved the putative debate is dispelled.
Then this logic supports the case for absolutes.
30 Sep 09
Originally posted by josephwEven 'wrong' things can be true. (The 'wrong' thing may play a part in anothers' situation,and help them out-all points of view can only be seen by god)
In any debate:
1. We can both be wrong.
2. One of us is wrong.
3. We can't both be right.
Does anyone see any other option(s)?
30 Sep 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelI think the options may be better expressed as:
Even 'wrong' things can be true. (The 'wrong' thing may play a part in anothers' situation,and help them out-all points of view can only be seen by god)
In any debate:
1. Both opinions can be incorrect.
2. One opinion can be incorrect.
3. It can never be the case that two conflicting opinions can be correct.
where incorrect==wrong==false
and correct==right==true
but that probably still doesn't unambiguously describe the options!
--- Penguin.
- Joined
- 07 Mar 09
- Moves
- 28919
30 Sep 09
Originally posted by josephwYep - too bad actual human life and real world problems can't be reduced to logical propositions because of incomplete or disputable information. Logic always works in a situation where you possess perfect knowledge. Outside of the chessboard I don't know of many situations like that.
Then, when there are mutually incompatible propositions, one is right or one is wrong, or both can be wrong, but both can't be right.
Then this logic supports the case for absolutes.
30 Sep 09
Originally posted by TerrierJack"Logic always works in a situation where you possess perfect knowledge."
Yep - too bad actual human life and real world problems can't be reduced to logical propositions because of incomplete or disputable information. Logic always works in a situation where you possess perfect knowledge. Outside of the chessboard I don't know of many situations like that.
Care to describe a situation where one possesses perfect knowledge?