This forum was closed on October 1st, 2010. However, the archives are open to the public and filled with vast amounts of good reading and information for you to enjoy. If you wish to meet some Wardrobians, please visit the Into the Wardrobe Facebook group.

Philosophy and Language

Reply

Postby Silence » February 9th, 2008, 1:38 am

Man will be natural by nature until he transcends the natural. And because of his fallen state, what we call the natural man is decidedly unnatural. Only when we are unified in Christ will we speak with one voice and share one heart; His. Until then, 'a matter of taste' and 'mine is better than yours' is a moot argument.

Concerning the phrase 'everything is relative', I am forced to ask- relative to What? What if some things we deem of great importance are ultimately revealed as equally irrelevant? Our priorities must first be straight before we get into disputing something as petty as taste, and its bases in right and wrong, or better and worse- and again, at the point, will it still matter?

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Matthew 10:32 KJV. Even Caiaphas by virtue of being high priest that year prophesied concerning Jesus' mission. Truth, the foundation of everything testifies of Christ; how can we help but speak truth, even if it ends up in a twisted form? Even CS Lewis pointed out that Evil is only spoiled goodness, and thus cannot even be honest about being evil.

Silence :read:
Silence
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 130
Joined: Feb 2008

Re: Reply

Postby Ben2747 » February 9th, 2008, 2:10 am

Ben2747
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Jul 2007

Re: Reply

Postby rusmeister » February 9th, 2008, 4:02 am

"Eh? Two views? There are a dozen views about everything until you know the answer. Then there's never more than one."
Bill "The Blizzard" Hingest - That Hideous Strength
User avatar
rusmeister
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 1795
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Russia

Postby Silence » February 9th, 2008, 6:10 pm

Ben2747: I did not mean that taste is necessarily petty by nature- merely that we tend to become so when discussing it; giving 'matters of taste' the weight and importance of Eternal Truth, the discussion of which should not be a disagreement so much as an attempt to pin down its true nature.

*I understand your question better from your last post; but there is no easy answer, since knowledge of the truth comes from personal experience. So unless you are willing to accept a flawed expression of my limited insight at face value, you will never be in complete agreement with it. Take what you can, consider what you are able, and put the rest aside.

*I think that much light and truth was taught by Adam and Eve to their children, but thousands of years have distorted it. Perhaps you even touch upon the subject of 'true myth' that Tolkien and Lewis believed in? A fascinating study, I assure you.

rusmeister: I completely agree- truth is much more complex. People often think me rambling because I go to great pains to try and establish the context for what I say. And since very few people have the patience for even a five-minute lecture, I try to be concise.

Again, truth must be personalized; what the Lord would command of Moses is different than what he may ask of me. My path to Heaven is different than yours, since it is impossible for two people to experience the same thing in the same way at the same time. How then can we believe there is a trite mass-producible solution, or answer? Also, taste is based on personal need; and while I might be vitamin E deprived, you could have too much of it. The foundation of it may be the same, (health and well-being,) but the means can vary widely depending on your circumstances.

I hope I wasn't entirely incoherent.
Silence :read:
PS: on the subject of 'everything is relative', though we think of it as just a nice way of saying 'maybe we are both right, without needing to agree', I must point out that 'everything' can only be 'relative' in relation to something established and immovable.
Silence
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 130
Joined: Feb 2008

Postby alecto » February 10th, 2008, 4:01 am

The gustes in de rerum gustibus are tastes in general, and the reason they are hard to dispute is that sentences like "pizza tastes good" do not have truth values because they are improperly constructed sentences. "Pizza tastes good" is not specific enough to determine whether it is true or false. It is thus in the same category as partial mathematical statements like "x =". "X = " is not complete, so it cannot be verified.

People argue vociferously about things like "pizza tastes good" because of this very issue. Now a more specific sentence, like "pizza tastes good to Hillary Clinton" can in principle be verified, though it is stil problematical. She might like some kinds of pizza and not others. This problem, however, is a more general problem concerning uses of categories, and not limited to the subject of taste. More modern logical systems would call "tastes good" a two place predicate. It is meaningless until two nouns are specified, one being the taster and the other being the object tasted. Using this more robust system of constructing propositions, one can dispute matters of taste. This issue and its possible resolutions extend to more general definitions of and metaphorical interpretations of taste.

The ethical issue can only be treated within this kind of framework, and there are at least two kinds of questions:

1 - Are there some objects that it is proper to have a taste for for some people and not for others, and

2 - are there some objects that it is improper to have a taste for for all possible people?
Sentio ergo est.
User avatar
alecto
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 510
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Austin, TX

Postby Silence » February 10th, 2008, 5:58 am

Silence
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 130
Joined: Feb 2008

Postby Robert » February 10th, 2008, 2:21 pm

[I am] Freudian Viennese by night, by day [I am] Marxian Muscovite

--Robert Frost--
User avatar
Robert
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Under the stars and in the midst of things

Previous

Return to Religion, Science, and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered members and 11 guests

cron