🚀 go-pugleaf

On Apr 26, 12:24 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:49:17 -0700 (PDT), PD
>
>
>
> <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 24, 6:35 pm, foolsrushin <dolomi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 25 Apr, 00:22, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> >> > On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:12:22 -0700 (PDT), PD
> >> > <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> Obviously you've already taken a vow of consummate ignorance. Anyone
> >> > >> can say anything publicly without making it true.
> >> > >That's certainly correct. However, the point of using words in the
> >> > >first place is not to establish the truth of the purported meaning of
> >> > >those words, but to communicate.
> >> > To communicate what? Science prefers truth.
> >> > ~v~~
>
> >> Contractual obligations, poems, plays, inductive infallibility? Can
> >> the latter be communicated unambigously? Wittgenstein retreated to
> >> language games, and rightly, Russell thought them silly.
>
> >Lester has certainly proferred himself toward the perception that he
> >doesn't really care one way or the other. His wee game is to cycle
> >through a two line script:
> >1  Prove what you say.
> >2. Nope, you haven't proven it. [Go back to 1]
>
> Difference is I can demonstrate the truth of one thing

It doesn't appear that this is demonstrated at all, though it is
certainly clear that you've *assumed* one thing.

However, if you want to claim that you know only one thing, because
you can demonstrate the truth of one thing, then I guess I'm OK with
your self-assessment.

> whereas you
> can't demonstrate the truth of anything.

Yes, I certainly can. I just can't demonstrate it to sofa cushions,
old pencil erasers, or Lester Zick. That, however, is not my problem.

>
> Tell you what. We'll settle just for having you demonstrate your own
> conception of truth instead of complaining about mine.

Tell you what. Let's not. That would be returning to your little two
line script mentioned earlier, and that seems like an *awfully*
tedious game.

>
> ~v~~