Re: Tautologies and Empirical Truth

From: Lester Zick (lesterDELzick_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 10/30/04 

Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:45:44 GMT

On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 06:01:05 GMT, "Stephen Harris"
<cyberguard1048-usenet@yahoo.com> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:

>
>"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>news:4181bedf.75193516@netnews.att.net...
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:22:32 GMT, "Stephen Harris"
>> <cyberguard1048-usenet@yahoo.com> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>>>news:4180c3a7.71190262@netnews.att.net...
>>>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:04:19 -0400, Wolf Kirchmeir
>>>> <wwolfkir@sympatico.ca> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Lester Zick wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Tautologies and Empirical Truth
>>>>>> --------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In a frank discussion with Wolf Kirchmeir yesterday concerning whether
>>>>>> tautologies constitute empirical evidence he took occasion to remind
>>>>>> me quite candidly that tautologies are always true. And the moral he
>>>>>> drew from this was that tautological truths can't be empirical because
>>>>>> empirical observations are always problematic and tautologies are not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then I got to pondering. It seemed a shame to have something that was
>>>>>> always true and not be able to draw some useful information from it.
>>>>>> Here was this beacon of universal truth, and we had no use for it. I
>>>>>> understood that philosophers and scientists consider tautologies
>>>>>> useless despite their universal truth. However, I decided that the
>>>>>> final chapter on usefullness of the tautology had yet to be written.
>>>>>
>>>>>"Always true" does not mean "universal truth."
>>>>
>>>> Aw, c'mon, Wolf, you're quibbling. If something is always true, it's
>>>> true for all things everywhere at all times. If it's not true for all
>>>> things everywhere, it's not true all the time. Totally irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>> Regards - Lester
>>>
>>>I am more sympathetic to Wolf's original point, which was something
>>>which is logically/tautologically true does not have an empircal (physical
>>>reality) implication. Of course if the premise is true about reality then
>>>the argument is called sound and then has an actual implication about
>>>reality, because you are essentially just stating a fact about reality.
>>
>> So statements about reality which are true constitutes a sound
>> argument? A mere statement doesn't constitute an argument at all.
>>
>> I can appreciate where your sympathies lie, Stephen, but where does
>> your reason lie?
>>
>
>Arguments are called valid if they are logically correct.
>Arguments are called sound if they are both valid and have a true premise.
>An argument consists of a premise and statements which follow to arrive at a
>conclusion.
>
>Rabbits are often white. (true premise)
>Some rabbits are pets for children. (supporting premise)
>Conclusion: Some pets for children are white.
>
>>>the argument is called sound and then has an actual implication about
>>>reality, because you are essentially just stating a fact about reality.
>>
>
>"Some pets for children are white." is a true statement about reality
>because it follows from the true premise "Rabbits are often white
>which is supported by "some rabbits are pets for children and leads
>to the true conclusion Some pets for children are white which is
>also a true statement about reality.
>
>Maybe you thought "argument" was meant to imply some type of dispute
>which has nothing much to do with a statement. An argument is a series
>of statements in logic without the implication of a dispute involved.
>
>My "reason lies" in being educated.

And my question concerned where your reason lies with repect to my
true observations concerning tautologies and not your observations
with respect to white rabbits and children's pets.

Regards - Lester

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Tautologies and Empirical Truth
    ... > Arguments are called sound if they are both valid and have a true premise. ... > Some rabbits are pets for children. ... Some pets for children are white. ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Tautologies and Empirical Truth
    ... >> Arguments are called sound if they are both valid and have a true premise. ... >> Some rabbits are pets for children. ... A circular argument includes no possibility. ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: The Pointy Stick Compendium Project
    ... just images of them, along with a description if you feel ... you forgot the rosewood and bronze pointy-stick depth gauge ... keep rabbits in hutches like that? ... Are they pets, or livestock? ...
    (rec.crafts.woodturning)
  • Re: Muslim fury over ham in prison halal curry
    ... Dog or cat no, for sentimental reasons as I have them as pets. ... I've eaten plenty of rabbits despite having ...
    (uk.politics.misc)