[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 212 KB, 1200x1200, worse than hume.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15587229 No.15587229 [Reply] [Original]

Who is this goblin to place limitations on the way my mind models ideas. Is it a question of truth? That my minds model can never be known to correspond to the idea being hypostatized?

Would a different theory of truth do away with Kant's critique of metaphysics?

>> No.15587245

his limits were to avoid religious babbling which could never be proved or refuted because it lies outside of possible experience e.g. quakers, calvinists, materialists, etc.

>> No.15587271

>>15587245
Aside from the desideratum, does the critique of hypostatizing ideas depend on the correspondence theory of truth to hold?

>ideas are non-objects
>truth can only correspond to objects
>hypostatizing makes an idea into an object
>the hypostatized object-idea can never correspond to the non-object idea
>therefore no truths about ideas are valid

>> No.15587294

>>15587271
If no truth about ideas are valid, then how does one know whether this idea of truth is valid in itself? You’ve created ambiguity
which cannot be logically validated except by resort to an idea. Thank you for your service.

>> No.15587320

>>15587294
Skeptic-chads win again.

>> No.15587324

>>15587320
I’m not skeptical in my skepticism, if that’s what you’re insinuating.