Jon Johanning <zenner41 at mac.com> wrote: On Dec 30, 2004, at 11:42 AM, Chris Doss wrote:
I maintain that there is only one kind of logic and one kind of truth. Do you have a problem with that?
Manjur's Response:
Actually Richard Rorty would. Any undergrad who took the time to read "Philosophy and the Mirror of Knowledge" should know that for Rorty, truth is communicative, it is a matter of an intersubjective agreement within a community. Truth does not have any independent existence outside that communicative setting. (Actually Rorty doesn't have a simple relativism either, but that's another debate). It boggles my mind how are you so fond of quoting Rorty yet failed to notice that "simple truth" about him. As far as numbers are concerned, there may be complex mathematical theories out there that are outside my expertise. But from a social theory perspective, numbers are parts of classification systems and like any classification systems, they are constructed. It is not the objective existence of singular or plural numbers that I am questioning (although there may be ways of doing that too). But numbers make sense only if you are using the language of mathematics. If I can't count,
in other words, I am not being able to situate myself in the discourse of mathematical language, numbers don't have the same meaning for me. Besides, even assuming a common socialization in the mathematical language, whether you see "two chairs" or "twelve pieces of wood stuck together" or "millions of particles," or "one aesthetically pleasing scene" depends on the discursive perspective that you are taking. There is nothing "objectively logical" about it.
Manjur
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!?
Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20041230/51cb9c41/attachment.htm>