Talk:Truth/draft


 * Note: Seeded with text moved from Talk:Truth for the purpose of separating work on the article content from discussion about the nature of the content. -Stevertigo

Line by line

 * Sentence 1
 * RN: Truth is a word used to mean honest, accurate, or loyal, and to express agreement, affirmation, or assent.
 * "Honest" and "loyal" are about people, not statements; An "honest" statement can be untrue - This version does not talk of the truth of statements. But this is interesting. Banno 20:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Truth is a word used to refer to statements which are honest or accurate, or otherwise have a fidelity, assent, or affirmation with principles which...
 * Truth does not refer to statements (for example, in "it's the truth", it is the "it's" that does the referring, not "the truth"); and I don't know what it could be to "have a fidelity" or to "have an assent". Banno 20:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * What about a "true statement"? This phrase refers to a particular type of statement (notice that the sentence above qualifies those statements to which "truth" refers — truth does not refer to statements, but is said of statements which exhibit certain features). Again consider a sentence of the form "The truth is...". But these are really just points of English grammar. Perhaps "Truth is a word used with reference to...". The phrase "have a fidelity, assent or affirmation" is a bit awkward. Perhaps we could substitute "are faithful to, assent to, or affirm principles which...". Ig0774 05:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with your criticism, if not your criticisms. But I humbly suggest that for every criticism we make, we pay for it with a helpful suggestion. If nobody's codified that principle yet, you can go ahead and name it after me. -Ste|vertigo 00:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Helpful suggestion for sentence #1: Truth is a word used to describe assertions that are honest or accurate, or to express agreement, affirmation, or assent.''' Rick Norwood 19:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Sentence 2
 * SV: In addition to its common meaning, "truth" has paramount usage in philosophy, where it is commonly used to represent either a literal or a perceptual association between statements and the concept of reality, as well as a principle which upholds both accepting and projecting honest thought.
 * "Paramount usage" is clumsy. Again, truth does not represent anything in deflationary theories; nor is all truth literal; and I've never heard of a "principle of truth".Banno 20:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree "paramount usage" is clumsy, perhaps you can suggest a different pair of words. Deflationary theories would seem to qualify for some - how is it that you can say they are wrong? (That would seem to be a deflationary judgment of deflationary theory.) Lets not get sidetracked with philosophy. -Ste|vertigo 00:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Might be best just to cut out "paramount usage" altogether. thus "In philosophy "truth" is commonly used to represent...". Of course, this still runs into the problem of deflationary truth theories... The phrase "principle of truth" is reminiscent of the Sanskrit philosophical term pramana, but admittedly seems a bit out of place in Western philosophy. Ig0774 05:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The statement "out of place for Western philosophy" seems a bit out of place within the context of a project which does in fact have non-Western contributors. We can elseplace debate what is and what is not Western. Besides, any meaningful definition of truth would not be in anyway localised. Where "meaningful" would generally indicate a usage which held the term in any esteem. Or not, if we are to be absolutist about inclusivity, with absolutism being only one paradigm within imagined reality. -Ste|vertigo 06:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Helpful suggestion for sentence #2: Truth is an important concept in philosophy, linguistic, logic, and law. Philosophers down through the ages have developed many different theories about the nature of truth. Rick Norwood 19:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sentence 2
 * That's on the right track for a second sentence. "Philosophers" I would put in later, as its got that long-winded "down through the ages" arc in it. Start small - with the word, and how it is used. -Ste|vertigo 22:20, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Thing
This was intended to be a working draft which would be free of comment. I see now that the technology fails us in facilitating that task. Should I now just give up? Perhaps I can figure out a way to extract the actual meaning from your comments and I can put them into some literate encapsulation. :| -Ste|vertigo 06:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)