Talk:Truth/insults?

Deflating Banno's unintelligibility
This section is an ongoing list to deflate some of Banno's many uninteligible or redundant statements and make them more comprehendible.


 * 1) "positing a definition of truth" - defining truthBensaccount 16:52, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) "makes at least two assumptions" - makes two assumptions
 * 3) "denied, for instance, by phenomenology" - denied by phenomenology Bensaccount 17:05, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) "a statement or other truth bearer" - something
 * 5) "can be said to" - can Bensaccount 17:09, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) "There is some sense in which" - loosely (speaking) Bensaccount 17:15, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) "To that reality" - to reality Bensaccount 17:18, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) "an assumption that has faced criticism by many philosophers." (with no critisism mentioned) - Meaningless bias in my opinion but I will let it stand. Bensaccount 17:20, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) "For instance, defining objective truth as objective correspondence with reality makes the assumption that "something can correspond to reality". This assumption has faced criticism by many philosophers. " - For instance, defining objective truth as "objective correspondence with reality" has faced criticism by many philosophers. Bensaccount 17:24, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 10) The nature of truth is a key topic - truth is a key topic. Bensaccount 03:20, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Why do you feel the need to adopt such a rude and belligerent attitude? Banno 21:20, Apr 17, 2004 (UTC)

If you make a simple point that I disagree with and you use confounding language and phrasing I have to clarify it before I can dispute it. If you arent intentionally confounding your points to make them difficult to argue, I am sorry; but if you are, you deserve to feel insulted. "So, if pigs fly, if pigs do indeed fly, then it's true that pigs fly" - From the former deflationary theory of truth - Bensaccount 21:52, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)