Talk:Truth/insults?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] 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)