Posted: Oct 11, 2018 4:45 am
scherado wrote:What I brought to the table was, and is, what I call "referent analysis," a method of critical thinking, which I use to determine the truth-value of anything. I was introduced to this in the book, The Tyranny of Words, by Stuart Chase.
Just to get some context, I dug up a review of Chase's book, which was published in 1938; the review came soon after, I'm guessing. The reviewer notes that an effective function of Chase's work would be to drive readers to investigate his sources, great thinkers of the caliber of Aristotle and Nietzsche. We had a great debate back on RDF with the intriguing title, "Relativism is self-refuting". This has forever warned me about some of the ways philosophy is discussed in chat-rooms. Just for the record, I don't accept the notion that "anything" has a truth value. As the song goes:
If you ain't wrong, you're right
If it ain't day, it's night
If you ain't sure, you might
Gotta be this or that
If it ain't dry, it's wet
If you ain't got, you get
If it ain't gross, it's net
Gotta be this or that
If it ain't sis, you can't miss
It's got to be your brother
Can't you see it's gotta be
One way or the other?
If it ain't full, it's blank
If you don't spend, you bank
If it ain't Dee, it's Frank
Gotta be this or that