TRUTH ETHICAL TRUTH LOGICAL TRUTH truth from the

TRUTH

ETHICAL TRUTH & LOGICAL TRUTH (truth from the sense of subjective component of knowledge) (truth from the sense of objective component of knowledge) ETHICAL TRUTH • • LOGICAL TRUTH • • The matter of ethical rule Ethical truth is attributed to the speaker Function: • Does not pay attention to the reality • But we pay attention to the correspondence between the speaker’s statement and his mind. Blind colo r eye The matter of logical rule Logical truth is the attribute of proposition Function • We pay attention to reality • The focus is the correspondence between the statement and the reality E BLU s Ethically he right, he does not lie That is a black pen PEN Logically he wrong, his proposition does not correspond to the reality

TRUTH For example : in the middle age, Earth is the center of universe Ptolemy (85 -126): Geocentric universe Was believed Was justified But it is not knowledge, since it is not the truth

Two things concerning truth that always be mixed or confused to each another • The Essence of Truth • The method/ way coming to the truth

• The Essence of Truth • The method/ way coming to the truth Deals with the questions, such as: • What is the nature of truth? • What is the reality of the truth? • What is the meaning of truth? • What is truth? Deals with the questions, such as: • How can we come to the conclusion that a proposition is true? • How can we know something is true? • What is the criteria that a proposition is true? For example If true is the correspondence to reality How we know that a proposition corresponds to reality? Many philosophers confuse

The Essence of Truth “What is truth? ” • Historically, the most popular theory of truth was the Correspondence Theory. • for any proposition p, p is true if and only if p corresponds to a fact. • First proposed in a vague form by Plato and by Aristotle in his Metaphysics, • • No other theories than the correspondence theory until the last of 19 C It is begun under the influence of Hegel and Kant at first, another theories were built • After 19 C, at least there are 3 theories of truth remain

The Correspondence Theory of Truth For any proposition p, p is true if and only if p corresponds to a fact / reality. In knowledge we have : • • Proposition Reality We have knowledge of reality through proposition So, the truth here means There is correspondence between : • Proposition So, knowledge in this theory knowledge by mediation i. e. through proposition • Reality

The Correspondence Theory of Truth There are 3 axioms in this theory : • There is reality outside mind • We are able to know that external reality • Our knowledge to the external reality is knowledge reality as it is There is no objection concerning this until Hegel and Kant Or not a phenomenological knowledge / knowledge as what phenomenon occurs is in one’s perception Hegel Believed in identity between mind and reality Kant We just able to know phenomena, not noumena (reality as it is) Phenomena = noumena + influence of mind Under the influence of both philosophers, objections arise Theory of truth is not Correspondence theory

Objections Truth : corresponding between • Proposition • And Reality • Hence, it means we know just proposition, and not reality • When we know reality, it is indirectly, by mediation, that is proposition • Hence we know reality through proposition Hence, we cannot see 2 things: Proposition and Reality, then see whether or not there is corresponding between them Since we just know proposition But this objection is not correct, since it is mixing between ESSENCE of truth and CRITERIA of TRUTH

For example: Ahmad : “gold is a metal of which atomic number is 90 Dahlan : “It is not true that gold is a metal of which chemical number is 90” Why ? “Since we cannot recognize which metal atomic number is 90” Ahmad spoke about the essence of Gold Dahlan objection is due to the criteria of knowing the atomic number of gold Dahlan’s objection is not correct since he make confusedness between essence of a thing and criteria of coming to the knowledge of that thing

Objections Truth = Corresponds to Proposition Reality What is the bridge that corresponds the proposition to the reality? By another proposition? Lead to an Infinite Regress But this objection is not correct, since it is mixing between ESSENCE of truth and CRITERIA of TRUTH

Objections Liar Paradox Epimenides (600 BC) The Epimenides paradox is a problem in logic. It is named after the Cretan philosopher Epimenides of Knossos (alive circa 600 BC). Epimenides was a Cretan who made one immortal statement: "ALL CRETANS ARE LIARS. " Another example: "ALL WHAT I SAY ARE LIE. "

Objections Objection: “The concept of Correspondence is not clarified” If truth : Proposition Corresponds to Reality How can it be? Both are Identical ? Similar? • Hence we know reality through proposition • It means, it assumes between proposition and reality there must be the same identity • But, it is impossible, since proposition is a thing and reality it refers another different thing. Proposition and reality is not identical at all. • So, in this sense proposition cannot correspond to reality, since they are not identical to each another.

If truth : Proposition Reality Corresponds to How can it be? Both are Identical ? Similar? Another option : there is similarity between both proposition and reality Similarity between 2 things, means both things have: • • Aspect of similarities Aspect of differences it is the same just to same extent, to some grades But truth is not graduated • A proposition that : “A is B” • GRADUATED Can be true or false It cannot be between true and false