But I ask, if the premise is not understood by someone, if the person being asked is too ignorant or arrogant to understand the question, does this suddenly invalidate the question?
The answer must be no, since all things are relative to all people, right? Just because it is not true to one does not mean that it is not true to all, right?
And as such should these who say such things keep this in mind and remain silent, instead of tearing others down?
P.S. I am only talking of non-true/false questions, ones that do not have one single answer. I.E. Is the earth a sphere? Yes. There is no other answer because the earth is a sphere. So do not answer with a comment about some questions having a single answer.
Serious answers only please.
Thanks.If a premise is considered false is the question worthless?
Your point is well taken and expressed with the passion of your conviction. Someone else's opinion or thought about your question has no barring on the validity or substance of the question. If the premise, in your writing, is that which you believe to be accurate then it is a matter of opinion not validation. For someone to say that your premise is worthless is rather cavalier on their part. In short, they probable missed the point entirely.If a premise is considered false is the question worthless?
If a tree falls and nobody hears it, does the tree make a noise?
PS. The earth is an oblate spheroid, not a sphere.
Commonsensically, if your question hinges on the premise being true, then its being false makes a question worthless.
The prototypical example of loaded questions is ';when did you stop beating your wife?';.
I don't recognize your screenname, but there are way too many people here who don't ask real questions, but merely do a rant while smirking about how clever they are, and how dumb everyone else is.
You are requesting viewpoints other than your own. From their viewpoint, the premise was false. Given that, it would be deceitful of them to answer any other way. So decide which you want from those people, a truthful answer that may not agree with your own expectations, or a deceitful answer that does. The truthful answer is potentially educational, while the deceitful answer is just an ego stroke.
Well it'd be your mind creating the situation that allowed yourself to be torn down in such a case. If all things are relative as you said then so is your ability to be affected by others. Your truth's are your own and that's all that matters, why it's even being put to others for judgement is curious to me. Regardless, everyone has the right to answer any question, with conformity of only responding a certain way to answers, for example accepting only good answers, we'd lack the diversity that stimulates creativity, and in conformity you're pointing towards an ending instead of a continuing of creation. Thus you'll find it more of a growing process to roll with the punches and constructive criticism to make yourself a better person rather than thinking of letting it effect you. You'll find this to be true when you look deep in your heart. Good question.
the easiest way to shoot down an argument that you don't like is to claim false premises. As always in Philosophy we must separate truth and belief as we must separate ethics and values. It is incumbent on anyone claiming false premises to state the foundation, or argument for such a claim. Simply claiming false premise is not enough. Its a because I said so argument. Take the argument that marijuana should be illegal because the dangers associated with organized crime in the trade. The problem doesn't lie in the fact that it can be shown that organized crime is involved but with the fact that if the substance was made legal the purveyors wouldn't be criminals and I believe an organized band of merchants is called a chamber of commerce not a criminal gang.
The argument from religion falls prey to a similar flaw ie. its gods will. The fact that something is God's will alone does not prove that it is a valid premise. You must always argue from a rational base and cover your as$. Philosophy is a blood-sport.
About relativity, don't fall prey to I'm OK you're OK, Not all things are relative. How you feel about Picasso is relative, whether its OK to knock your granny over the head and take her money is not. So be careful when you chock something up to a difference of opinion. It may cost your granny her bingo money and a goose egg on her noggin'.
I am very inclined to ask what you mean by 'worthless' here. e.g. Moral worth or worthy of asking a question to some end or etc. I suppose you mean worthless in a sense that if a premise is false, the question becomes invalidated.
I do not think you are seriously referring to a non-cognitive use of a proposition here: that is a command, expression or a genuine question like ';what day is today?'; Non-cognitive use is neither true nor false. I think you are referring to a cognitive use of a proposition stated in a question form like ';don't you think it is wrong to kill a person?'; which is just another way of saying ';it is wrong to kill a person.'; Now it is either true or false.
Truth or falsity occurs when a proposition (sometimes called a statement) refers to something. If it correctly refers to something, it is true and if it doesn't, it is false. Concerning your question of if all things are relative to all people, (although I am not certain as to what you mean by that), if a statement is not about a person you are talking to (e.g. Weight of Earth), whether or not the person understands it or not has nothing to do with the weight of earth. I do not think all tihngs are relative to all people. It depends because if a statement is about someone and that someone disagrees with the statement, perhaps such a statement may be relative to the user of a statement.
You are at least right in saying that the answer must be no. Let's say you talk to a baby and ask a question. ';What is your opinion on the quantum physics?'; Obviously, the baby will not answer that question; but that doesn't make the question worthless. It's just that it has to be asked to a right person.
No, if nothing else it opens up the possibility of more questions, more ideas. Whos knows what can come from one single premise.
No comments:
Post a Comment