tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post115220206293083258..comments2023-10-31T07:23:17.922-04:00Comments on The Theos Project: Truth DichotomyJonathan Erdmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-81142853056743700442009-06-09T14:36:19.448-04:002009-06-09T14:36:19.448-04:00女子校生女子校生女子校生成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美...<a href="http://eee321.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">女子校生</a><a href="http://eee320.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">女子校生</a><a href="http://eee322.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">女子校生</a><a href="http://eee327.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢</a><a href="http://eee326.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢</a><a href="http://eee323.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢</a><a href="http://eee325.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢</a><a href="http://eee324.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢</a><a href="http://eee328.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室</a><a href="http://eee329.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室</a><a href="http://eee330.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室</a><a href="http://eee331.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室</a><a href="http://eee332.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室</a><a href="http://eee333.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室pixnet</a><a href="http://eee334.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室pixnet</a><a href="http://eee335.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室pixnet</a><a href="http://eee336.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室pixnet</a><a href="http://eee337.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人聊天室pixnet</a><a href="http://eee338.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人夜色</a><a href="http://eee339.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人夜色</a><a href="http://eee340.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人夜色</a><a href="http://eee341.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人夜色</a><a href="http://eee342.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">成人夜色</a><a href="http://eee344.arcodb.org.tw" rel="nofollow">av168成人</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-17626876272212863072006-12-02T14:50:00.000-05:002006-12-02T14:50:00.000-05:00Interesting observation about the pragmatic theory...Interesting observation about the pragmatic theory of truth. I do think that there are come parallels between John and pragmatic theories of truth.<br /><br />I see three forms of truth in the Gospel of John:<br />Truth as correspondence<br />Truth as experience (crf. Kierkegaard)<br />Truth as action<br /><br />John's development of aletheia is extensive and fascinating, but the reason for this essay was to explore the fact that John doesn't seem particularly choosy about whether or not his "aletheia" fits into a particular theory of truth. Philosophical truth theory has become very fragmented (dichotomized) in that truth is either correspondence or pragmatic, either subjective (Kierkegaard) or objective, etc. And even within these camps there are many in house debates.<br /><br />John's conception of truth does not suffer the death of a thousand qualifications. That is its value for the contemporary truth-theory discussion. That is to say nothing about the value it has for the church. Ironically, though, I think that it today's atmosphere Christian thinkers would be the last ones to appreciate John's alethic development.Jonathan Erdmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-33847464785320046722006-12-02T14:43:00.000-05:002006-12-02T14:43:00.000-05:00Distinguishing Analytic from Existential:
A few w...Distinguishing Analytic from Existential:<br /><br />A few ways we might distinguish the two are as follows...<br /><br />Analytic: God exists<br />Existential/Kierkegaardian: <i>My</i> God exits<br /><br />A: Jesus Christ died upon the cross as redemption for sin.<br />E/K: Jesus Christ dies upon the cross as redemption for <i>my</i> sin.<br /><br />A: My wife has beautiful blue eyes.<br />E/K: My wife has beautiful blue eyes.<br /><br />The first two examples are obviously religious in nature. It is possible to acknowledge a theological truth at a distance. Much different to experience the impact of that truth in one's soul. So, in a sense it is more spiritual. But more than simply being emotive or a psychological experience it is also decisive - lived out in life. I cite K on page 5: <i>Only in subjectivity is there decision, whereas wanting to become objective is untruth. The passion of the infinite, not its content is the deciding factor, for its content is precisely itself. In this way the subjective "how" and subjectivity are the truth...When subjectivity is truth, the definition of truth must also contain in itself an expression of the antithesis to objectivity, a memento of that fork in the road...An objective uncertainty, held fast through appropriation with the most passionate inwardness, is the truth, the highest truth there is for an existing person.</i><br /><br />Now, I don't set objective and subjective truth in contention with each other in the same way as K, though I do appreciate his point.<br /><br />In the third example above I use the same language because the objective truth about the eyes of one's wife can be stated completely devoid of subjective passions and desire - an objective reflection. Conversely, the very same objective truth can be stated with an intangible and mysterious passion for the mind, body and soul of that person - an experience words will fall short of describing. The difference between the two can be linguistically represented in the exact same manner and yet the truth of it resides at different levels: objective for the man whose heart is cool towards his wife , but subjectively passionate for the man whose heart is set aflame.Jonathan Erdmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-59694064083897591442006-12-01T08:36:00.000-05:002006-12-01T08:36:00.000-05:00I read this paper quickly, looking for something i...I read this paper quickly, looking for something in particular. Not being well-versed in philosophy it's tough for me to comment. It seems that you were landing on a particular starting point for the analytic approach, but then kept backpedalling all the way back to Aristotle. That threw me off a little. And the Kierkegaardian quotes didn't really illuminate the existential position for me very well. <br /><br />The "analytic" notion says that my conception of truth corresponds to something that's true out there in reality, whereas the "existential" position says... what exactly? That the important thing is my subjective experiencing of something that feels like truth, or of how truth affects me personally, or what? Is it some sort of intuition?<br /><br />I wasn't sure how the Gospel of John fit the discussion. Were you trying to see which competing truth theory made itself manifest in John? Do you think the writer of John manifests both theories of truth plus more, or do you think he precedes the distinctions that were made clearer by later philosophers? This idea of "doing the truth" is an interesting one: does it represent some precursor of a pragmatic theory of truth? I guess not: it's more about the morality of living in accordance with the truth however it's ascertained.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com