Logical truth Vs Objective truth

[glaucon]

The proof of it lies in the fact that “SOMETHING does exist”. I (what I perceive myself to be) am experiencing a (absolute, objective, real, etc) TRUTH right now. I perceive that “something” or truth to be “typing on my keyboard”. The objective truth may be something completely different (dream, illusion, eating ham sandwich, whatever) but it is SOMETHING.

This argument, I cannot refute. However, you failed to see that taking this point of view results in only one position: solipsism. All you can ever call 'truth' is bound to you.

 

[dsdsds]

This argument, I cannot refute. However, you failed to see that taking this point of view results in only one position: solipsism. All you can ever call 'truth' is bound to you.

You're right, I do fail to see that. I think I'm trying to make a point AGAINST solipsism. Any truth a single individual perceives is irrelevant when compared to the real objective truth. Philisophically, I am trying to remove the word "TRUTH" from describing human perception. Truth is beyond us. We can use the word in our language and mathematics but to philosophize truth is audacious.

 

[glaucon]

You're right, I do fail to see that. I think I'm trying to make a point AGAINST solipsism. Any truth a single individual perceives is irrelevant when compared to the real objective truth. Philisophically, I am trying to remove the word "TRUTH" from describing human perception. Truth is beyond us. We can use the word in our language and mathematics but to philosophize truth is audacious.

Well.. personally, I tend to agree with your conclusion here. However, there are philosophical movements that attempt to deal with solipsism, and interestingly, they tend to try to deal with it in the same way you wish to: by dealing with the language. Coherence theorists and nominalists both attack language usage as a means to bringing the self back into a reality. Interesting stuff, for sure, yet, it still seems to me to be a bit of trickery.
In any case, it's important to remember that to truly take on the solipsistic point of view, one really has to be a serious sceptic, which is quite difficult in practice ( I can't believe I just wrote that given how staunch a sceptic I am, lol ).

 

[Quantum Quack]

ahhh but is it true that you wrote that, I think this is a truth is it not, you who ever you may be.......Personally I think we sometimes mix up our depths of discussion. Superficially of course there is much truth but at a deeper level, and sometimes too deeper level there is no beast as the truth. But surely first we must define how deep you wish to go.

If one accepts a purely monistic view that the reality is only mine and my minds view then this immediately invalidates the notion of truth beyond what i percieve. But to take this view may not be in any way helpful to disussing our combined multiplistic monoistic mind view. That has much commoness between such views and those commonesses may very well be described as truths only by nature of their shareability between views.