• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

There are no facts

I more or less agree with this. While intuitively it's difficult for me to admit it, technically it makes sense. To state something as a fact is to proclaim it unquestionably and irrefutably "true".

But what is truth if not an ever-changing state of being?

All science does is find the truth that applies to a certain concept in a certain moment of time based on a certain set of criteria and assumptions. But the most important aspect of science, as Terence said in one of his most legendary talks, is that it's capable of undergoing its own reform, and has been involved in that for quite some time now.

Even saying the only "fact" is that the only guarantee in this universe is the state of constant change would assume that a state of no change does not exist, which already relies in a bunch of assumptions and perspectives (or lack thereof).

It's a difficult topic, this one, as most of Nietzsche's work.
 
I’d say you can speak of 'facts' all that you want, but they all fit in the larger category of interpretation.

No interpretation of facts, just facts of interpretation.
 
Isn’t it interesting what is popular in our culture? Like, what if Nietzsche was really watered down philosophy that was just smart enough that masses of people could be bedazzled by it. Cultural selection
 
Isn’t it interesting what is popular in our culture? Like, what if Nietzsche was really watered down philosophy that was just smart enough that masses of people could be bedazzled by it. Cultural selection
Funny that you say this, I recently tried going deep into his work by reading some of his most popular work, including Beyond Good and Evil, and idk if it's an issue with translation, or if I'm not smart enough, but a lot of what he's written sounds like drivel to me. Sure, there are some profoundly deep ideas here and there, but a lot of it is unnecessarily complicated references, comparisons and metaphors that dilute the essence of what he's trying to convey and make reading his work an absolute chore.

I'm probably just not smart enough to understand him yet, or maybe I need to become fluent and read his work in original instead of translated. Oh well.
 
Forget the sayer, get the message?
I tried making it bigger than the name!
 
Probably not, because there are no facts. So that would have to be an interpretation.
 
I’d say you can speak of 'facts' all that you want, but they all fit in the larger category of interpretation.

No interpretation of facts, just facts of interpretation.
If there's facts of interpretation then there are facts 😊

However, it seems fact is only a fact in a paradigm that generates it (I'm stating such as an observation, not a fact).

But... Wittegnstein said,
"1. The world is everything that is the case.
1.1The world is the totality of facts, not things.
1.11The World is determined by the facts, and by these being all the facts.
1.12 For the totality of facts determines both what is the case and also all that is not the case.
1.13 The facts in logical space are the world.
1.2 The world divides into facts.
1.21Any one can either be the case or not be the case, and everything else remain the same...
...?

Have fun

One love
 
I find the statement logically problematic. When we say there are no x, then that means there's no exception to "no x." But how can we know that without being aware of the totality of things.

A certain spark is hit in my logical brain whenever I hear the terms "all," "none," etc.

One love
 
Back
Top Bottom