i didn't misunderstand you will.
it's all about this:
Quote:
|
Truth isn't just a word, though.
|
it's hard to tell what's a throwaway and what's not, so i decided to assume it wasn't.
just so you know how all this got started.
the rules of logic are rules of logic. they structure areas of activity, they formalize ways of thinking in certain ways that have been pretty effective *for us*--but they aren't complete, they can't be completed---so the fact of effectiveness is simply that and does nothing--and can do nothing--to resolve the problem of grounding. if you're going to make claims to something bigger than effectiveness in certain areas, at certain scales, within certain spaces, then you have to be able to build from the inside outward--and the problem's just in the nature of proofs---nothing to be done about it.
and functionally, this isn't a problem, really: but it does point to limits on the kind of arguments that you can make and the kinds of appeals to logic or reason that you can get away with.
but maybe you didn't mean anything at all and the sentence i took off from was a throwaway.
it's just hard to know.
the rules aren't transparent.
and anomalies can occur.
they do all the time.
don't get me wrong, btw: i like reason. it's a very nice space to play about with, an aesthetically pleasing one. it lets you do things like structure sequences of sentences and not get all tangled up.
that is nice.
i like that.
anyway, so this is now a threadjack appended to a thread about vanity plates, so it's fitting in some ways that it should be vain. it's be more fitting if i could figure out a joke using the word plates. but i can't. tant pis.