Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

the nature of truth

Posted by matthew 
Announcements Last Post
Announcement SoC Curricula 09/30/2017 01:08PM
Announcement Demarcation or scoping of examinations and assessment 02/13/2017 07:59AM
Announcement School of Computing Short Learning Programmes 11/24/2014 08:37AM
Announcement Unisa contact information 07/28/2011 01:28PM
Anonymous User
Re: the nature of truth
October 10, 2007 01:34PM
OK fair enough, I accept I'm ill-prepared for philosophy debates and shouldnt get involved smiling smiley
avatar Re: the nature of truth
October 10, 2007 01:40PM
Re the reference to the Matrix earlier - they actually screened it *again* this weekend on SABC.
Re: the nature of truth
October 10, 2007 01:41PM
No no, please, I really didn't mean that.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be a wally, but this is a pretty hectic topic and I guess I went overboard in my answer.

Apologies bini, I didn't mean that. But if you would like to read some philosophy I'd really suggest Roger Scruton's masterful "Modern philosophy" as a good starting point, if you work through it you'll have about as much knowledge as an undergrad in philosophy (probably a better idea than someone who did phil at UNISA in fact)

I was being serious about the "fact" issue though.
Anonymous User
Re: the nature of truth
October 10, 2007 01:51PM
@lilumZA

I didnt take offence at your observations, just agreeing with you that I cant hope to make a serious input on topics like this without at least investigating the outcome of previous scholars or thinkers observations. So yeah, I'll heed your advice winking smiley
Re: the nature of truth
October 10, 2007 04:48PM
lycium Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the matthew defense: "i'm not wrong, it's your
> definition of right and wrong that's wrong. mine,
> even though i say it's subjective, is right. trust
> me... i know."
>
> i'm sure many constructive discussions can be had
> in this style eh matthew smiling bouncing smiley

hehe.. i'm famous now... i have my own defense... but in all seriousness, there is major drive in modern logic to model logic based on based on belief and partial knowledge...

i'm disputing a shared truth that we are both welcome to partake of - it is subjective in terms of being based on a "logicians" perspective... if you call yourself a logician you commit yourself to trying to understand the shared subjective true.
avatar Re: the nature of truth
October 10, 2007 08:40PM
Yeah... I used to be a literature student and so have studied a bit of Derrida, Lacan, Kristeva, Lacan, Freud, Saussure (spelling?) as their theories cross pollinated with the theory of literature. But its been 7 years now since I was actually confronting the ideas and struggling with the notions. Its been a while; and thus that part of my mind has not been exercised. Its interesting though how ideas such as structuralism have actually given me conceptual tools to understand large computer systems.

 
  ,= ,-_-. =.
 ((_/)o o(\_))
  `-'(. .)`-'
      \_/
http://ilanpillemer.com
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Re: the nature of truth
October 11, 2007 09:06AM
Yeah, literary theory is great stuff, even though structuralism through poststructuralist approaches to actual literature seem to be on the decline (actually, pretty much dead, compared to the 80's), it's "child" disciplines like gender studies and post-colonial studies etc are also really super interesting.

what I think is so cool about it is that it is so interdisciplinary in it's approach.
I can see how structuralism could provide some useful metaphors for understanding large computer systems, that's really interesting actually.
I just ordered Rivkin and Ryan's anthology, I haven't done much reading in continental philosophy/theory for a while now (I also did Derrida formally like 3 years ago) so I'm amped to get my teeth into it.
I've mostly been reading a lot of so-called analytical philosophy the last couple years, and Rorty ... lots and lots of Richard Rorty (you hear he died this year? And of pancreatic cancer just like Derrida ... apparently Rorty's daughter joked with him that it was a disease one gets from reading too much Heidegger smiling smiley )

Are you (Ilan) planning on doing any graduate work in philosophy/theory?
Or is it computer science the whole way?
avatar Re: the nature of truth
October 11, 2007 09:43AM
At the moment I plan to go Honours in Computer Science. 7 Years ago I was doing my Master's in English Literature. I was studying at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and post-moderninsm, Freud, Derrida, Levi Strauss etc were all the rage. Maybe its the Jewish thang. I had completed the course work, except for one arbitrary essay and Italian. I had just begun working on my thesis. And then I had a headache, went to the doctor and my world fell apart. I had a weird rare illness. I had millions of tests, had an operation, came back to South Africa.... and whilst recuperating did a quick VB course and found a job through the classifieds....

I was very weak though, and my thesis supervisor was overseas, and I lost focus on my research... and my career direction changed. So I started the Bsc through UNISA.

And I discovered I actually love computer science; and this third yr course in AI has really fascinated me. So I am going to stick with the computer science.

Though I will always regret not finishing my MA. I did put years into it....

But as I said literary theory actually has very interesting correlations with the design of computer systems.... Objects understood through the lens of metonomy metaphor? Are programs definied by the structures between the objects; where is the meaning located and how is it invested? Maybe one day I can try and marry some of my computer science to literary theory in a thesis in computer science? hmmm...

 
  ,= ,-_-. =.
 ((_/)o o(\_))
  `-'(. .)`-'
      \_/
http://ilanpillemer.com
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Re: the nature of truth
October 11, 2007 10:15AM
Shame about your MA ... it would be awesome to have had both your Msc and MA eventually.
Nah, I don't think it's a Jewish thang (although on Derrida, perhaps Habermas would disagree smiling smiley ) And lit. Theory is still huge, just not AS huge as it was in the 70's and 80's when the yanks literature departments got hold of it and turned out thousands of Phd theses by applying some or other theory to a novel or whatever.

I'm not sure how the comp.sci departments would be with bringing in Lit.crit, but I'm certain you could do it the other way around (Cybertheory stuff).

I agree though that computer science is really interesting. I'd like to do my honours in it at some stage. I'm really interested in Applied logic and UNISA seems to have a fair amount of that going on. And there is a HUGE intersection with philosophy there. I'd like to do the artificial intelligence module at some stage, but I wanna finish my phil honours next year, so we'll see ... maybe I can twist the department's arm to let me do it simultaneously?
avatar Re: the nature of truth
October 11, 2007 10:30AM
Until the Paul de Man crisis, which sullied the field; and the US moved on.. the AI course is really fun.

 
  ,= ,-_-. =.
 ((_/)o o(\_))
  `-'(. .)`-'
      \_/
http://ilanpillemer.com
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Re: the nature of truth
October 11, 2007 10:44AM
Ja, the de Man debacle was really bad. You're right, that had a huge effect.
avatar Re: the nature of truth
October 16, 2007 11:51AM


 
  ,= ,-_-. =.
 ((_/)o o(\_))
  `-'(. .)`-'
      \_/
http://ilanpillemer.com
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Re: the nature of truth
October 16, 2007 12:12PM
hahahahahaha smiling bouncing smiley smiling bouncing smiley
Re: the nature of truth
October 16, 2007 12:14PM
I just counted your molars....@?Randy
Re: the nature of truth
November 05, 2007 08:54AM
Knowledge is just opinion that you trust enough to act upon - Orson Scott Card
Anonymous User
Re: the nature of truth
December 18, 2007 10:51AM
I came accross this article while investigating some physics topic and it reminded me of this thread. It is Steve Weinberg's commentary on the infamous Sokal Affair. The following provides the context of the debate
Anonymous User
Re: the nature of truth
December 18, 2007 11:20AM
Sorry for the spam but I felt this quote from Noam Chomsky about the Postmordenist writings is also relevant.

"There are lots of things I don't understand -- say, the latest debates over whether neutrinos have mass or the way that Fermat's last theorem was (apparently) proven recently. But from 50 years in this game, I have learned two things: (1) I can ask friends who work in these areas to explain it to me at a level that I can understand, and they can do so, without particular difficulty; (2) if I'm interested, I can proceed to learn more so that I will come to understand it. Now Derrida, Lacan, Lyotard, Kristeva, etc. --- even Foucault, whom I knew and liked, and who was somewhat different from the rest --- write things that I also don't understand, but (1) and (2) don't hold: no one who says they do understand can explain it to me and I haven't a clue as to how to proceed to overcome my failures. That leaves one of two possibilities: (a) some new advance in intellectual life has been made, perhaps some sudden genetic mutation, which has created a form of "theory" that is beyond quantum theory, topology, etc., in depth and profundity; or (b) ... I won't spell it out. "
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login