| Revision as of 07:37, 10 July 2005 editBanno (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,532 edits ==disambig==← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:51, 10 July 2005 edit undo67.182.157.6 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| Don't be silly. An unambiguous mention of the actual meaning of the term, 'true' -- in accord with the actual state of affairs in any particular case -- is needed to give it the ] to float above the sea of theist ] in ]. | Don't be silly. An unambiguous mention of the actual meaning of the term, 'true' -- in accord with the actual state of affairs in any particular case -- is needed to give it the ] to float above the sea of theist ] in ]. | ||
| :The definition offered is blatantly POV - see ]] 07:07, July 10, 2005 (UTC) | :The definition offered is blatantly POV - see ]] 07:07, July 10, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :The corespondence theory is one amongst many |
:The corespondence theory is one amongst many | ||
| This is not about any THEORY ('might be' proposition), sir. | |||
| ==disambig== | |||
| Any statement about the actual state of affairs in any particular case is true if and only if it is in accord with the actual state of affairs in that particular case. This is not just a point of view, or a theory, it is the definition of the term, 'true'. What are you, ]? | |||
| What is the point of a disambiguation page with one link? Weird. ] 07:37, July 10, 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:51, 10 July 2005
Why is True auto redirecting to Truth? Might want a disambigous page w/ also links to True in terms of other things, (I came looking for Computer Science related info) --ORBIT 18:17, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
Redirect
The definition given here is far too feeble. ... Banno 21:00, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
Too feeble???
Don't be silly. An unambiguous mention of the actual meaning of the term, 'true' -- in accord with the actual state of affairs in any particular case -- is needed to give it the buoyancy to float above the sea of theist obscurantism in Truth.
- The definition offered is blatantly POV - see truthBanno 07:07, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
- The corespondence theory is one amongst many
This is not about any THEORY ('might be' proposition), sir. Any statement about the actual state of affairs in any particular case is true if and only if it is in accord with the actual state of affairs in that particular case. This is not just a point of view, or a theory, it is the definition of the term, 'true'. What are you, Obscurantist?