Relativism, Relativism, Truth, and Truth, and

RealityReality

Wood combines with Wood combines with phlogiston, of negative weight, phlogiston, of negative weight, when it burns, to leave ash; when it burns, to leave ash; the ash weighs less that the the ash weighs less that the wood; thus phlogiston is of wood; thus phlogiston is of negative weight.negative weight.

If If youyou believe burning wood combines believe burning wood combines with phlogiston, that’s fine. It’s true with phlogiston, that’s fine. It’s true for for youyou, but not for , but not for meme, for I don’t , for I don’t believe it.believe it.

In In youryour societysociety burning wood burning wood combines with phlogiston, but combines with phlogiston, but not in not in my societymy society. Truth is . Truth is relative to societies.relative to societies.

According to According to your conceptual your conceptual schemescheme, burning wood , burning wood combines with phlogiston, but combines with phlogiston, but in in my conceptual schememy conceptual scheme this this doesn’t hold; truth is relative to doesn’t hold; truth is relative to conceptual schemes.conceptual schemes.

Burning wood combines with Burning wood combines with phlogiston if I believe it does, phlogiston if I believe it does, for for we create our own realitywe create our own reality..

If enough of us If enough of us believebelieve burning burning wood combines with wood combines with phlogiston, phlogiston, it will become the it will become the truthtruth..

It doesn’t matter whether It doesn’t matter whether burning wood combines with burning wood combines with phlogiston or not; the very idea phlogiston or not; the very idea is is metaphoricalmetaphorical, like all , like all language use, and as language use, and as metaphoricalmetaphorical, it’s all relative., it’s all relative.

1.1. If after weighing the wood and the If after weighing the wood and the ash remaining after the wood has burned ash remaining after the wood has burned (objectivism), we might imagine, and (objectivism), we might imagine, and venture the conjecture (idealism), that venture the conjecture (idealism), that phlogiston is of negative weight. But the phlogiston is of negative weight. But the very idea of negative weight, however very idea of negative weight, however faithful it coincides with experience, is faithful it coincides with experience, is counterintuitive. So we should continue counterintuitive. So we should continue our search for a better answer.our search for a better answer.

C. S. Peirce

2.2. The premises behind this posture are:The premises behind this posture are:– No contradiction, conundrum, or paradox, no new No contradiction, conundrum, or paradox, no new

knowledge.knowledge.– Just because an idea hasn’t been refuted doesn’t Just because an idea hasn’t been refuted doesn’t

mean it’s true.mean it’s true.– Just because an idea hasn’t been proven doesn’t Just because an idea hasn’t been proven doesn’t

mean it’s false.mean it’s false.– When evaluating an idea look for disconfirming as When evaluating an idea look for disconfirming as

well as confirming evidence.well as confirming evidence. In other words, look for the unexpected, the bizarre, the In other words, look for the unexpected, the bizarre, the

weird.weird.

– In other words, if you’re more wrong that right, your In other words, if you’re more wrong that right, your probably on the right track. In other words, make probably on the right track. In other words, make mistakes (‘catch yourselv in your own lies’) as mistakes (‘catch yourselv in your own lies’) as quickly as possible.quickly as possible.

But a great truth is such that its But a great truth is such that its complement—its complementary complement—its complementary other—is also true (Niels Bohr).other—is also true (Niels Bohr).

So take truth and ‘lie’ into equal So take truth and ‘lie’ into equal consideration.consideration.

Relativism all this? Yes, and no. Yes, Relativism all this? Yes, and no. Yes, because there are many possible truths because there are many possible truths (‘world versions’ [Nelson Goodman]). No, (‘world versions’ [Nelson Goodman]). No, because all possible truths are ONE; but because all possible truths are ONE; but we’ll never have the ONE, so we’ll we’ll never have the ONE, so we’ll continue imagining new possible ‘truths’ continue imagining new possible ‘truths’ (idealism (idealism ) and discarding them in favor ) and discarding them in favor of other possibilities that emerge and of other possibilities that emerge and promise more success (promise more success ( objectivism). objectivism).

Creativity: mistakes with Creativity: mistakes with survival value?survival value?

Quite likely, for there is Quite likely, for there is more in human life and in more in human life and in

the physical world than our the physical world than our theories of them allow.theories of them allow.