FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2765358587> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2765358587 endingPage "990" @default.
• W2765358587 startingPage "989" @default.
• W2765358587 abstract "Reply to Stephen Angle Danielle Macbeth (bio) The idea of natural truth is the idea of truths that are the same for all rational beings with our biological form of life. The thought is that in regard to at least some issues, for example the ontological status of fish, there are natural truths, and that it is the task of philosophy in particular to discover such truths. In my essay I distinguish such truths from empirical truths such as, for example, that water nourishes plants or that there are black swans, as well as from matters of taste. Angle reminds us of yet another sort of truth that is not amenable to the kind of treatment that I outline for natural truth. It is not, or at least seems not to be, a natural truth that one ought (or ought not) to rid oneself of anger. Whether one ought to rid oneself of anger may well be a question that one must answer for oneself insofar as it is a question about how one is to live one's life. Questions about how to live one's life, although informed by such natural truths as there are, are not questions of natural truth any more than are empirical questions or questions of taste. The question about the fish seems to me distinctive because, on the one hand, it is not an empirical question, and, on the other, it transcends (if I am right) our individual understandings of how to live our lives. And it is important not least because its answer has ramifications for how we, all of us, ought to treat fish. Our relationship to the environment is in question and can be answered, I think, only after we have come better to understand such natural truths as there are about ourselves, about the environment, and about particular things in the environment, things such as fish. But there is also a larger issue, one that Angle is right to press. My history, my training, and my cultural context all lead me to focus first and foremost on truth. But that, too, may be something that I need to question. Is it a natural truth about us that we value truth above all, at least in some domains? It does seem so to me. But I also know that there are alternative ways of raising the issues of concern in my essay. I, of course, speak the language of my training and intellectual milieu, but what I envisage and am after transcends that training and milieu. In the conversation I envisage, [End Page 989] everything is up for reflective criticism and revision—everything except the idea that there are some things on which we, all human beings, can and should agree, and on which we will agree when we have talked long and hard enough. Perhaps it will concern fish in ponds. Perhaps it will concern how best to negotiate complexity. Perhaps it will focus on how we can continue the conversation at all. I do not know what the natural truths will turn out to be, or even what sorts of things they will turn out to concern. What seems to me incontestable is that there are natural truths (broadly conceived as what is the same for all human beings) to be discovered, and that only philosophers engaged in a truly global dialogue will be in a position to discover them.1 Danielle Macbeth Note 1. Regarding Rorty on irony, readers may be interested in my discussion in Reading Rorty: A Sketch of a Plan, in A Companion to Rorty, ed. Alan Malachowski (Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, 2017). [End Page 990] Copyright © 2017 University of Hawai'i Press" @default.
• W2765358587 created "2017-11-10" @default.
• W2765358587 creator A5052399986 @default.
• W2765358587 date "2017-01-01" @default.
• W2765358587 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2765358587 title "Reply to Stephen Angle" @default.
• W2765358587 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/pew.2017.0085" @default.
• W2765358587 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
• W2765358587 type Work @default.
• W2765358587 sameAs 2765358587 @default.
• W2765358587 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2765358587 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2765358587 hasAuthorship W2765358587A5052399986 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C2776608160 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C8868529 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C107038049 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C111472728 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C138885662 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C15744967 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C166957645 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C169760540 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C2776608160 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C8868529 @default.
• W2765358587 hasConceptScore W2765358587C95457728 @default.
• W2765358587 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2765358587 hasLocation W27653585871 @default.
• W2765358587 hasOpenAccess W2765358587 @default.
• W2765358587 hasPrimaryLocation W27653585871 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W2087674090 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W2366677945 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W2370179943 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W2371533443 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W2376373418 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W4248622074 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W630973842 @default.
• W2765358587 hasRelatedWork W659059949 @default.
• W2765358587 hasVolume "67" @default.
• W2765358587 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2765358587 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2765358587 magId "2765358587" @default.
• W2765358587 workType "article" @default.