Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Self-evident and Self-refuting

robGRAUERT
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2013 8:32:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Is it appropriate to say that "self-evident" and "self-refuting" are opposites since it's impossible for a self-evident statement to be false and it's impossible for a "self-refuting" statement to be true?
TheElderScroll
Posts: 643
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2013 8:43:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/28/2013 8:32:02 AM, robGRAUERT wrote:
Is it appropriate to say that "self-evident" and "self-refuting" are opposites since it's impossible for a self-evident statement to be false and it's impossible for a "self-refuting" statement to be true?

I would think "self-evidence and "not self-evidence" are opposites. "Not self-evidence" includes the probability of "self-refuting." "Not self-evidence" suggests that people need explain and validity their claims.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2013 9:24:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/28/2013 8:32:02 AM, robGRAUERT wrote:
Is it appropriate to say that "self-evident" and "self-refuting" are opposites since it's impossible for a self-evident statement to be false and it's impossible for a "self-refuting" statement to be true?

I am wary of so called things that are "self" evident"

It was self evident the sun goes around the earth

It was self evident that the sun is fire

It was self evident humans are intelligently designed
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
robGRAUERT
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2013 10:24:15 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
@Illegalcombatant

It sounds like you (or I) don't understand the term "self-evident."

It's my understanding that a statement is self-evident if you have to acknowledge the statement is true in the first place when you're try to prove the statement to be false. It's literally impossible to ignore that the statement is true if you want to be logical.

"The Sun is made of fire" and "The sun orbits Earth" are not self-evident. You don't have to acknowledge they're true in the first place in order to prove them false.
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2013 11:06:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/28/2013 8:32:02 AM, robGRAUERT wrote:
Is it appropriate to say that "self-evident" and "self-refuting" are opposites since it's impossible for a self-evident statement to be false and it's impossible for a "self-refuting" statement to be true?

I don't agree that it's impossible for a self-evident statement to be false. Not all self-evident truths are necessary truths. I think there's a handful of contingent truths that are self-evident, e.g. that our senses are giving us true information about a real external world, that our memories are giving us true information about a past that actually happened, that the future will resemble the past, etc.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle