The Challenge of False Proposition

1609 Words7 Pages
The Challenge of False Proposition: Revisited To refer to a true proposition in a crude sense, is for it to have a correlation to the material world 1 . For example, the statement “John is in the classroom” would be a true proposition if there was indeed an existing John in the classroom, and it would be made false if it is verified otherwise. Following from this definition, we may regard false proposition, as that which does not mirror a reality in the world. Going back to our sample proposition, if there was no John in the classroom it would be the case that the proposition is false. This explanation seems satisfying at first glance, then again a dilemma surfaces; as what was raised by Garver and Lee on chapter 2. If false propositions are false because there are no existing reality that correlates to them, why is it that we are still able to understand the meaning behind them (Garver & Lee, 1994:16)? If there is no John in the classroom, why is it that we are still able to come up with a corresponding meaning, such as the informant lying or is ignorant of the fact that there is no John in the classroom? From what I understand from the challenge of false proposition is it brings about the necessity to come up with criteria of truth and meaning because the challenge seems to imply that false proposition could also elicit the characteristic of having meaning. 1 What I mean by this is the material world as opposed to the intellectual world. 2 DELA CRUZ Hence, to not blur the line between
Open Document