Re: Truth

Kent Johnson wrote:

Just to be clear, you believe that all relationships, all order,
including for example a spatial relationship like *near* or
*far* are linguistic, a "language game". Is that correct?

Kent:

Yes, in sociology, that is called "strong constructionism." I am not
saying that the relationships are not legitimate or measurable. However,
in calling them "near," "far," or "ordered," we are imposing our own
humanly devised categories ("names") upon them.


That is the second time you have said that ideal forms is a
Platonist notion. The notion of ideal forms is from Aristotle,
which would make it Neo-Platonist. Socrates (and therefore
Plato) never posited idealize forms, but rather Aristotle
attributed the idea to Plato to try to interpret the cosmology
Plato presented. That cosmology as Aristotle presented it
is called Neo-Platonism.

Yes, it is Aristotle's interpretation of Plato. However, Neoplatonism
began much later than Aristotle. It is usually traced back to Plotinus
in the third century A.D. Even Middle Platonism did not develop until a
couple of hundred years after Aristotle's death.

Which would make it Neo-Platonist.

The idea of Logos had been well established long before Plotinus and
Neoplatonism.

Even now you compare the concept to how Aristotle used it,
whether it was pre-Moses or post-Baha'u'llah it seems to
make no difference to you.

Why do you think it makes no difference to me?

The concept in your mind appears universalist, that everyone
should know and accept the concept.

I don't see it as universal. I see it as context.

It only exists where the writers intended it, and should not be read
into Baha'i Writings or pre-Socratic writings, the Bible or the Hindu
and Buddhist writings.

Whether people read it into the Baha'i texts is beside the point.
Neoplatonism, Aristotelianism, etc. are built into the literary
framework of many of the Baha'i Sacred Texts.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist


.