TRUTH AND THE MONEY-SCALE PUZZLE —“The only statement you can construct that’s

TRUTH AND THE MONEY-SCALE PUZZLE

—“The only statement you can construct that’s true, but not ‘useful’ would be by defining ‘useful’ in a highly narrow sense of ‘useful to higher order consciousness functions’.

But, you have only practical, not epistemological reason for doing that: the fullness of your mind needs these basic perceptual constructions.

For everything else you write about epistemology, I continue to be surprised you don’t understand why truth must be only intersubjective experience. How could it be otherwise?”—

It’s easiest to describe as an analogy to the coins-and-scale problem of finding the oddly weighted coin.

Most people do not consider that there are there conditions: the left side, the right side, and the table in front of the scale.

So when someone says ‘intersubjectively’ anything I’m never sure if they are referring to imaginary (two sides of the scale), or correspondent (two sides of subjective value plus the objective reality they are both testing against.

So while the utility may possess subjective value, correspondence is still simply true or false.

It may be true that we only care about useful truths in the positive sense.

But we also care about intersubjectively erroneous judgements which we resolve by objective truth.

This is why I always ask for both sides of the question, instead of the ideal type of utility (seizure of opportunities).

Truth and falsehood may help us get what we want: to cooperate.

Truth allows us to decide conflicts: non-cooperation.

Since the central problem of our age is DISPUTE, I am not looking for consensus by preference or utility but for means of resolving these disputes regardless of intersubjective valuations.

So it’s not that I don’t understand. It’s that I understand the full accounting of the question, rather than just the partial accounting of utility in matters of cooperation.