Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Good point. So to truly give peacegirl a fair chance, can we agree that the premise is more accurately stated:
Humans always attempt to move in the direction of greater satisfaction
|
Exactly. So the next question is how this is supposed to be known or supported. Is it meant as an analytic truth, true by definition? Or is it a synthetic contingent truth known by empirical observation? |
It is an inductive truth known by empirical observation. Just as we know that apples fall off of trees to the ground, and we know this through observation, Lessans is showing that this knowledge is true based on his observations of human nature which are immutable universal laws. |
If it is an inductive truth known by empirical observation, then you need to define "greater satisfaction" and specify exactly how it can be measured or determined in any given instance of observation. You need to explain how it can be
empirically observed to be true in any instance by specifying what empirical observations would have shown it to be
false. If you can't give empirically observable
truth conditions for the principle, then it is not being judged empirically at all, but is instead being judged
a priori as an analytic truth.
If it is an "immutable universal law" known to be true in any given instance without any empirical measurement or determination, but rather by way of an a priori conceptual proof (as you suggest in your previous post), then it cannot be an inductive truth known by empirical observation.