Classes of Truth: The Mediate Judgments to Attain Truth

The third classes of truths are those contained in mediate judgments deduced by inference (reasoning) from 'first principles.'

These mediate judgments are based on self-evident 'first principles' or 'axioms,' but they themselves are not self-evident; it takes a process of reasoning to show that they follow necessarily from these axioms.

Mathematical deductions are examples of this class of judgments. That 38,400 is divisible by 2,560 fifteen times is not in itself directly clear; but if we perform the division, or multiply 2,560 by 15, we can prove the truth of the judgment. Similarly, that the square of the hypotenuse of a right-angled triangle is equal to the sum of the squares constructed on the other two sides is clear enough when the proof is furnished by a process of reasoning: but it is not a self-evident truth like the statement that a plane square encloses four right angles.

A mere explanation or comparison of ideas will not suffice in these cases to perceive the truth of such judgments by means of immediate intuition; mediate inference is require to establish the logically necessary connection between such truths and the axioms upon which they are based. However, once this connection is demonstrated, these deductive judgments are as true as their 'first principles,' unless it can be proven that man's reasoning powers are essentially invalid in their operations. Man's conviction is, of course, that he can reason in a valid manner.

Provided, then that man's reasoning powers are essentially valid, these mediate judgments derived from 'first principles' possess universal, necessary, absolute truth.

Coming up next on Epistemology Today blog:

Classes of Truth: The Mediate Judgments as Results of Inductive Process

Sidebar One

The validity or truth-value of human knowledge is the crucial problem in modern Philosophy. It has agitated the minds of philosophers for more than three centuries and the effects of their discussions are felt in every department of science. Naturally so, since it lies in the very nature of Epistemology to question the capability of man's mind to contact reality and to know what things are in themselves, the validity of all knowledge, and consequently also of science, is at stake. The foundations of human knowledge are challenged, examined, and frequently attacked. An acquaintance with this problem and its possible solution will be, therefore, a matter of prime importance for every seeker of truth and for every student of Philosophy.

This blog is intended for those who have no previous acquaintance with the subject. In accordance with this purpose, we have endeavored to place the problem in its proper historical setting, showing its origin and development, without confusing the issue with a large amount of historical detail. For the same reason, the subject (Epistemology) is treated in a constructive manner, seeking a positive solution of the Epistemological problem rather than giving an extensive criticism and refutation of the individual opposing systems of thought.

The language, so far as consistent with the matter under discussion, is plain and simple, avoiding what Hugh S. Elliot styles "sesquipedalian verbiage." Much of our modern philosophical jargon is so well-nigh incomprehensible as to make the underlying ideas opaque unintelligibility is not necessarily depth. Obscurities, of course, remain because the nature of knowledge itself is obscure; no amount of words will ever be able to clarify completely the mystery of the mind.

Pages

Epistemology, Knowledge and the Truth