Averroes Double Truth View

@philosopher mentioned this to me, saying It sounds like me. I have no idea what this is and I"m not sure I like this term. Can some one explain it to me? (without making stuff up)

I do not think this is quite what I am saying. I think I’m more of (to invite a term) a Realist-Perspectivist. Or maybe a critical realist:

… I propose a form of critical realism . This is a way of describing the process of “knowing” that acknowledges the reality of the thing known, as something other than the knower (hence “realism”), while fully acknowledging that the only access we have to this reality lies along the spiralling path of appropriate dialogue or conversation between the knower and the thing known (hence “critical”).[2]

Reminds me of my last identity crisis on this topic: What Exactly Am I?

We are, in fact, not bound to a limited view of the “Elephant” based upon combining our blind samplings, for we do share the faculty to read the book that the “Elephant” wrote about Himself! What limits our view, mostly, is our stilted imaginations.



You’re definitely closer to critical realism than double meaning.


Double Plus True!


What do you mean?

There is no such thing as double truth. One truth is scarce enough

It was supposed to be a humorous reference to “Newspeak” , from the distopian novel 1984 by George Orwell. It uses words like Plusgood and double-plusgood eliminates synomyns for “good”. It also eliminate unnecessary antonyms, so “bad” becomes “ungood”, double-plus ungood, etc…

Also lost are the concepts of right/wrong, good/evil. Orwell’s vision of the future is a terrible place.

IOW: I was totally off-topic. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Sounds like Foucault’s vision of the present. :frowning_face: