You make a valid point. Its good that you're not entirely reacting out of a hostility of an unknown source. Am I right? Well I'll be happy to reply.
The concept of you having a head is only verified by a popular agreement of what that is which rests upon your shoulders. But there is still a missing link between that being truth and merely one way of looking at it, or how the subject is conceived. I tend to agree, you do have a head, its where your brain is, and your brain is where the words to which I am replying were pieced together. That is, what I know to the best of my knowledge on basic anatomy. But would I call that the truth? No, not at all. So I wont rigidly accept it to be so. This can apply to more consequential sectors of thought, such as, the way one views the universe, or the political situation on Earth. Some may say that this is simply a disagreement on semantics. But you'll find if you look, that 'truth' can never be rigid as words, its pure unobstructed observation, it can only translate to rigidity in the mind, thus nullifying it, thus, naturally, our solidifying of this concept, which is only based on stimulus and our perception of the stimulus. (exactly like when contemplating Infinity, one turns the concept into a Finite model, and only a potential Infinity can be conceived, not an actual Infinity) That we humans are all raised in a similar fashion we follow similar patterns and our perceptions of life are generally unified. This generalization, the things we can mostly agree upon (like your 'I have a head' analogy) is quite logical, and as you stated, is also the truth. Now notice that all to which you have applied the word 'truth', is a noun! linguistics!
Last edited by EmaEmerald : 11-25-2008 at 10:27 AM.
Reason: potential and actual infinity analogy