Editing Talk:Transcendent values (section)

= Transcendent vs. transcendental =
I changed the terminology from transcendental to transcendent out of respect for Kant's terminology. [[User:Craig Calcaterra|Craig Calcaterra]] ([[User talk:Craig Calcaterra|talk]]) 19:43, 3 July 2023 (CDT)

== Vs. Wittgenstein's rule-following paradox ==

The Transcendent Values Thesis can be compared with [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wittgenstein%20on%20Rules%20and%20Private%20Language Wittgenstein's rule-following paradox] given in Philosophical Investigations §201a: "This was our paradox: no course of action could be determined by a rule, because any course of action can be made out to accord with the rule". The basic idea is that in the process of defining any rule there are necessarily some ultimately undefined primitive notions (see #page footnote) that leave room for interpretation, allowing one to follow the rules in multiple ways. In fact Wittgenstein's assertion is maximal: this looseness in interpreting the primitive notions allows room to follow the rules in any possible way.<br>

This rule-following paradox is not subsidiary to the Transcendent Values Thesis, nor does it imply the Thesis. Nevertheless they augment each other. <br>

The Transcendent Values Thesis assumes an environment where there ''is'' a universally accepted interpretation of rules, yet we still claim the intent of the game designer cannot be completely encapsulated by any choice of rules. Thus the claim of the thesis is twofold: 1. human desire and intent is more complicated than any formal language is capable of containing, 2. there are sufficient available strategies to subvert the intent of the designer.<br>

The first claim means that human desire transcends formal description.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wittgenstein_on_Rules_and_Private_Language#The_skeptical_solution Kripke's skeptical solution] to the rule-following paradox is that there are social expectations that determine what following a rule means. In this sense, Wittgenstein is wrong to claim "any course of action can be made out to accord with the rule". This is also motivation for DGF's approach to creating the Web3 enviroment: we wish to provide the tools which will enable humanity to build communities where Web3 transactions can flourish in accord with their values. [[User:Craig Calcaterra|Craig Calcaterra]] ([[User talk:Craig Calcaterra|talk]]) 13:48, 12 July 2023 (CDT)

==The Böckenförde dilemma==

"The liberal secular state lives on premises that it cannot itself guarantee."
    - Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde in ''Staat, Gesellschaft, Freiheit'', Frankfurt, 1976.

[Liberal, here, means freedom-oriented. Böckenförde was not referring to the current political terminology that has drifted in recent decades due to political power shifts in 
the various party value changes that have occurred.]

The quoted sentence from Böckenförde's article is referred to as the [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%B6ckenf%C3%B6rde_dilemma Böckenförde dilemma]. The rest of his paragraph is instructive:

"This is the great adventure it has undertaken for freedom's sake. As a liberal state it can endure only if the freedom it bestows on its citizens takes some regulation from the interior, both from a moral substance of the individuals and a certain homogeneity of society at large. On the other hand, it cannot by itself procure these interior forces of regulation, that is not with its own means such as legal compulsion and authoritative decree. Doing so, it would surrender its liberal character and fall back, in a secular manner, into the claim of totality it once led the way out of, back then in the confessional civil wars." 

A democratic state is supported by the democratic convictions of its citizens. Those convictions cannot be supported by the democratic state itself in some ouroborous paradox.

[[User:Craig Calcaterra|Craig Calcaterra]] ([[User talk:Craig Calcaterra|talk]]) 18:20, 7 May 2024 (CDT)