Since it seems obvious that words are usually different from what they refer to, that we cannot in general make anything by merely describing or picturing it, and that not all descriptions or pictures are right, how can I talk of worldmaking, find facts fluid, acknowledge conflicting truths, and suggest that the distinction between world and version is elusive? In this paper, I want to review and clarify some themes of Ways of Worldmaking, discuss some common objections to it, and reaffirm some of its paradoxes.
- MONISM, PLURALISM, NIHILISM Some truths conflict. The earth stands still, revolves about the sun, and runs many another course all at the same time. Yet nothing moves while at rest. We flinch at recognition of conflicting truths; for since all statements follow from a contradiction, acceptance of a statement and its negate erases the difference between truth and falsity.
Usually we seek refuge in simple-minded relativization: according to a geocentric system the earth stands still while according to a heliocentric system it moves. But there is no solid comfort here. Merely that a given version says something does not make what it says true; after all, some versions say the earth is flat or that it rests on the back of a tortoise. That the earth is at rest according to one system and moves according to another says nothing about how the earth behaves but only something about what these versions say. What must be added is that these versions are true. But then the contradiction reappears, and our escape is blocked.
Should we rather consider "The earth is at rest" and "The earth moves" as incomplete fragments of statements, true or false only when completed in one way or another, e.g. "The earth moves relative to the sun" or "The earth is at rest relative to Rome"? This does not work either; for what can these statements mean? Perhaps, in the former case, "If the sun is at rest, the earth moves". But then the antecedent and consequent are themselves fragments of statements, without truth-value until completed; and so on ad infinitum. Or should we translate to "If the sun's position is plotted as a point, the earth's positions will be plotted as a path"? Then, since the