Truth or vomit

I had fed the cats and I was thinking of attend a Philosophy Cafe at a pub in Kingston Monday evening. Mmm, beer and philosophy, not as dangerous as drinking and driving but more fun. Anyway I didn’t go in the end, despite the fact I was interested in meeting other clever-clogs and smart-arses like me and making them buy me overpriced beers. Why didn’t I go? I’ll tell you why. The title of the evening was “Is there such as a thing as non-physical truth?”

And it took me one and half minutes solitary reflection to come to the inescapable answer. That meant I was going to sit through a long talk and a rowdy shouting match of people quoting Kant and Heidegger and maybe Russell Brand for all I know, while in a state of intellectual frustration and an inebriated sense of intellectual superiority.

So here’s how it it goes:

Either there is such a thing as physical truth or there isn’t – they are the two alternatives we’re being asked to decide between.

If it’s true that there is such a thing as non-physical truth, then the answer is “yes”.
If it’s true that there is no such thing as non-physical truth, then that is actually an example of a non-physical truth so the answer is still “yes”.

The only reason it took me all of a minute and a half to figure that out is that I had already enjoyed a very expensive glass of Chimay and was at the same time wiping up a pool of our cat’s vomit off the kitchen floor.

Or had I?