RE: What is your truth? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

What is your truth?


Truth is subjective/relative.
  47% (23)
Truth is absolute.
  52% (25)


Total Votes : 48
(last vote on : 7/11/2013 3:38:13 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message

vincentML -> RE: What is your truth? (7/5/2013 1:17:27 PM)

quote:

I will go half way with you. There are a great many people who pretend their beliefs are facts. They know for a fact that the two are not the same, but act otherwise. And there are many who do believe their beliefs are facts.

Don't think I ever, ever, ever suggested I expected any kind of harmony! That is not so much from different interests though, but rather different agendas.

Dyfrynt;
I think we are basically on the same page here. I agree there are scoundrals, liars, and political con-men afoot in the land. My main point is that the majority join causes, religions, political parties in order to affirm their own emotional self-identities. We are soooo tribal and needy.



dcnovice -> RE: What is your truth? (7/5/2013 1:28:02 PM)

quote:

People do not pretend their beliefs are facts. The KNOW they have THE truth.

Does this include those holding the belief/truth that there is no God? [:)]



vincentML -> RE: What is your truth? (7/5/2013 1:35:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

People do not pretend their beliefs are facts. The KNOW they have THE truth.

Does this include those holding the belief/truth that there is no God? [:)]

[:)] I would think so for those who are adamently affirmative, but most of us hedge a bit and take the position that the belief there is a god is unsustainable outside of blind Faith. We are waiting for your facts to make sense.



tweakabelle -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 2:57:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
When your headache clears, perhaps you could be kind enough to point how any human being might achieve the status of "objective" about anything.




No. I'm much too lazy to attempt that kind of argument. [;)]


.... or perhaps too well informed to attempt that kind of silly argument .... [;)]



MrBukani -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 3:23:48 AM)

We have some knowledge that doesn't depend on context, called universal knowledge. It's knowledge that equally well applies to all situations. For example, the laws of physics don't have exceptions depending on which culture you live in. Gravity is the same no matter what the historical context or what your religion is. Physics is general purpose. Similarly, water consists of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom, everywhere and forever. And 2+2=4 even if the majority opinion in my society thinks otherwise. (Of course we still have to be careful with ambiguity. Two buckets of water, plus two more buckets of water, can make one large puddle.) Relativists also can get themselves into trouble by saying there is nothing really wrong with rape, it's just a matter of opinion.

In general, any piece of knowledge has some limited amount of applicability. It is correct in some situations, but has some exceptions. The more widely knowledge applies, the better. Universal knowledge is a goal of both science and philosophy. Although it's hard to come by, we have made progress in discovering it, and can continue to make more. For example, computers would not function if we hadn't made genuine scientific progress.

The other reason people deny there is an objective truth is because they are skeptical that we know the truth. I accept that we never know what the truth is for sure. We can be mistaken. But to be mistaken, there has to be an objective truth! The idea of a mistake is that there is a truth and we have it wrong. Denying there are true ideas also denies that there are false ideas and mistakes. As a consequence, it prevents us from finding and correcting our errors, because errors are deviations from the truth and they say there is no truth to deviate from. Because they prevent error correction, relativism and other denials of truth are irrational ways of thinking. Similarly, denying there is a truth involves denying we can make progress, because progress means getting closer to the truth and understanding more of the truth.



MrBukani -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 3:38:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

People do not pretend their beliefs are facts. The KNOW they have THE truth.

Does this include those holding the belief/truth that there is no God? [:)]

I will stress this point again. The core of an atheist is that they don't believe in god, not that they believe there is none.
See the difference?




Kirata -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 3:53:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

I will stress this point again. The core of an atheist is that they don't believe in god, not that they believe there is none.

Houghton-Mifflin
   Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
   The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
Collins
   Rejection of belief in God or gods
MacMillan
   The belief or theory that God does not exist
Merriam-Webster
   Disbelief in the existence of deity
   The doctrine that there is no deity
Webster's New World College
   The belief that there is no God, or denial that God or gods exist
Dictionary.com
   The doctrine or belief that there is no God.
   Disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

K.



MrBukani -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 6:36:27 AM)

Ever heard of wakachakawakulu machu michi popijopolus?
No?
Now you have to believe he don't exists or does exist.
Before I made this statement he didn't exist.
So now you have to believe he doesn't exist.

Neat trick isn't it?

If you can't tell the difference between not believing and believing there is a problem with logic.



vincentML -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 6:41:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
When your headache clears, perhaps you could be kind enough to point how any human being might achieve the status of "objective" about anything.




No. I'm much too lazy to attempt that kind of argument. [;)]


.... or perhaps too well informed to attempt that kind of silly argument .... [;)]

Establishing the objective nature of things does not rely on any one individual person. Yours is a strawman position, I think. [:)]



Kirata -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 7:01:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

Ever heard of wakachakawakulu machu michi popijopolus?
No?
Now you have to believe he don't exists or does exist.
Before I made this statement he didn't exist.
So now you have to believe he doesn't exist.

Neat trick isn't it?

If you can't tell the difference between not believing and believing there is a problem with logic.

There's a problem alright, but it's not with logic. If he exists, then he existed before you made the statement. And what I have to do after you make it isn't to decide whether or not I believe that he exists but whether or not I believe you.

K.



Rule -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 8:02:35 AM)

[sm=goodpost.gif]



MrBukani -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 7:01:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

Ever heard of wakachakawakulu machu michi popijopolus?
No?
Now you have to believe he don't exists or does exist.
Before I made this statement he didn't exist.
So now you have to believe he doesn't exist.

Neat trick isn't it?

If you can't tell the difference between not believing and believing there is a problem with logic.

There's a problem alright, but it's not with logic. If he exists, then he existed before you made the statement. And what I have to do after you make it isn't to decide whether or not I believe that he exists but whether or not I believe you.

K.

So you just decided to believe the book but not god.
Great!
That sounds prefectly rational.
It's called indoctrination.
Just because people create bullshit doesn't make somebody a believer.
And people wonder why there was a naziparty.
Ordering people to believe even if they don't want too.
[:D]
No thanks.



tweakabelle -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 9:19:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
When your headache clears, perhaps you could be kind enough to point how any human being might achieve the status of "objective" about anything.




No. I'm much too lazy to attempt that kind of argument. [;)]


.... or perhaps too well informed to attempt that kind of silly argument .... [;)]

Establishing the objective nature of things does not rely on any one individual person. Yours is a strawman position, I think. [:)]

You might like to detail how any human being, or group of human beings, can "establish the objective nature of things". It's certainly NOT a function of numbers. Or, if you are sensible, follow Peon's discreet disinclination to contest that humans are incapable of objectivity about anything.



MrBukani -> RE: What is your truth? (7/7/2013 9:47:15 PM)

I just love it how people object the truth.
Kinda abject in my eyes,but division is profitable.
Why again and again needing to make the same argument of math and the laws of nature we observe.
Some people will only find peace in death.
Why bother batting the batted.
I'm glad I made my peace a long time ago.
Don't worry, I'll soon be outta here and half of you can go back to your beloved dimension of dark matter.
It's summer enjoy the sun, get of the grid.



Kirata -> RE: What is your truth? (7/8/2013 12:53:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

There's a problem alright, but it's not with logic.

So you just decided to believe the book but not god.

It's always gratifying when someone is kind enough to offer an example that proves my point.

K.



jlf1961 -> RE: What is your truth? (7/8/2013 6:42:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

There's a problem alright, but it's not with logic.

So you just decided to believe the book but not god.

It's always gratifying when someone is kind enough to offer an example that proves my point.

K.



K, I like your style.

However, I must point out another problem with the book, Christianity has one book, well except the Mormons, yet none of the various denominations can agree on just what it says, which may prove the point that organized religion is a form of psychosis.



GotSteel -> RE: What is your truth? (7/8/2013 2:14:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
There's a problem alright, but it's not with logic.

So you just decided to believe the book but not god.

It's always gratifying when someone is kind enough to offer an example that proves my point.
K.

K, I like your style.

However, I must point out another problem with the book, Christianity has one book, well except the Mormons, yet none of the various denominations can agree on just what it says, which may prove the point that organized religion is a form of psychosis.


I'd like to add that for those of us who don't hear voices believing "god" isn't an option on the table. We're left with a pile of conflicting assertions by human beings and no particularly good reason to believe any of them. We're told we are supposed to have faith in one of them but no one has been able to give me a good reason why, heck I've yet to see anyone manage to differentiate between religious faith and gullibility.



PeonForHer -> RE: What is your truth? (7/8/2013 2:51:48 PM)

quote:

I've yet to see anyone manage to differentiate between religious faith and gullibility.


Ooooh, that'd be interesting. Who wants to take that on? Fun!



MrBukani -> RE: What is your truth? (7/8/2013 3:14:02 PM)

All Germanic languages
besides English
have introduced a terminological distinction between truth "fidelity" and truth "factuality". To express "factuality", North Germanic opted for nouns derived from sanna "to assert, affirm", while continental West Germanic (German and Dutch) opted for continuations of wâra "faith, trust, pact" (cognate to Slavic věra "(religious) faith", but influenced by Latin verus). Romance languages use terms following the Latin veritas, while the Greek aletheia, Russian pravda and Serbian istina have separate etymological origins.

That is because english is the most modern european language. And we all know a lot gets lost in translation.
It's why I said it's important to know the origin of words if you really wanna make any assumption.
English is a simple language and it lacks certain terms.
It's not my problem the english language is less competent in acknowledging the truth.
At least half of the people here are smart enough to get it.[:D]



PeonForHer -> RE: What is your truth? (7/8/2013 3:53:38 PM)

Isn't there a dyke you can stick your finger into somewhere, Mr B?



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.298828E-02