| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 The Truth.Are there absolute truths? |
||||||
|
Hi Anti My statement, "I think Boro will go up this season", is a fact My statement, "Boro will go up this season", is an opinion My statement, "God will save Boro from going down", is a belief Is that the sort of thing you had in mind? Steve |
||||||
|
I'll stick to the bible John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. Jesus is the truth, if you know him then truth is defined. Len |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Subjective |
||||||
|
Relativism, Rilke? I was driving one night with my daughter in the car (she was 3 at the time). Suddenly she called out, "Daddy look! The moon is following us!" Sure enough, when I looked, the moon seemed to be keeping up with the pace of the car as the rest of the world sped past. What followed were some magical experiments in moonwatching. We pulled over several times to see if we could make the moon stop and go; we slowed, and sped up, turned left and right to see what the moon would do; and we wondered how it knew where we were going and indeed why was it following us anyway? That the moon was following us was not the "truth", but my daughter's first guess. A personal perception does not constitute "the truth", whether it applies to the moon or to morals |
||||||
|
@ untateve Steve |
||||||
|
But obsteve, |
||||||
|
I don't suppose we can know for sure... Though these are, as you rightly assess, personal perceptions, it is my belief that personal perceptions *alone*, do not constitute "the truth". Otherwise there would be multiple and conflicting truths. Which to me would appear pointless, unless you are someone who considers truth to be nebulous, relative and potentially self-negating? This is why I tried to set some definitions earlier, for the words "fact", "belief" and "opinion". Steve |
||||||
|
Len |
||||||
|
And, if something is "probably" a duck, that allows for the possibility that it is not a duck. |
||||||
|
Hi untateve And are all those beliefs true? If all points of view are equally true, at least for the time that they are held, does it follows that nobody is ever wrong, so long as they think that they are right? This seems a little pointless to me, to try and eradicate the distinction between belief and fact Steve |
||||||
|
With no disrespect, I view all religion as mythology. None of it rings true to me. However, there are many people of faith who assert that their particular God exists, what is written in their version of the bible is fact, and that their God speaks "the truth." I am certain I am right. They are certain they are right. Where is the truth to be found? As I think about it, there may not be objective facts--simply our perceptions which we interpret as facts. |
||||||
|
I agree with the religion example However, in science, for example, there are "Laws" which are based on shared experience and evidence, much more so than the personal experience of a religious belief. I suppose there is a sliding scale from unfalsifiable "beliefs", based on little or no evidence and impossible to test empirically, to falsifiable "facts", which are based on multiple evidences which are testable. Although I agree, even for those things which seem to be a certain as a duck, there must be an element of "nobody knows for sure" (alien duck invasion, anyone?). Here is an extract from Boswell's "Life of Samuel Johnson", demonstrating the difficulty of arguing against Immaterialism: "After we came out of the church, we stood talking for some time together of Bishop Berkeley's ingenious sophistry to prove the nonexistence of matter, and that every thing in the universe is merely ideal. I observed, that though we are satisfied his doctrine is not true, it is impossible to refute it. I never shall forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it -- "I refute it thus." Big up Johnson Steve |
||||||
|
Untateve |
||||||
|
OK dudes, It is my opinion that this *reality* is true, and tbh until I met untateve I had yet to meet anyone who genuinely holds the opinion that the world is a purely constructed and subjective phenomenon. So I'm guessing untateve, rilke and j2000 are potential "Idealists", while antinephilehi, myself and solascriptura are potential "Realists". (Correct me if I have it wrong) My proposition is that we organise a chess game, Idealists v Realists, for a "trial by combat" to see who is right. ATM it's three on three, but if anybody reading this post would like to weigh in on either side, then we could have a major battle on our hands. Don't be shy here, what is at stake is the objectivity/subjectivity of the universe! Steve |
||||||
|
obsteve |
||||||
|
untateve |
||||||
|
Hi untateve Are all points of view equally true, for as long as they are held? Is it possible to hold a wrong belief? Is there an objective material universe in your philosophy? Steve |
||||||
|
A point of view does not equal absolute truth (I tend to doubt that there are any absolute truths). However, a 'point of view' is most definitely true to the person holding that view for as long as s/he holds that particular view. I may disagree with the point of view but that does not make that point of view any less 'true' for the person holding that particular view. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Is it possible to hold a wrong belief? Here again, a belief is not a truth. As a belief is not a truth, should these factors somehow change, beliefs may change. So the question becomes, can the belief be wrong? At one time, it was believed that the world was flat. I don't see a way to argue that that this belief was correct. However, I would argue that the perception that the Earth was flat was indeed reality. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Is there an objective material universe in your philosophy? I do not believe that there is an objective material universe. |
||||||
|
Morning untateve! Wow, that's a big statement! While I agree that personal truths and points of view and beliefs may change, I believe that there is a material universe, which will continue to exist after I am dead. My reasons for believing so are of course unprovable! However, I use personal analogy to sustain my belief: I rationalise, as j2000 does above, that I exist- or at least that my thoughts exist. Given that I exist, it seems reasonable to argue that those others who seem to exist like me, do also. It also seems reasonable to extend that thinking to a material world- If I and others exist, we become part of a universe which behaves very much like it would do were it to exist. My problem with considering a universe entirely of my own creation, is that I have created one which behaves remarkably as if it were materially existing. Although I admit I cannot prove otherwise, I have no real reason to believe it is constructed by myself. There is no evidence to suggest it is a subjective construction. I am also concerned that should I be a figment of your imagination, I might cease to be were you to stop thinking about me! |
||||||
|
No worries there. You are constantly in my thoughts. |
||||||
|
Excuse me for being forward, |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Outside of conscience However, if things exist outside of your conscience, doesn't that constitute a materially existing (albeit subjectively perceived) universe? Nuances of your and your brother's perception of your mother aside, there are objective, materially existing attributes to your mother, surely? If I were to assume she were 5'5" tall, I would either be right or wrong. I would argue that to call my my guess "the truth", rather than "my best guess", is unhelpful. Steve |
||||||
|
However, if things exist outside of your conscience, doesn't that constitute a materially existing (albeit subjectively perceived) universe?" I see your point. And perhaps I'm not clear to others because I'm not clear with my own thoughts. I concede that there is a materially existing universe. Perhaps it is the word "objective" that does not fit with my philosophy. Reality, it seems to me, is subjective. I guess the struggle for me is determining if there are any objective truths. My mother, most certainly, is 5' 2" tall. She was most certainly born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. So would this be considered an "objective truth?" |
||||||
|
I understand and agree So when you say: ' My mother, most certainly, is 5' 2" tall. She was most certainly born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. So would this be considered an "objective truth?" ' I would consider your mother's height to be empirically measurable, though your statement might not be the truth. The "objective truth", or "reality" would be her actual height, no matter what you said, or I believed, her height to be. Steve |
||||||
|
What is "Truth?" Take a beauty pageant, for example. The competition is based mainly on the physical beauty of its contestants, and whatever the judges perceive as most "beautiful" will win the contest. When we compare a slender, white, blond and "young" (another question, what is young?) woman, and place her against a chubby, short-haired, old woman, what result are we to get? Many people will go with the blond woman, but why so? Because they perceive it as beautiful. But when you ask them what the definition of beauty is, they can give you no real answer. It is simply opinion, and nothing more. Just because many people perceive something as beautiful or correct (like religion) does not mean it is so. It is the way we perceive things that make the outside world right, wrong, beautiful and ugly. The fact is, because in the world there are distastefully perceived things, so too there are beautiful things. We can compare the distastefully perceived objects to the beautifully perceived objects and determine, through opinion, which we like more, so to speak. If there were only one thing in the world, only one, take a computer for example, and you were to determine if it is beautiful or not, you could do no such thing. You would have no way of saying, because there would be nothing else to compare it to. Now, if you were to place the original Mona Lisa next to the computer, many people would come up with their answer very quickly. Therefore, in my subjective interpretation, there is no such thing as "truth," just the way we perceive the outside world. |
||||||
|
Truth Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know-John Keats There are no objective truths, only personal ones. |
||||||
|
eyero5 30-Dec-09, 06:53 |
Belief |
||||||
| |||||||
Log in 
