goldrush writes:
I am not arguing that science is a tool. The reason I had "truths" in quotes was because even though people are quick to say they don't exist, they herald discoveries made through science as fact, proof, and hard evidence, which are soft forms of absolute truth. The reason our knowledge changes with new discoveries is because absolute truth exists. As a matter of fact, logic is rather absolute. To say that absolute truth does not exist is a contradiction since such a statement would be an absolute truth. If we conclude that all truth is relative, it is relative to something: absolute truth.
Sheesh.
Nice try little one, but first learn to read.
If you read what I have written you will see that I have said there are things that are absolutely true, for example in our normal counting system 2 + 2 = 4.
That is different than saying that there is some
"Absolute TRUTH".
And I don't really care that you are "not arguing that science is a tool" because it most obviously is a tool. No one has said it is not a tool.
A "soft form of absolute truth" is what?
It certainly is not a fact, for example the hard fact that the Biblical Flood never happened. Now that is an absolute truth unless the God that that did it is also a liar and a cheat.
And what we find when we get away from facts and into areas such as morality is yet again, not some absolute truth. Morals are relative to the individual situation, the society and other relative morals. No absolute morals needed.
But what does any of this have to do with the topic?
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!