Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,584 Year: 2,841/9,624 Month: 686/1,588 Week: 92/229 Day: 3/61 Hour: 3/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Perceptions of Reality
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 170 of 305 (394755)
04-13-2007 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by RAZD
04-12-2007 10:38 PM


Re: physical reality and morality?
This really has nothing to do with multiple universes. So I am not rejecting multiple universes because it would do away with morality. I won't accuse you of creating a straw man... you misunderstod me.
Maybe there are multiple universes. If there are, morality would still be absolute in my opinion.
What I was driving at, was that mutiple universes can be (and have been) used to posit the notion that ultimately, reality is infinite in the manner of order and function of law. I am not saying anyone here has used this notion, but I know folks who have.
That being said, let me illustrate this another way so that we can dialog on it meaningfully.
When speaking of absolute moral truth, if you say that 'all truth is relative', does that statement include itself?
If you say yes, then that statement is also not always true. Which means that some truth is not relative. Which means the statement is false.
If you say no, then you are positing an absolute while denying that absolutes exist.
What am I missing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by RAZD, posted 04-12-2007 10:38 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by ringo, posted 04-13-2007 2:50 AM Rob has replied
 Message 194 by RAZD, posted 04-14-2007 8:38 AM Rob has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 172 of 305 (394796)
04-13-2007 9:08 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by ringo
04-13-2007 2:50 AM


Re: physical reality and morality?
Ringo:
Who is claiming that "all truth is relative"?
Can you think of a truth that is absolute?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by ringo, posted 04-13-2007 2:50 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by ringo, posted 04-13-2007 1:23 PM Rob has replied
 Message 222 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-18-2007 10:35 AM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 174 of 305 (394895)
04-13-2007 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by ringo
04-13-2007 1:23 PM


Re: physical reality and morality?
Ringo:
I'm asking: Who is using the word "all" besides you?
And I want to make sure that you are not saying 'all truth is relative' implicitly. I contend that you and others are saying it in your assumptions. That is why I asked for you to give me a truth that is not relative. If you do not believe (consciously or subconsiously) that all truth is relative, then it should not be difficult for you to think of one. But I believe you do. And I see it implied again and again in so many comments here at EVC. And when I call these asumptions into question (irrespective of subject), I am disregarded as off topic. It is a continuing phenomenon.
Let's dialog on this please...
Can you demonstrate an absolute to prove to me you do not believe 'all truth is relative'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by ringo, posted 04-13-2007 1:23 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 10:47 PM Rob has replied
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:20 AM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 176 of 305 (394897)
04-13-2007 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by ringo
04-13-2007 1:23 PM


Re: physical reality and morality?
Ringo:
Doesn't your logic fall apart if the statement is "truth is relative"?
The statemeent itself is illogical. I have never suggested such a thing. The only logical and realistic statement can be, 'Some truth is absolute.' (that in itself is an absolute truth).
If you want to affirm relativism it can be done in the following manner: 'Some truths are relative'.
Do we agree upon that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by ringo, posted 04-13-2007 1:23 PM ringo has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 177 of 305 (394901)
04-13-2007 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by jar
04-13-2007 10:47 PM


Finally... I get to teach jar about absolutes
jar:
It is absolutely true that I like strawberry ice cream.
It is absolutely true that I am over 21 years old.
It is absolutely true I made an omelet for lunch.
It is absolutely true I had a V-8 tonight.
None of these are absolutely true... they are relatively true in their respective time. You used the words years, lunch, and tonight. You have liked strawberry icecream only since you have tried it. Before that, it was not your favorite.
An absolute is true at all times, and is not relative to time. Otherwise it is not absolute.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 10:47 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 11:26 PM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 179 of 305 (394908)
04-13-2007 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by jar
04-13-2007 11:26 PM


Re: Finally... I get to teach jar about absolutes
jar
The readers can look at the thread and decide whether or not what I said were actually absolutes.
Are you implying that the readers of this thread can interpret reality and the meaning of words for themselves?
If so, will you allow me the same liberty?
Do you even know what I am saying?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 11:26 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 11:43 PM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 181 of 305 (394912)
04-13-2007 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by jar
04-13-2007 11:43 PM


Re: Finally... I get to teach jar about absolutes
jar:
Yes, words have different meanings based on language, culture, era and context.
So, is it ok with you if (based upon my languge culture and era) if I interpret your words above to mean, 'the emperor wears no clothes'?
If not, why?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 11:43 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 11:53 PM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 183 of 305 (394921)
04-14-2007 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 182 by jar
04-13-2007 11:53 PM


Re: Finally... I get to teach jar about absolutes
jar:
That has absolutely nothing to do with what has actually been said in reality
You used the word absolute and reality in the same sentance. I am proud of you.
jar:
Rob, it is perfectly fine with me for you to try to interpret my words anyway that suits your little fancy.
So, you are saying that green frogs inhabit your rectum?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by jar, posted 04-13-2007 11:53 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by jar, posted 04-14-2007 12:35 AM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 185 of 305 (394923)
04-14-2007 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by ringo
04-14-2007 12:20 AM


Re: physical reality and morality?
Ringo:
Then it shouldn't be hard for you to demonstrate what you "see".
Well it is...
How would you describe the color yellow to a blind man?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:20 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:25 AM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 187 of 305 (394926)
04-14-2007 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by ringo
04-14-2007 12:25 AM


Re: physical reality and morality?
I am sorry Ringo, it appears that you agree with me. My mistake...
Some moral truth is absolute.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:25 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:30 AM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 190 of 305 (394932)
04-14-2007 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by jar
04-14-2007 12:35 AM


Re: Sheesh
jar:
That still has NOTHING to do with the fact that so far no one has been able to show an example of an absolute moral that stood up to examination or that there is some absolute morality
Someone not only did, but does. He is completely honest without respect for the consequence to Himself. Do you know Him?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by jar, posted 04-14-2007 12:35 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by jar, posted 04-14-2007 12:52 AM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 192 of 305 (394935)
04-14-2007 12:56 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by jar
04-14-2007 12:52 AM


Re: Sheesh
jar:
Your preaching is pointless and immaterial here.
Not much has changed in two thousand years huh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by jar, posted 04-14-2007 12:52 AM jar has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 193 of 305 (394946)
04-14-2007 4:24 AM
Reply to: Message 188 by ringo
04-14-2007 12:30 AM


Re: physical reality and morality?
Ringo:
No, I don't agree with you.
I said that some truth is absolute.
If you disagree, then you're saying some truth is not absolute (ie. all truth is relative).
You asked first thing, who said 'all truth is relative'. I said you implied it in your assumptions visible in your statements.
You have just proven that that is the case unless you meant to say you agree with me. You cannot both agree and disagree on the issue at hand. The issue does not lend itself to your indescision. It forces you to choose.
What is left to discuss?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:30 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 11:09 AM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 196 of 305 (394974)
04-14-2007 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by ringo
04-14-2007 11:09 AM


It seems to me to be the proper thread.
Ringo:
And since you are the one who claims that "some truth is absolute", the onus is on you - not me - to produce some. (This might not be the proper thread to do that.)
This is likely going to be way over your head at the current time. But you are very intelligent. If you think about it over some time and really attempt to digest it, I think you will find it nourishing. Whether or not you do is up to you.
What I don't want to see is some ad hoc denial that I have even said anything meaningful. If you wish not to think about it, it does not make my words void.
Life is absolute And what life is... is Love. That is the reality that underscores this thing called 'being'. And it cannot be found under a microscope. It is found by trusting another with Justice, Mercy, And forgiveness. that is the heart of the absolute moral law. Truth and grace. It is not self serving. That is life in it's unmitigated glory.
Let's look at Justice, Mercy, and Forgiveness as absolutes.
If we do not simply accept that all of the above are absolute by mere assumption, then we lose all basis for denouncing anything.
All of our moralizing (theistic or non-theistic) is predicated upon these assumptions.
Let me give another example... There will come a day when all men pay for the crimes they think no-one saw, because justice is absolute.
If justice is not absolute, then there is no justice. And all of our pontifications become puffs of air. This whole excercize is just a bunch of monkeys trying to find the good life, when in reality our father is merely death.
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 11:09 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:15 PM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5839 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 198 of 305 (394983)
04-14-2007 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by ringo
04-14-2007 12:15 PM


Re: It seems to me to be the proper thread.
Ringo:
That's no basis for the "dialog" that you claim you want. You can't demand that I accept your examples of "absolutes" with no backup whatsoever.
That's just it Ringo... on what basis do you deny it?
Would it be unjust of me?
That is your implication, and I agree that you are correct in insisting upon justice.
This is very tricky and heavy. Very hard to keep a handle on. It is almost like the tomato seed. We can't quite get our finger on it...
It is subconscious. And the point is that if we take away these assumptions, then we have no ground with which to stand.
Your entire thinking process is rooted in the Christian worldview. It is what underpins the Western Culture. If you take it away, with what will you judge a statement to be true or false?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 12:15 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by ringo, posted 04-14-2007 1:05 PM Rob has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024