1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Absolute Truth

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by MermaidFairy, Oct 16, 2016.

  1. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    Does it have to be a dream? It's enough if I think of the stew, or even if I look at it, smell it, taste it, it all gets rendered in my mind. Can perception be separated from reality or "truth", if I can only observe this "truth" through my perception? It's the same old debate of subjectivity vs. objectivity, like how you pointed out in this earlier post of yours.
     
  2. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    If it moves and not mentioned in the Bible, shoot it.
     
  3. fschmidt

    fschmidt Active Member

    From my view, perception is separated from reality but not from truth. The stew is in the pot. The concept of the stew and all statements about the stew are in the mind. There is no correspondence of mental concepts to reality because these are completely different things that can't correspond. Plato has his ideal form of the perfect stew out there in reality, but I just have the stew in the pot (and my concept of it).
     
  4. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member

    The ingredients travel, when I take them home. :) Or do I have to cook in the supermarket? :eek:

    In the end it all comes down to people's preference... so how absolute that is? Maybe that's the absolute truth? That everything is relative?
     
  5. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member

    Is this really it? If source and location are the same, we just name both out of being proper...?
     
  6. andersonnnunes

    andersonnnunes Active Member

    I am more inclined to agree with: If It Moves, Script It.
     
    Ruryse likes this.
  7. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    :D Could you script absolute truth and all the different kind of religions?
     
  8. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    Is it really absolute?
     
  9. andersonnnunes

    andersonnnunes Active Member

    Would be nice to do that and try some evolutionary algorithms to see which belief systems outranked others in different situations. I proposed to do something similar once, but on a much smaller scale.

    Ecologist have been trying this with models of different species and habitats for years. I haven't been following the advances, but I would not be surprised if by now this were entirely feasible.
     
    Ruryse likes this.
  10. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    Does it basically arrive to the "no free lunch" theorem again? Or are there certain belief systems that are truly more effective in more situations than other ones?
     
  11. andersonnnunes

    andersonnnunes Active Member

    One thing is to know that all solutions are equally good on average, another totally different thing is to know which solutions are good or bad under which contexts.
     
    Ruryse likes this.
  12. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member

    Ok... :) But isn't it a popular simplistic cop out line when you let the common people speak? :)
     
    Ruryse likes this.
  13. Daman

    Daman New Member

    I believe that the only "absolute truth" (as defined by Descartes) is that "thinking exists". That proposition seems to be the only proposition beyond logical doubt. I.e., you can logically doubt the existence of anything except that some sort of "thinking" is taking place. You can't doubt that you think because doubting requires thinking.
     
    Ruryse likes this.
  14. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    People won't quickly switch between religions just to gain access to a better solution every now and then though. They are rather rigid that way.
     
  15. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    lmao! Okay. But the "common people" get their knowledge from the pioneers of humanity, don't they? It's just usually an applied knowledge, with most of its original meaning long left the building, so to say.
     
  16. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    That's an awesome thought. Thinking creates absolute truth though, doesn't it? If thinking is absolute truth, and it also creates absolute truth, then absolute truth creates itself. Or thinking creates thinking. And these are all just thoughts. And logic is also created by thinking.
     
  17. andersonnnunes

    andersonnnunes Active Member

    Yep and that is for all kinds of beliefs, not exclusively religion. That is why I support death penalty for serious crimes and I would be happy to be the executioner in case no one else stepped up - for fear that they would get PTSD or whatever.
     
  18. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member

    Would you also be the judge, or whose judgement would you accept regarding death penalty?
     
  19. andersonnnunes

    andersonnnunes Active Member

    The movie Sicario (2015) could be a great case to discuss that sort of question.

    Advancing justice is a pyrrhic victory if it results in a spiral of vengeance. Assurance that this won't happen should ideally be secured first, if necessary. (How that should be done is another question entirely.)

    The judge? Most certainly not, as the number of situations in which that could happen is so small and they will probably never happen, but, if they did happen, I don't see why not.

    One of the judges? Sure, I choose not to kill a man without analyzing his case first. My name could not figure out as "judge" but I would judge the case anyway before deciding how to act.

    Why not be a witness too? Let's say an alien species lands on Earth, it is rich and untouchable by human military, it wants to administer justice on Earth and it can collect evidence by analyzing raw brain memories, which they can extract somehow, but the witness dies during analyze. If I were convinced that they were capable of doing what they claim, would I submit my brain? Can you guess my answer?
     
  20. fschmidt

    fschmidt Active Member

    Thinking can't create absolute truth by the definition of absolute truth, which is truth independent of thought. All truth created by thinking is relative to the thinking itself. So the statement "thinking exists" may be either absolute or relative.
     
    ListenNighGlint likes this.

Share This Page