2 edits
@lundos said'even if there is a universal truth' LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL. Are you kidding me? Back to trying to insult me. I understand what you were trying to say but what comes out is useless rambling. I can also see you are using your own definition of concise.
I'm trying to get you to understand that even if there is a universal truth on a theoretical level it doesn't matter in the real world.
LOL LOL LOL
haha
The logic behind explaining how two different statements about the same thing cannot both be true cannot possibly be stated more concisely or any more dumbed down. I challenge you to do so. You have taken to arguing against reality, like the 'no man is an island' red herring, it's just a cover for your claim on the lives of others, if nothing is true then anything can be true,
@wajoma saidOkay. How would you error-less measure and uphold the truth for multiple people over time?
'even if there is a universal truth' LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL
haha
The logic behind explaining how to different statements about the same thing cannot both be true cannot possibly be stated more concisely or dumbed down. I challenge you to do so. You have taken to arguing against reality, like the 'no man is an island' red herring, it's just a cover for your claim on the lives of others, if nothing is true then anything can be true,
Of course it can between humans. Because people remember things differently. And even if you record something people see it differently. For each of them they see or remember an experienced truth.
I'm not saying nothing is true or truth is useless as a concept. That's another straw man. I'm saying that we - as a whole society - has to define the scope of what's an acceptable level of understanding truth, because saying there's an objective truth and we should only use that has no basis in a practical world.
I understand this concept is difficult and psychology is unknown for you, but please stick to it this time.
@lundos saidStep one: Realise there is only one reality, that there are not 6 billion different realities, two people holding different views on the same thing cannot both be right, this is not "for arguments sake" or "even if there is a universal truth"
Okay. How would you error-less measure and uphold the truth for multiple people over time?
Of course it can between humans. Because people remember things differently. And even if you record something people see it differently. For each of them they see or remember an experienced truth.
I'm not saying nothing is true or truth is useless as a concept. That's another straw ...[text shortened]... stand this concept is difficult and psychology is unknown for you, but please stick to it this time.
There is something that exists and because different people perceive things differently does not negate the reality of that which exists.
Philosophical not psychological, as much as you'd like to derail the convo.
@wajoma saidActually, that depends on who you ask. There are plenty of philosophical theories that operate with multiple realities.
Step one: Realise there is only one reality, that there are not 6 billion different realities, two people holding different views on the same thing cannot both be right, this is not "for arguments sake" or "even if there is a universal truth"
There is something that exists and because different people perceive things differently does not negate the reality of that which exists.
Philosophical not psychological, as much as you'd like to derail the convo.
But just for fun. Who defines that one reality? The Universe? Nature? God(s)? You?
If you and I experience the same event in different ways who decides what actually happened?
You've given me a quote so let me reciprocate with one of my favourite quotes:
“Where two principles really do meet which cannot be reconciled with one another, then each man declares the other a fool and a heretic.”
Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty
@lundos saidIn your quote do you suppose that both go away saying "We're both right, because there is no right or wrong"
Actually, that depends on who you ask. There are plenty of philosophical theories that operate with multiple realities.
But just for fun. Who defines that one reality? The Universe? Nature? God(s)? You?
If you and I experience the same event in different ways who decides what actually happened?
You've given me a quote so let me reciprocate with one of my favourite qu ...[text shortened]... nother, then each man declares the other a fool and a heretic.”
Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty
@wajoma said"to thine on Self?!" That does not compute with libs, Wajoma. They replace the word Self with the word Us. The group. They are like a bunch of worms in a bait box, all moving around in tandem with all the same thoughts about their lives. Why have original thoughts,...let someone else think, just as long as I get a check. Pitiful. Glassy eyed stares. Why focus?
Here's another one for you:
“This above all: to thine own self be true and it must follow, as the night the day
Thou canst not then be false to any man/Farewell, my blessing season this in thee!”
Shakespeare
Life changing, and if anyone needs it right now, it's you.
I do wish they would own up to preaching dependence. Why dont they just say it?
Really....why not just say it. This is all anonymous, so what hurt could it do to just say what they really think about how society should interact? Marauder has done OK with that, he has made it clear about what Obama said, to transform America and spread the wealth around. He has not, however, said how that could work, given that some people work harder than others. I fully expect that if he were honest, he would say that the harder workers should just temper it down a bit.
1 edit
@lundos saidI didn't get that from the quote, rather that it was a variation on what I've been saying for 5 posts, that each believes themself to be right i.e. that they believe there is right and wrong, that they both can't be right.
I'm saying that you will call me a fool no matter what I write if you think we disagree on a fundamental level.
If you think there are multiple realities all competing with one another, that there is no right or wrong then there's probably not a lot to talk about. If some one is swinging a piece of 4x2 towards your face I don't think claiming the piece of wood is, say for you, a waft of smoke, I'd say you're going to find out about reality good and hard and fast.
You say there are multiple realities, that there is no true reality, or right or wrong, I say there is only one.
One of us is right, one of us is wrong.
@no1marauder saidOh, come on. You should know by now that all libertarians are so only in speech, and never in actions.
Are you, like Earl, just another LINO (Libertarian In Name Only)?
@averagejoe1 saidHow to say you've never owned a house without saying "I've never owned a house".
OK, for fun, I will state the obvious. The wall will be built and we will get a final bill. At that time, President Trump will sign the last check and be paraded by his patriots. The wall will cost NOTHING after that.
@shallow-blue saidIs that you, Suzianne?
Capitalism.
It's capitalism which rides on the back of prosperity created by others.