Go back
Absolute Morality

Absolute Morality

Spirituality

Vote Up
Vote Down

Stop quibbling you too and respond to my last post. Am I on the right track or not?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by stocken
I just now realised that I must separate observation, fact and logical
conclusion. Let's say I can see an angel in this very room, right now. I
would say that it's a fact that I can see this angel. Does angels exist
then? No, not necessarily. That would be a leap of faith to believe that
angels exist, simply because I can now observe one right here, ...[text shortened]... ithout knowing anything
about what might cause such a phenomenon to appear before me.
Kind of, the error in there is:

So, facts would always be absolutely true in that we can observe them at
some level.

To have absolute truth about the observation you require a reference point and since observation is a realtive perceptive process, there is none. It may be true that you have observed something but there exists the possibility, no matter how small, that you and those around you have not. Thus the truth of the event is relative to a common sense experience axiom(s) .

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Starrman
I'll say it again, since you ignored it again, you are an idiot.
I did not ignore it. I said that was your own flimsy opinion, since you did not believe in absolute truth.

And I would add to that that you cannot have any absolute certainty about anything. You are not even absolutely certain whether or not you exist.

So long then. Enjoy your flimsy opinions and childish insults, if that is all you can muster.

PS: I would rather be called an idiot than live in the selfish, meaningless little world that you have created for yourself, with no absolute certainty about anything.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by stocken
I just now realised that I must separate observation, fact and logical
conclusion. Let's say I can see an angel in this very room, right now. I
would say that it's a fact that I can see this angel. Does angels exist
then? No, not necessarily. That would be a leap of faith to believe that
angels exist, simply because I can now observe one right here, ...[text shortened]... ithout knowing anything
about what might cause such a phenomenon to appear before me.
The question is not whether or not the statement of a fact can be verified as true ie can we know that the angel exists, but rather whether or not the actual fact can be true ie is it possible for anything to exist. In my opinion, the existence of an object (say my computer) is independent of whether or not I can verify its existence (I cant). I can however be very sure of its existence and verify it to a very high certainty but not quite 100% certain. In my opinion the truth value of the statement "the angel existed" is fixed and unchangeable and uniform for everybody.

Vote Up
Vote Down
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
The question is not whether or not the statement of a fact can be verified as true ie can we know that the angel exists, but rather whether or not the actual fact can be true ie is it possible for anything to exist. In my opinion, the existence of an object (say my computer) is independent of whether or not I can verify its existence (I cant). I can howev ...[text shortened]... alue of the statement "the angel existed" is fixed and unchangeable and uniform for everybody.
Are you 100% sure that you exist?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

The post that was quoted here has been removed
Are you absolutely 100% sure about that? 😛

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down
Vote Up
Vote Down

The post that was quoted here has been removed
Are you absolutely sure about that? 😛

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
The question is not whether or not the statement of a fact can be verified as true ie can we know that the angel exists, but rather whether or not the actual fact can be true ie is it possible for anything to exist. In my opinion, the existence of an object (say my computer) is independent of whether or not I can verify its existence (I cant). I can howev ...[text shortened]... alue of the statement "the angel existed" is fixed and unchangeable and uniform for everybody.
But with that reasoning, there's really nothing we can verify as being
absolutely true. Or is that your point?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by stocken
I just now realised that I must separate observation, fact and logical
conclusion. Let's say I can see an angel in this very room, right now. I
would say that it's a fact that I can see this angel. Does angels exist
then? No, not necessarily. That would be a leap of faith to believe that
angels exist, simply because I can now observe one right here, ...[text shortened]... ithout knowing anything
about what might cause such a phenomenon to appear before me.
Would you say that your own existence is a fact and that it is absolutely true that you exist?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
Would you say that your own existence is a fact and that it is absolutely true that you exist?
I've always been the first to say that nothing exists. Flip through the void
thread and you'll see me make that "crazy" statement. Everything can
come from nothing simply because everything is nothing.

Of course, that's just a flimsy mind-game. The only truth we carry within
us, is that of our own delusional state; I mean our own selfawareness.
The rest is information received through our senses and interpreted by
our brains, so we can't be sure of anything other than our own existence.
Who's to say what is and is not? If you're crazy you may believe that the
shadows dancing on your non-existent bedroom wall after lights out are
for real, but most of us attribute their appearance to the non-existent
moonlight outside partially covered by leaves dancing in the wind. How
you interpret the information you receive will determine how well you
understand the truth behind it.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Give it up, dj2. You're not gonna be able to trick people into acknowledging the existence of God by this means. Your approach is just too far-fetched!


I don't think that this line of argument is designed to "trick people into acknolwedging the existence of God".

It may be designed to cause the denier of the existence of God to stop and think of the side effects and by-products of discarding with God's existence, particularly as related to a basis of morality.

There are usually side effects of taking a certain belief. Sometimes a certain belief looks attractive - like "Let's say there is no God at all. Atheism is the truth". Sometimes it is good to say to oneself -

"Okay. This idea looks attractive. It looks inviting. But what are the side effects of me taking this position? I have seen the pros of adopting such a belief. Are there any cons to me adopting such a belief?"

I don't think djbecker desires to trick anyone into acknowledging the existence of God. I think he might be trying to get thoughtful people to question the reasonable by-products of taking the position that God does not exist.

So the Atheist boasts "I am good. I am a moral atheist and a good person."

So we ask, "Okay. But what is the basis of your goodness? Why not be a terribly evil person? What difference would it make?"

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
Would you say that your own existence is a fact and that it is absolutely true that you exist?
Maybe we're all plugged into the Matrix. Actually, maybe I am the only one who is plugged in, and the rest of you are just characters created by the programmer.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Maybe we're all plugged into the Matrix. Actually, maybe [b]I am the only one who is plugged in, and the rest of you are just characters created by the programmer.[/b]
You are an effect of the Matrix.