Truth

[Zarlan]

This thread is open-ended, intended to discuss something that seems to be just as important as questions like 'What is life?'.

What is truth? Is there an absolute truth? How is truth established?

I am a Christian, so my absolute truth is the Bible, but what do you all think? If you don't have an absolute truth, how does that affect your outlook on life?

[Sage the Mage]

Absolute truths exist at the highest level, so they need not exist inside the universe if there's multiple universes or anything at all outside the universe.

Can all absolute truths be discovered? Only if the universe is the highest level, since no human can completely understand anything beyond the universe since we cannot percieve it.

So, no I don't consider any text to contain all absolute truths, if any at all.

How does having no belief that I know the absolute truth effect myself? It doesn't. My morals are derived from religion (mainly christianity I'd think) because of what my family believes. Osmosis :)

[Hydro]

I am a Christian, so my absolute truth is the Bible, but what do you all think? If you don't have an absolute truth, how does that affect your outlook on life?

It's hard for me to believe in one absolute truth, but I strive to live by the mantra that all people deserve respect, as the world around us.
I think the golen rule is still the golden rule.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Absolute truths exist at the highest level, so they need not exist inside the universe if there's multiple universes or anything at all outside the universe.


:scratch:


Can all absolute truths be discovered? Only if the universe is the highest level, since no human can completely understand anything beyond the universe since we cannot percieve it.

So, no I don't consider any text to contain all absolute truths, if any at all.


Didn't this small paragraph attempt to demonstrate the absolute truth that no texts could contain absolute truths? :uhhuh:


How does having no belief that I know the absolute truth effect myself? It doesn't. My morals are derived from religion (mainly christianity I'd think) because of what my family believes. Osmosis :)

A person's understanding of reality has no bearing reality.

[Echod16]

|2| + |2| = |4|

that looks like truth to me, unless it's an illusion created by the flawed human mind O_o

[Sage the Mage]

Didn't this small paragraph attempt to demonstrate the absolute truth that no texts could contain absolute truths?
Huh? I already stated that absolute truths can exist.

A person's understanding of reality has no bearing [on] reality.
I'd guess that's what you ment to say, but I still don't see what this matters.

[Endora]

Truth is subjective..as is reality
One can only have personal honesty.

[SpiritWalker]

"You want answers?!"
"I want the truth!!"
"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!"

[Endora]

"Self assessment is universal truth." *winks* oh crap i have something in my eye !! *starts with an uncontrollable wink*

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Huh? I already stated that absolute truths can exist.


Yes you did, which is progress. 2 months ago you wouldn't dare say anything like that - you sounded as foolish as the poster below you with the girly face saying everything is relative and only opinions matter. Yet, there's work to be done in that you proceeded to blab forth unintelligible drivel regarding "inside and outside the universe", and some other inexorably redundant conjexture regarding "levels". I hope you can make sense of it.

[Xaf]

I guess reality is the truth. The molecules that make up my keyboard or the gravity that holds us on the earth. Lies only come into play when you start mixing in emotion and perception so a lie is really just an illusion. And since there is no way to filter emotion and perception out we will never know absolute truth. We could only hope for a better understanding of it, unless of course those tales of enlightenment and heaven are true.

[Maullus]

Greetings,

you sounded as foolish as the poster below you with the girly face saying everything is relative and only opinions matter. Yet, there's work to be done in that you proceeded to blab forth unintelligible drivel regarding "inside and outside the universe", and some other inexorably redundant conjexture regarding "levels". I hope you can make sense of it.

I don't mean this as an attack, honestly. I just don't understand why you can't attempt to be nice and "educate" people at the same time. You trod all over people without any regard whatsoever. Ridiculing and belittling people is hardly considerate, and I can't quite seem to fathom their "misguided" opinions warranting that kind of treatment.

[Endora]

Yes you did, which is progress. 2 months ago you wouldn't dare say anything like that - you sounded as foolish as the poster below you with the girly face saying everything is relative and only opinions matter. Yet, there's work to be done in that you proceeded to blab forth unintelligible drivel regarding "inside and outside the universe", and some other inexorably redundant conjexture regarding "levels". I hope you can make sense of it.

LOL what did you try and say?

[Sage the Mage]

Yes you did, which is progress. 2 months ago you wouldn't dare say anything like that - you sounded as foolish as the poster below you with the girly face saying everything is relative and only opinions matter.
Nah my views haven't changed.

Yet, there's work to be done in that you proceeded to blab forth unintelligible drivel regarding "inside and outside the universe", and some other inexorably redundant conjexture regarding "levels". I hope you can make sense of it.
When you suggest a creator you are already attesting to an outside the universe. That's why I mentioned that.

When I said highest level, I mean the thing that's most outside (like one of those egg toys), since at that point there will be only one thing.

[Xaf]

Greetings,



I don't mean this as an attack, honestly. I just don't understand why you can't attempt to be nice and "educate" people at the same time. You trod all over people without any regard whatsoever. Ridiculing and belittling people is hardly considerate, and I can't quite seem to fathom their "misguided" opinions warranting that kind of treatment.

This is an internet video game forum, do you really expect people to not make fun of others?

[Lazzmodai]

I guess reality is the truth. The molecules that make up my keyboard or the gravity that holds us on the earth. Lies only come into play when you start mixing in emotion and perception so a lie is really just an illusion. And since there is no way to filter emotion and perception out we will never know absolute truth. We could only hope for a better understanding of it, unless of course those tales of enlightenment and heaven are true.
THat truth is subjective. Is gravity some ineffable force, the weakest of the four, or is it an actual physical exchange of subgluonic matter (as postulated by Hawkings, among others)? Thinking something does not make it so. A few thousand years ago the earth was flat, and that was absolute truth.

I have to agree with Sage on this one, absolute truth, while it does exists is far beyond anything we can ever grasp. Absolute (or universal) truth is something wholly alien to our pathetic, small little human minds.

[Andarcel]

|2| + |2| = |4|

Analytic truth. It's true by definition. I suppose you could call it an asbolute truth of a sort, but it's not very preposessing.

[The.Jolly.Roger]

String theory. String theory is truth.

[Maullus]

Greetings,

This is an internet video game forum, do you really expect people to not make fun of others?

Considering the fact that I've been a member of WorldOfWar.net since 2001 and the members have shown an amazing amount of decency to date...yes. Yes, I do, in fact, expect people to refrain from being immature, rude, or otherwise obnoxious. That's the thing that separates these forums, from those forums.

And making fun is one thing, being rude without provocation is quite another.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Greetings,



I don't mean this as an attack, honestly. I just don't understand why you can't attempt to be nice and "educate" people at the same time. You trod all over people without any regard whatsoever. Ridiculing and belittling people is hardly considerate, and I can't quite seem to fathom their "misguided" opinions warranting that kind of treatment.


Not alot new with this post I suppose, except the fact that it's about 5 months too late :). If I wanted to insult anyone, it would be directed at themselves as a person, not at the positions they hold. As I mentioned before, its up to the posters wether they want to believe their dignity rests on something outside themselves. I won't make any apoligies about calling what someone believes foolish. If this is indeed the case, I'll spend time discussing the content, not just moving on like a typical troll. I've got nothing against my detractors, and while I find you irritating at the best of times, I've got no personal vendetta against you. As far as these forums go, I've established that the tone I take is not a personal one, but bears the full bore of reason behind it when dealing with arguments/content etc.

This I've told countless people - Booms, Bhs, Essex, etc, and on other areas of the forum, I'm chummy-chummy with these people. The OTF with its respective topics demands a solid stand for the arguments that are undertaken. If posters enter discussion with the premise that content is worth treating with respect, than things can be progressive. You've seen Bhs' comments on his leaving - the OTF was basically a free education for him. Do you think that came about by "offering" opinions? No. It's by telling it like it is.

In short, if a poster cares enough about a topic to go into it, moreso than just airing his/her opinion and leaving, they will reply in kind to a rebuttal. So far, I haven't seen you get into any content-based discussion save for what literature and poetry you think is cool, or how you continually mention that "respect and kindness" is oh-so important. Ever hear of a velvet dictatorship? Reply to this with a "greetings,". gg.

[Zarlan]

What's funny is I almost didn't start this thread because I thought to myself I bet AoA is going to get involved here, insulting people's views and glorifying his own. If only we were so wise as he.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Stick around Z, you'll get there someday ;). If it's views you wanted to look at, try arguing them, instead of offering that sort of drivel. Ask me again why I take a firm tone with posts like that - they are silly. These forums have so much potential, yet their heavy topics enjoy no real solid discussion. That's enough to make any honest intellectual balk.

[Zarlan]

Feel free to enlighten us with your understanding on the topic, then. I am eager to absorb your wisdom.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Feel free to enlighten us with your understanding on the topic, then. I am eager to absorb your wisdom.

I would think that this thread was a result of reading my comments on it in a few other recent threads. My position on the matter is inexorably clear. Furthermore, it can be easily implied in my first reply to Sage, which I'm assuming you've read because it is your thread. My position on the matter is that yes - there is "truth", which, by its very nature, must be an absolute universal, because it is a single, immutible concept. Pick me apart and I'll offer more discussion.

[Zarlan]

Ok, so you have established the existance and nature of truth, but what is truth? Is there more than one truth?

[Hydro]

I would think that this thread was a result of reading my comments on it in a few other recent threads. My position on the matter is inexorably clear. Furthermore, it can be easily implied in my first reply to Sage, which I'm assuming you've read because it is your thread. My position on the matter is that yes - there is "truth", which, by its very nature, must be an absolute universal, because it is a single, immutible concept. Pick me apart and I'll offer more discussion.

Sometimes you astound me with your arrogance ;)

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Ok, so you have established the existance and nature of truth, but what is truth? Is there more than one truth?

Truth can be distinguished from Truths. Truths deal with maxims, axioms, and their respective content. "Truth" is a universal concept, making particular truths possible. A common argument against relativists for instance is a reply to they saying "there is no absolute truth". Yet, they are assenting to an absolute truth-vaule statement. Thus, the universal concept of truth, that there must be a position. Arriving there is a process.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Sometimes you astound me with your arrogance ;)

Thanks for the smiley. :)

That is actually another dimension for this discussion. People believe its arrogant to have someone present a confident air regarding knowledge. They call people humble who say "oh.. I dont know". That's because they too believe that nobody can really know anything, and believe that the said person is being honest and humble. In reality, this has its own connotations of arrogance. The truly arrogant are those who state that there is no truth, and no way of coming about it. They blatantly re-create reality by that positon, and demand that others do likewise. Forget about discovering truth.. The texts I plan on writing before I shuffle off this mortal coil will be dealing with this exact problem. Your grandchildren will be reading them at class.

[Zarlan]

So you are saying that truth can only exist with the use of postulates, which are in their very definition unreal?

[AgeOfAbnegation]

So you are saying that truth can only exist with the use of postulates, which are in their very definition unreal?

Certainly not. I said that the notion of truth is what makes content based truths (such as 1+1=2), possible. Descartes took that mathematical model waay off course, but the fact remains that one can point to a universal truth, without demanding to make a particular conent a universal.

[Zarlan]

It is impossible that humility is a form of arrogance! If you reason away the word to mean its opposite, then you are not dealing with the purest form of humility.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

It is impossible that humility is a form of arrogance! If you reason away the word to mean its opposite, then you are not dealing with the purest form of humility.

You've never heard of false humility? I've been very clear in my post. If you want to argue that, go ahead. Please don't waste my time however by coming into this discussion with a mind to simply "take out AoA", as you implied earlier on. Wether you like me or not, you still have to deal with the actual text. Anyway, I'll talk to u tommorow.

[Maullus]

Greetings,

Snide post. :) It's a talent you have, being able to insult someone without actually using invective. Like, "Reply to this with a "greetings,". gg." Very clever. It makes me look silly, without ever really stepping outside the bounds of propriety.

You haven't seen me post in any "content-based discussion," because I failed to see the point any longer. You inundate the OT forum with pedantic displays of philosophical jargon. You state that "The most essential thing for a human being to do is to become a philosopher, and make an attempt to discover to the best of your ability what these objective, metaphysical laws are, and "discover" the best way to live your live, not foolishly create it like a child would create a sandcastle," which is a view (bear in mind I'm talking about your opinion, not you as a person) that I find to be a complete load of bullcrap. Having a discussion with you is like fighting a war of attrition. It's not about the sharing and reception of ideas that differ from one's own, it's about having stamina to endure what is, inevitably, an endless barrage of nonsensical philo-babble.

And yes, I do indeed discuss what type of literature I like. Discussing that type of thing with other people often leads to new perspectives and appreciation of something I had not realized before. Perhaps that's just not existential enough to warrant your respect.

And if that was it... well, I'd probably keep my mouth shut. Hell, I might even still like you. (That was meant about you, not about your opinions.) But that's not it. You're just not nice. :) The simple fact that you revile my stance on "respect and kindness" is a clear sign that, 1) I'm talking to a brick wall, and 2) those words have little meaning to you, except perhaps on your terms. Perhaps descending from the ivory tower you've secluded yourself in might offer a better perspective.

There is nothing you can say to me that would justify the approach you take to discussion. You preach lofty ideals, which are of little practical use. Show me a philosopher whose work contributes in a significant way to the world today, and I'll show you a hundred that are responsible for keeping him fed, clothed, and safe. You respect one of those men. I respect one-hundred.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Snide post. It's a talent you have, being able to insult someone without actually using invective. Like, "Reply to this with a "greetings,". gg." Very clever. It makes me look silly, without ever really stepping outside the bounds of propriety.

Well, you could always message me on MSN to bring up an issue, you needn't feed the drama queens here.

It's not about the sharing and reception of ideas that differ from one's own, it's about having stamina to endure what is, inevitably, an endless barrage of nonsensical philo-babble.

If that's what you care to belive, it's your choice. I suppose that if we don't go into the texts to discuss the matter, we'll never arrive at a solution. I know you're not a philosopher, not everyone is. I'm sure you have skills I could never hope to have in some areas. In my defence however, it's not BS. I've been here since the beginning of the year, and there were more than a few posters who had knowedge of the subject matter who called me to task. I've replied in kind. There seems to be a monopoly on the OFT regarding intelligent discussion, but there really is no monopoly. Philosophy is like athletics - the more you practise it, the stronger you are. That doesnt make a person better, but it does make them more potent in that given area.

There is nothing you can say to me that would justify the approach you take to discussion. You preach lofty ideals, which are of little practical use.


Nothing practical for your needs at the moment. Years back, I would have certainly said the same. I'm not here to offer a panacea for people, but to help balance things out in arguments, and I believe alot of posters have improved. Bhs was a success to some degree, and I enjoy arguing with people like Sage, etc, even if you or some others think it goes nowhere. Whatever. It's not useless. Just remember the maxim that "Rome wasnt built in a day".
Some say that philosophers are useless cuz their texts just sit on shelves. Yet, it was those texts that create the social systems throught the centuries, and the schools of thinking that make great scientists and engineers possible. It is inexorably practical, but perhaps not "immediately" practical. It is immediately practical however in that it helps people live their lives better in terms of thinking properly.
Admittedly, some of the stuff seems like babble, because I dont have 24/7 to fully outline what I want to say, so I'll offer a small pre-empt and post a text reference or whatever.


Show me a philosopher whose work contributes in a significant way to the world today, and I'll show you a hundred that are responsible for keeping him fed, clothed, and safe. You respect one of those men. I respect one-hundred.

Indeed, all are equal in dignity, no matter who. Philosophers would not be possible without a well established social network - look at the greeks. One thing I want you to understand however is that it's not BS. You're a pracical-minded man, and that's great - you remind me alot of my brother. But, the theoretical and the practical are 2 sides of the same coin. Each draw from the other. Each are necessary as well.

[Maullus]

Greetings,

Not once in that entire post did you deride or insult, even in a subtle or indirect way. You presented an argument from a sincere stance, with compelling reasons to justify it, and I find myself agreeing with much of what you said.

Rome was not, indeed, built in a day.

[Zarlan]

I agree that the attitude change is a great improvement. By not shooting down other people, you really do carry more sway. I am much more inclined to agree with you when you approach someone with less arrogance, but still a firm belief on a topic.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Greetings,

Not once in that entire post did you deride or insult, even in a subtle or indirect way. You presented an argument from a sincere stance, with compelling reasons to justify it, and I find myself agreeing with much of what you said.

Rome was not, indeed, built in a day.

Thanks. I've got a sharp tongue, but I could never hold a grudge.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

I am much more inclined to agree with you when you approach someone with less arrogance, but still a firm belief on a topic.

THats what worries me. It's not arrogance. What worries me is that people believe others only when there's a smile to go with it. Don't you get it?

[Zarlan]

Not so much a smile, as kindness and respect toward that person. To demonstrate respect shows a greater understanding than the words you use, in my oppinion.

[Hydro]

Your grandchildren will be reading them at class.

.... :cheesy:

[Oberon]

AoA needs to change his avatar back to his own sexy self.

[Endora]

Greetings,

Snide post. :) It's a talent you have, being able to insult someone without actually using invective. Like, "Reply to this with a "greetings,". gg." Very clever. It makes me look silly, without ever really stepping outside the bounds of propriety.

You haven't seen me post in any "content-based discussion," because I failed to see the point any longer. You inundate the OT forum with pedantic displays of philosophical jargon. You state that "The most essential thing for a human being to do is to become a philosopher, and make an attempt to discover to the best of your ability what these objective, metaphysical laws are, and "discover" the best way to live your live, not foolishly create it like a child would create a sandcastle," which is a view (bear in mind I'm talking about your opinion, not you as a person) that I find to be a complete load of bullcrap. Having a discussion with you is like fighting a war of attrition. It's not about the sharing and reception of ideas that differ from one's own, it's about having stamina to endure what is, inevitably, an endless barrage of nonsensical philo-babble.

And yes, I do indeed discuss what type of literature I like. Discussing that type of thing with other people often leads to new perspectives and appreciation of something I had not realized before. Perhaps that's just not existential enough to warrant your respect.

And if that was it... well, I'd probably keep my mouth shut. Hell, I might even still like you. (That was meant about you, not about your opinions.) But that's not it. You're just not nice. :) The simple fact that you revile my stance on "respect and kindness" is a clear sign that, 1) I'm talking to a brick wall, and 2) those words have little meaning to you, except perhaps on your terms. Perhaps descending from the ivory tower you've secluded yourself in might offer a better perspective.

There is nothing you can say to me that would justify the approach you take to discussion. You preach lofty ideals, which are of little practical use. Show me a philosopher whose work contributes in a significant way to the world today, and I'll show you a hundred that are responsible for keeping him fed, clothed, and safe. You respect one of those men. I respect one-hundred.

*puts glasses on and reads*
O oo very nice. :thumbsup:

[strychnon]

The ultimate answer to life, the universe and everything is 42. The mystery to be solved is to determine what is the ultimate question. :spy:

Note: this is a reference to cult humor which may give ages away.

[Zarlan]

I read this today:

"The beginning of knowledge is to know oneself to be a sinner."

[Hydro]

Civilization is a useless pile of ****.

[Lazzmodai]

Wow. This degenerated pretty fast.

AoA, I've got to say that of everyone in the forums, I find your posts most interesting. Your words have had me up way past bedtime researching and reading (sometimes starting with Wikipedia, I must confess ;)). But I've got to say, it is so very difficult to discuss, debate or argue with you, because of your tones. I will grant that you know far more than I or probably anyone else here as far as the nature and process of thought go, but really, you're a bit of a pompous *** about it. I've backed down from discussions with you simply because of the tone set forth in your posts. Anyways, I'm very happy to see a change for the better as far as that goes. The open exchange of information is incredible, please let's not mar it with "sharp tongues".

[Endora]

There should be truth in thought, truth in speech, and truth in action. To the man who has realised this truth in perfection, nothing else remains to be known because all knowledge is necessarily included in it.
--Mohandas Gandhi

[Xaf]

There needs to be warning signs in the otf that say "Dont feed AOA's ego." Its so fat it he might choke on it if people keep feeding it.

[Maullus]

Greetings,

Can we not turn this into the "Bash AoA" thread? Discussing something with someone, even a seemingly personal subject like the one I brought up in regard to him, is quite different then sitting here insulting him. I don't think there is any call for that, and it serves no constructive purpose whatsoever. All it will do is antagonize him and prompt a (justifiably) rude response.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Anyways, I'm very happy to see a change for the better as far as that goes. The open exchange of information is incredible, please let's not mar it with "sharp tongues".

I don't lose sleep over how tone is perceived by X or Y poster, but I'll try to be more gentler with you guys in the future.

[Hydro]

You can be harsh with me, I think we are both intelligent people, and if you made a mistake, you can bet your *** I would be all over it. I would assume the same from you...

:buddies:

[AgeOfAbnegation]

You can be harsh with me, I think we are both intelligent people, and if you made a mistake, you can bet your *** I would be all over it. I would assume the same from you...

:buddies:

You're my kind of guy Hydro :). :drink:

[Sage the Mage]

The main thing I've noticed is the decreased use of terms like mental midget and other random insults.

[Lazzmodai]

The main thing I've noticed is the decreased use of terms like mental midget and other random insults.And this is most definitely a good thing.

I guess the point is that I am well aware there are many many things I don't know, and having guys like AoA on this board is an excellent opportunity to learn a lot (no, I'm not being sarcastic). But I should be able to say "hey, I don't know this." without feeling like an idiot. Not that anyone goes out of their way, it just comes off that way sometimes. I think if we all give a little more thought into not just what we're saying but how we're saying it, this place could remain the best damn OTF forum on the intarweb.

[Hydro]

The main thing I've noticed is the decreased use of terms like mental midget and other random insults.

You know you miss mental midget a tiny bit... ;)

[AgeOfAbnegation]

And this is most definitely a good thing.

I guess the point is that I am well aware there are many many things I don't know, and having guys like AoA on this board is an excellent opportunity to learn a lot (no, I'm not being sarcastic). But I should be able to say "hey, I don't know this." without feeling like an idiot. Not that anyone goes out of their way, it just comes off that way sometimes. I think if we all give a little more thought into not just what we're saying but how we're saying it, this place could remain the best damn OTF forum on the intarweb.


Your request is reasonable. It's not as much fun for me though. :hanky:

[The.Jolly.Roger]

Who thinks there is, in all of us, and ingrained instinct of what is universally right and wrong? Or, who thinks that what is right and wrong is a human concept, defined differently by different cultures at certain points in history that we learn from nurturing, depending on where we live, what our culture is, and what point of time we exist in?

[Lazzmodai]

hehehe, I can't wait to see some takes on this one.

I live my life by Karmic Law. It touches all of my actions and descisions, and I find it a much better guide than thou shalt not kill/steal/eat beans on sunday. When you figure on the spirit of your words and actions being put out into a cosmic whole, and that they will always affect you in the same spirit in which you put them out, it's easy to live well, be kind to others, etc.

I've even noticed this in gameplay in MMOs :) which brings up the question.. can karma exist across cyberspace? whoa.. mindbomb.

As for the effects of time/circumstance/culture, I do believe the vast majority of humans (save true amorals, but that's a separate issue) know basic right from wrong at birth. We can fell when we hurt someone. We can feel when something is "bad". This is purely opinion of course, but all of the grey areas of morality come from human complication of life and existence.

[The.Jolly.Roger]

What goes around comes around eh?
That's a good way to stay out of trouble.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

I live my life by Karmic Law.


Law? Or belief? :uhhuh: Substantiate plz.


It touches all of my actions and descisions, and I find it a much better guide than thou shalt not kill/steal/eat beans on sunday.


A matter of personal preference? (Rorty on liberal ironism argues this. His view is that we craft reality for our preference).


When you figure on the spirit of your words and actions being put out into a cosmic whole, and that they will always affect you in the same spirit in which you put them out, it's easy to live well, be kind to others, etc.


Use technical language to substantiate this plz.

[xXxDraGoNxXx1123]

hehe, odd thread. Anyway, I can't speak for everyone but I personally LOVED mental midget, by far one of the funniest things I have ever heard on the internet. Heck, I've since stolen it and use it on rare occasion(only when the poster is very truly being a stubborn and just out for a fight). It's great and I have to thank AoA for bringing it to the forums. :thumbsup: :lol:

[Endora]

hehehe, I can't wait to see some takes on this one.

I live my life by Karmic Law. It touches all of my actions and descisions, and I find it a much better guide than thou shalt not kill/steal/eat beans on sunday. When you figure on the spirit of your words and actions being put out into a cosmic whole, and that they will always affect you in the same spirit in which you put them out, it's easy to live well, be kind to others, etc.

I've even noticed this in gameplay in MMOs :) which brings up the question.. can karma exist across cyberspace? whoa.. mindbomb.

As for the effects of time/circumstance/culture, I do believe the vast majority of humans (save true amorals, but that's a separate issue) know basic right from wrong at birth. We can fell when we hurt someone. We can feel when something is "bad". This is purely opinion of course, but all of the grey areas of morality come from human complication of life and existence.


aah karma...I would believe if you follow this belief that it also exists in cyber space! why not! This seems very much like the teachings of Buddha and positive perception – one must surround themselves with the things they wish to be and they will be it. Pretty much removing all negatives in your life. To be good and all is good around you.

No need to make it technical -- Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction. ~E.F. Schumacker

[SpiritWalker]

Seeking the truth is futile, you will be assimilated, lower your shields and prepare to be boarded.

[Endora]

You would lose alot more then truth if you tried to "board" me ;p

[Lazzmodai]

Law? Or belief? :uhhuh: Substantiate plz. A belief in a law. Karmic law may or may not *actually* exist, I don't know and can't prove it one way or the other. But the belief in the law is all that really matters. The concept of karma is referred to as karmic law, but it's not really actually a law. Just a statement. The energies, positive or negative, that you put out into the universe will make their way back to you. So if you live well, are kind, etc., the universe will show you the same kindness in return.



matter of personal preference? (Rorty on liberal ironism argues this. His view is that we craft reality for our preference).
Yes, of course. It's what works for me. Everyone needs to find their own moral compass, and their own way of keeping it pointed north. This works for me. By no means am I saying the commandments or any other system is flawed, they just don't do it for me. It's a completely personal thing.


Use technical language to substantiate this plz. Err.. it's not a technical thing, man. It's completely personal, and it's possibly totally wrong. But the perception and belief in it substantiates the results, which is a guide to me living as a good, moral person.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

A belief in a law. Karmic law may or may not *actually* exist, I don't know and can't prove it one way or the other. But the belief in the law is all that really matters. The concept of karma is referred to as karmic law, but it's not really actually a law. Just a statement.


I could never take the dangerous approach to life you do. It's called living a lie. Surely, a person has a desire to know their shyt in how they perceive reality, not merely wishful thinking.


The energies, positive or negative, that you put out into the universe will make their way back to you. So if you live well, are kind, etc., the universe will show you the same kindness in return.


Pie-in-the-sky rhetoric. Which is why I asked for a technical explanation. Any text on metaphysics will throw out that drivel like yesterday's sportspage.


Yes, of course. It's what works for me. Everyone needs to find their own moral compass, and their own way of keeping it pointed north. This works for me. By no means am I saying the commandments or any other system is flawed, they just don't do it for me. It's a completely personal thing.


Rather, everyone needs to find an objective moral compass. This prevents moral decay and disillusionment, and persecution. Adherents to the post-modern view of "tolerance" are actually extremists who fail to see that their own "inclusive" views are actually a detraction from the core fundamental values of others. Arbitrary, strictly subjective value norms are, quite frankly, terrifying.


Err.. it's not a technical thing, man. It's completely personal, and it's possibly totally wrong. But the perception and belief in it substantiates the results, which is a guide to me living as a good, moral person.

Yes, it is very technical, "man". Were you coherent when you wrote this? If it's completey personal, and yet is subject to error, why would you base your life on its precipitated tenets? Sorry, it's hard for me to keep my cool when I see this sort of inconsistency.

[Lazzmodai]

I could never take the dangerous approach to life you do. It's called living a lie. Surely, a person has a desire to know their shyt in how they perceive reality, not merely wishful thinking.

I find your response overly analytical. You're talking about belief, faith, and religion. Can you prove the existence of God? No. No one can. Same goes here. I believe in karma, and the tenets of karmic law. *I* believe they are true. My fault here I suppose is in trying too hard not to offend those of other faiths. I personally completely believe in karma and the karmic law, and I live my life by that, and many other beliefs.



Pie-in-the-sky rhetoric. Which is why I asked for a technical explanation. Any text on metaphysics will throw out that drivel like yesterday's sportspage.

You want scientific proof? I cannot give you that. I can give you plenty of subjective points, even personal experiences, but I know that would just be more "rhetoric" to you. Again, we're dealing with an abstract concept. There is no quantitative way of looking at this.



Rather, everyone needs to find an objective moral compass. This prevents moral decay and disillusionment, and persecution. Adherents to the post-modern view of "tolerance" are actually extremists who fail to see that their own "inclusive" views are actually a detraction from the core fundamental values of others. Arbitrary, strictly subjective value norms are, quite frankly, terrifying.


Agreed. I should have phrased it better.


Yes, it is very technical, "man". Were you coherent when you wrote this? If it's completey personal, and yet is subject to error, why would you base your life on its precipitated tenets? Sorry, it's hard for me to keep my cool when I see this sort of inconsistency.

Coherent, yes, but also at the end of a 10 hour work shift. Apologies for the general nature of the post. Let me elaborate..

The *experience* is completely personal. The choice of beliefs is conpletely personal. Karmic law can be personal in its effect, but is universal in its application. It affects every sentient being in the universe.

I've got to say I think you're taking the wrong approach to this. Instead of going at this with your formidable critical thinking skills, stop a moment and imagine a world where everyone lived by karmic law. Everyone tried to never harm or be negating to anything or anyone else. Does that sound appealing?

This is my belief. It is how I guage my behaviour. When I feel angry, or when I'm about to say or do something mean or in negative spirit, I consciously remind myself of karma, and it makes me want to be a good person. To release whatever anger or frustration I have in a positive way. This can't be a bad thing, no matter how erroneous you can reason out my statements to be.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

I find your response overly analytical. You're talking about belief, faith, and religion. Can you prove the existence of God? No. No one can. Same goes here.


Hardly on the same page. While God cannot be "proven", metaphysical proofs can be demonstrated by reason. THis offers us options for belief, which cannot include the doctrine you assent to. As for discussing religion, your form is another manifestation thereof.


I believe in karma, and the tenets of karmic law. *I* believe they are true. My fault here I suppose is in trying too hard not to offend those of other faiths. I personally completely believe in karma and the karmic law, and I live my life by that, and many other beliefs.


If I were you, I'd stop worring about offending others, as if a person's beliefs were accurate, there would be no fear of any detraction therefrom. Nobody on this forum, or anywhere, for that matter, could insult or "offend" that which I hold to be true. THe only thing one could offer is a reasoned argument against it, but in accord with the tenets of reason, this would be impossible.


You want scientific proof? I cannot give you that. I can give you plenty of subjective points, even personal experiences, but I know that would just be more "rhetoric" to you. Again, we're dealing with an abstract concept. There is no quantitative way of looking at this.


No, I didnt ask for a scientific proof, you may have remembered me mentioning that proofs by means of the scientific method were futile when dealing with concepts. However, that does not excuse a person from the use of reason to come to grips with these concepts correctly - there really is no grey area.


The *experience* is completely personal. The choice of beliefs is conpletely personal. Karmic law can be personal in its effect, but is universal in its application. It affects every sentient being in the universe.


I asked you to get into detail about these sweeping statements. Sounds like a new-age guru.


I've got to say I think you're taking the wrong approach to this. Instead of going at this with your formidable critical thinking skills, stop a moment and imagine a world where everyone lived by karmic law. Everyone tried to never harm or be negating to anything or anyone else. Does that sound appealing?


This is the exact replica of what is written in the text I'm currently demolishing for my thesis. Richard Rorty's "contingency, Irony, and Solidarity". I'd encourage you to pick up a copy. He encourages readers to simply create truth, by means of what is appealing to us. Frankly, to subject objective reality to the artifices of imagination is terrifying. A person needs to have his/her beliefs grounded in reality. Imagination is great for poetry, but not for philosophy. Further problems arise when new philosophies arise from this model, and create social systems. Then, all suffer because the tenets of a given model arent representative of objective reality, but based on an ideal.


This is my belief. It is how I guage my behaviour. When I feel angry, or when I'm about to say or do something mean or in negative spirit, I consciously remind myself of karma, and it makes me want to be a good person. To release whatever anger or frustration I have in a positive way. This can't be a bad thing, no matter how erroneous you can reason out my statements to be.

Well ok, if that's how you live, so be it. For my part, I would tread cautiously as you're precipitating an ethical problematic. By choosing to live by which you cannot articulate or understand, you're walking blindly. That is not to say we throw faith out the window, but it is to say that by our use of reason and other critical faculties, we discover the correct form of this faith. To do otherwise is just to rely on bandaid solutions.

I'll continue this later if u wish - I'll be out of town for a while.

[Oberon]

Nobody on this forum, or anywhere, for that matter, could insult or "offend" that which I hold to be true. THe only thing one could offer is a reasoned argument against it, but in accord with the tenets of reason, this would be impossible.

Correct me if I've misinferred your statement but are you saying it would be impossible for anyone to offer a reasoned argument against your positions?

[Endora]

Philosophy, n. A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing :lol:

[Hydro]

Philosophy, n. A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing :lol:

Agreeed, and AoA is the best at getting nowhere fast ;)

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Correct me if I've misinferred your statement but are you saying it would be impossible for anyone to offer a reasoned argument against your positions?

No. Reason follows the same structure, regardless of the voice of it. It's not about personal edification, but being consistent, that's all. (ref. Kant's critique of pure reason, intro.)

Hydro and company - That's "still a philosophy". Please refrain from lame comments such as that - it's not my fault if you cannot follow me. Try asking for more explanation if needed.

[Endora]

No. Reason follows the same structure, regardless of the voice of it. It's not about personal edification, but being consistent, that's all. (ref. Kant's critique of pure reason, intro.)

Hydro and company - That's "still a philosophy". Please refrain from lame comments such as that - it's not my fault if you cannot follow me. Try asking for more explanation if needed.

Sweetie I follow you. Until you have an orginal thought in your apparently limited intellect which continuely parrots from text books I dont really need an explanation for basic established ideas.
:flip:

[Graav Wolfsong]

Oh, this could be good. :lol:

[xXxDraGoNxXx1123]

*grabs some popcorn*

*sits on the couch to watch the show*

[Eiger]

Been there, done that.

*farts and leaves*

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Sweetie I follow you. Until you have an orginal thought in your apparently limited intellect which continuely parrots from text books I dont really need an explanation for basic established ideas.
:flip:

heh.. What is "original thought"? (make it original plz)

[Endora]

heh.. What is "original thought"? (make it original plz)


What i am thinking about you right now.

[xXxDraGoNxXx1123]

What i am thinking about you right now.

Heh, actually I think AoA has you there, whatever it is, I'm sure it isn't original.

Bah, this show isn't as good as I thought it would be.

*throws popcorn in trash*

*goes back to playing WoW*

[Maullus]

Greetings,

Been there, done that.

*farts and leaves*

:lol:
:lol:
*dies*

I'm sorry, I know this is spammage, but that just killed me. That was the Coup de Gras.

[Endora]

Heh, actually I think AoA has you there, whatever it is, I'm sure it isn't original.

Bah, this show isn't as good as I thought it would be.

*throws popcorn in trash*

*goes back to playing WoW*

Well no one told you to wait for a verbal battle. *shoos him along* I mean I would actually have to care about the subject and the person would need to hold some merit.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

What i am thinking about you right now.

Well if its just going to be about trolling and insults, you can take it elsewhere.

[Endora]

Well if its just going to be about trolling and insults, you can take it elsewhere.

Random thought.
How do "you" generate original thought?
How do you break from the bonds of derivative consciousness? The vast majority of the contents of our mind is a smorgasbord of random thoughts heard from others throughout our lifetime.
from randomness emerges the new...so i say once again....
What i am thinking about you now.

[Pietoro]

I am a Christian, so my absolute truth is the Bible

Actually, I'm also a Christian, but I disagree w/that view, for the following reasoning:

Some will point to the Bible as the "proof" of a religious/social/political belief, as though it simply being in the Bible proves that it is true. This is above and beyond how said passage is to be interpreted within the context of Scripture.

The fact is that this is not the case. The Bible has no authority unto itself, and is in itself proof of nothing. "The Bible said it" should not be considered sufficient rationale for anyone, and non-Christians are right not to let that stand in place of a rationale.

I am, as I have stated often, a firm believer that things are written in the Bible for a reason and that sins are sins for a reason... They are not a cleverly devised set of rules we're supposed to follow just because God said we're supposed to follow them and threatened us with Hell if we didn't. They are written because they offer tangible, real, practical principles for how we are to relate to God, others and Creation with tangible, real consequences. Sins are not sins "just cuz", but because they alienate us in actual, demonstratable ways from God, others and Creation. They are not true because they are in the Bible: they are in the Bible because they are true.

As Christians, it is important that we remember this; God is the authority, not Scripture. Love is the guiding principle, not a cleverly devised set of rules. The extent to which Scripture has authority is the extent to which God inspired the writers of it to craft an accurate, demonstratable, real, practical picture of the world and each other and God, of our relationships with them and of our spiritual health. We uphold the Bible as uniquely authoritative for our lives as Christians because we we first believed.

I just think its dangerous to put your entire idea of Truth soley on what's written in the Bible... because there are many things the Bible doesn't address, and many situations in life are unique and can't easily be 'looked up' as how to regard them. The Bible is a guide for how we should live and treat others, but its not the 'end all be all' of our faith.

[Xaf]

Id say every thought is original, just like every atom is slightly different, every thought would be too. You might be thinking relatively the same thing as someone else once thought, but it would be slightly different.

[Cithrodar]

Truth is an abstract painting. Everybody gazes at the painting forever and rarely see's what the last person saw. One man sees a Sailboat, the other see's a horse....However both are right. :evil:

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Random thought.
How do "you" generate original thought?
How do you break from the bonds of derivative consciousness? The vast majority of the contents of our mind is a smorgasbord of random thoughts heard from others throughout our lifetime.
from randomness emerges the new...so i say once again....
What i am thinking about you now.

Well I'm challenging you to take that random smorgasboard and discover its inherent structure. Even chaos is a structure, or it could not exist. This is where "parroting texts" comes in handy (in this case, you can start with a bite-size morsel => Kant's "on a newly arisen superior tone in philosophy" - small, but it gets to the point). Simply going with the stream of conciousness will get you no further than poetry. After discovering critical thinking more perfectly, you'll soon realize the error you promulgated earlier in this thread by assenting to relativism.

[Endora]

Well I'm challenging you to take that random smorgasboard and discover its inherent structure. Even chaos is a structure, or it could not exist. This is where "parroting texts" comes in handy (in this case, you can start with a bite-size morsel => Kant's "on a newly arisen superior tone in philosophy" - small, but it gets to the point). Simply going with the stream of conciousness will get you no further than poetry. After discovering critical thinking more perfectly, you'll soon realize the error you promulgated earlier in this thread by assenting to relativism.


You hold to a unyielding "rationalist" view. So anything i say wont really matter will it? The basics tenets of epistemology is that you not only examine the knowledge but more importantly how you come to knowledge--knowledge is justified true belief!
So i waste my time here. Which finally brings me to the reason of my response you answered my questions like a poor politian and spouted more text in the process.

"The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind."- camus

[AgeOfAbnegation]

You hold to a unyielding "rationalist" view.


Nothing could be further from the truth. No doubt you think you know the ropes after fumbling through an intro to philosophy class :p.. If you want to use quotes, a "rationalist" view holds that reality is to be described in terms of "per se" concepts like math, geometry etc, with little or no reference to the empirical elements to glean the beginning of knowledge. Either your above comment stems from ignorance, or laziness on your part to read other threads, which clearly demonstrate my position. At least ignorance would be excusable, after claiming knowledge of where I stand.


So anything i say wont really matter will it?


If not substantiated with anything other than rhetoric, no.


The basics tenets of epistemology is that you not only examine the knowledge but more importantly how you come to knowledge--knowledge is justified true belief!


Which leads me to my inquiry into where you get yours.. For a coherentist model of epistemology to be even remotely accurate, try educating yourself a bit more thoroughly before tripping over your own statements.


you answered my questions like a poor politian and spouted more text in the process.
"The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind."- camus

...? :scratch:

[Endora]

whatever dude *rolls eyes*

[Galron Kincaid]

Duuuuude! Another bio-teo-philosophical thread! AoA and Andarcel must be getting their monthly erection by now. :lol: :clap:


My absolute truth?

"I believe in sex and death"

-someguy

[Endora]

"I believe in sex and death"

-someguy

Do they follow that order? Like a black widow spider?
:surprise:

[Galron Kincaid]

Not always.... :eek:

[Endora]

Not always.... :eek:


*feigns a smile and slowly backs out of the post*

[AgeOfAbnegation]

My absolute truth?

"I believe in sex and death"

-someguy

It's a start ^^.

[Galron Kincaid]

It's a start ^^.


If you can tell me who said that sentence i quoted, you win a kiss :lady:

[Endora]

OOO oooo Man love! *grabs a chair to watch*

[AgeOfAbnegation]

If you can tell me who said that sentence i quoted, you win a kiss :lady:

Haven't the foggiest.. Then again, the reward for remembering doesn't lend itself well :cheezy:..

[Endora]

Duuuuude! Another bio-teo-philosophical thread! AoA and Andarcel must be getting their monthly erection by now. :lol: :clap:


My absolute truth?

"I believe in sex and death"

-someguy

Are you quoting "sleeper"?

[HR_Hellfire]

Nice

Ok, I'm going to steal from my father here. The truth is fleeting, nothing more. Truth is reality as you see it and call it at the time based off personal knowledge, secondhand sources and opinion. The world changes, thats how it goes, so although I could say "The war in Iraq was a waste because there were no weapons." They could, pottentially, find them tomorrow. Does this make what I said a lie? No, It means that from what I knew at the time it was the truth (aside from the 'war in Iraq was a waste' part, which is just opinion). So if what I said was the truth, but no longer correct, the truth must be something palable, fluid and thus fleeting.

Just what I believe. Makes sence to me.
~HR_HELLFIRE

[Galron Kincaid]

Are you quoting "sleeper"?


Yes! :thumbsup:


*KISS WITH TONGUE*

[Endora]

Yes! :thumbsup:


*KISS WITH TONGUE*


ewww boy kiss!! yuck yuck ;p *kicks stone and sulks* i was hoping you would kiss AoA he could use a good aggressive tongue...
:evil:

[Galron Kincaid]

The only thing AoA could really use is a healthy dose of innocent, un-sophisticated books. Comics and/or novels.

I think reading only Kant ends up doing things to you :)

[Graav Wolfsong]

Nice

Ok, I'm going to steal from my father here. The truth is fleeting, nothing more. Truth is reality as you see it and call it at the time based off personal knowledge, secondhand sources and opinion. The world changes, thats how it goes, so although I could say "The war in Iraq was a waste because there were no weapons." They could, pottentially, find them tomorrow. Does this make what I said a lie? No, It means that from what I knew at the time it was the truth (aside from the 'war in Iraq was a waste' part, which is just opinion). So if what I said was the truth, but no longer correct, the truth must be something palable, fluid and thus fleeting.

Just what I believe. Makes sence to me.
~HR_HELLFIRE

Well put. I wasnt going to say anything in this thread as we've been through this a couple of times before but that pretty much sums up my point of view as well.

Truth is relative. An ultimate truth is not something the human mind can discover as everything goes through perception, knowledge and beliefs and these things are different from person to person.

At least that is my truth.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Truth is relative. An ultimate truth is not something the human mind can discover as everything goes through perception, knowledge and beliefs and these things are different from person to person.


Would you admit that this "ultimate truth" is a reality, even though it cannot be completely grasped by the human being?

[Endora]

Would you admit that this "ultimate truth" is a reality, even though it cannot be completely grasped by the human being?

*whispers over to Graav* Dont admit to anything without your lawyer present....

[AgeOfAbnegation]

He needs no lawyer when I'm his judge, jury, and executioner ^^ :p.

[Galron Kincaid]

No seriously, i too think that the absolute truth cannot possibly be reached by a human.

Exactly because he's human. And a human point of view.... is a limitation. And limitations definitely do not agree with the "absolute".


The very concepts of "Absolute" and "Truth" are human.

Now, forgive me for not remembering his name, but an ancient philosopher once said that "the world is full of gods".

And as humans always had deities that looked, and behaved, like human persons (as much as dogs and cats would have deities that look and act like dogs and cats).
That cannot be the truth.

(and no, AoA plz stand down. I'm not trying to mock god this time).


We have religions of humanity, we have myths of humanity, story of humanity, human spirit.

In order to reach Truth (not "absolute". Not even "the" at all), we should trascend our human status. And this does not happen even by death.
If there's actually a soul inside us.... that would still be human.

[Endora]

He needs no lawyer when I'm his judge, jury, and executioner ^^ :p.


You make me ache for PVP :evil:

[Endora]

No seriously, i too think that the absolute truth cannot possibly be reached by a human.

Exactly because he's human. And a human point of view.... is a limitation. And limitations definitely do not agree with the "absolute".


The very concepts of "Absolute" and "Truth" are human.

Now, forgive me for not remembering his name, but an ancient philosopher once said that "the world is full of gods".

And as humans always had deities that looked, and behaved, like human persons (as much as dogs and cats would have deities that look and act like dogs and cats).
That cannot be the truth.

(and no, AoA plz stand down. I'm not trying to mock god this time).


We have religions of humanity, we have myths of humanity, story of humanity, human spirit.

In order to reach Truth (not "absolute". Not even "the" at all), we should trascend our human status. And this does not happen even by death.
If there's actually a soul inside us.... that would still be human.


OOoo i like that--very nice!

[Graav Wolfsong]

Would you admit that this "ultimate truth" is a reality, even though it cannot be completely grasped by the human being?

Yes I believe there would have to be a 'true reality' of some sort. But like Galron said, it cant be defined by human terms.


*whispers over to Graav* Dont admit to anything without your lawyer present....

If there was a lawier present he would be tied up in my trunk and on his way to get a brand new pair of concrete shoes before he takes a nice relaxing swim. So I think it might be better for all concerned if the lawiers stay away from this one. :)

[AgeOfAbnegation]

No seriously, i too think that the absolute truth cannot possibly be reached by a human.

Exactly because he's human. And a human point of view.... is a limitation. And limitations definitely do not agree with the "absolute".


Define absolute, and its relationship to the human.


The very concepts of "Absolute" and "Truth" are human.


Human language, transcendental concept (universal).


Now, forgive me for not remembering his name, but an ancient philosopher once said that "the world is full of gods".


Pre-socratics. Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, etc - anyone before Parmenides.


And as humans always had deities that looked, and behaved, like human persons (as much as dogs and cats would have deities that look and act like dogs and cats).
That cannot be the truth.

(and no, AoA plz stand down. I'm not trying to mock god this time).


You couldn't mock God. Why can't pantheism be truth?


We have religions of humanity, we have myths of humanity, story of humanity, human spirit.

In order to reach Truth (not "absolute". Not even "the" at all), we should trascend our human status. And this does not happen even by death.
If there's actually a soul inside us.... that would still be human.

Good, but what can be said of the temporal world, the human being, and the laws of the cosmos and the spirit?

[AgeOfAbnegation]

You make me ache for PVP :evil:

Start/Join a Horde PvP guild on my server, and train well.

[Endora]

Start/Join a Horde PvP guild on my server, and train well.

*sneers* the nasty heathen horde clan are you?...figures*eyes slanted low*.... my goal is to wipe you and your kind off this world and now i will relish each and everyone i take *licks dagger* and think of you.


teehehe i love my role play
:uhhuh:

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Lol, ILM is an alliance guild. THat's why I asked you to play a horde character :p.

[Endora]

DAMN! i was really going to work up a nice fanatic titillation over this!

[Galron Kincaid]

The relation between the concept of "absolute" and the human being?

If that's what you meant, then it's a human creation.

Man becomes aware of the limited (physical) state of his kind and the world they live on. And by doing so, he automatically conceives the existence of a higher status: bondless, unborn and ethernal, wich is not "a" god, nor "God", but "the" god.

This god is everything, but you see? I'm still referring to it as "god". Words will always be inadequate.


Gods always looked like humans because they were the answer to unknown events: the unknown is humanity's worst fear, and i think our ancestors were far more comfortable with "one of their kind" controlling such events (before the majority of them got explained by science).


I'm not saying that pantheism itself can't be truth. It fully can.

But a human pantheism, Zeus & co being the best example, can't be truth because.... they're human.
Zeus and Era constantly argue, Ares and Athena hate each other.... Hell, they can even be wounded by mortals (Diomedes nailing Aphrodites); earthly businesses can be kept from their sight; and mortals themselves may as well become gods (Psiche).

And most importantly: those "gods" are NOT unborn!


The Christian god is more credible in this sense. Almighty, all-knowing, rarely depicted as a man-figure (but always man-like). I think he's the closest thing to the concept of "absolute" we can imagine.


Now allow me to disgress a little.... the Absolute Truth we're talking about.... is the truth about what?

"why does the universe exist". Is that right? I can't imagine a more crucial question.... but that's probably because i'm human :)

[AgeOfAbnegation]

DAMN! i was really going to work up a nice fanatic titillation over this!

Well, you put a smile on my face :). I like RP as well.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

The relation between the concept of "absolute" and the human being?

If that's what you meant, then it's a human creation.

Man becomes aware of the limited (physical) state of his kind and the world they live on. And by doing so, he automatically conceives the existence of a higher status: bondless, unborn and ethernal, wich is not "a" god, nor "God", but "the" god.


Transcendental concepts are not created, but discovered. What we lack draws out to that which fills it.


This god is everything, but you see? I'm still referring to it as "god". Words will always be inadequate.


See as in ocular? No. Senses are made for interaction with the physical world.


Gods always looked like humans because they were the answer to unknown events: the unknown is humanity's worst fear, and i think our ancestors were far more comfortable with "one of their kind" controlling such events (before the majority of them got explained by science).


I'm not saying that pantheism itself can't be truth. It fully can.


Can't, sry. If there were many gods of equal power, they would be the same God. If unequal power, there would be one at the top of the hierarchy. There is only one perfection.


But a human pantheism, Zeus & co being the best example, can't be truth because.... they're human.
Zeus and Era constantly argue, Ares and Athena hate each other.... Hell, they can even be wounded by mortals (Diomedes nailing Aphrodites); earthly businesses can be kept from their sight; and mortals themselves may as well become gods (Psiche).

And most importantly: those "gods" are NOT unborn!


The Christian god is more credible in this sense. Almighty, all-knowing, rarely depicted as a man-figure (but always man-like). I think he's the closest thing to the concept of "absolute" we can imagine.


Now allow me to disgress a little.... the Absolute Truth we're talking about.... is the truth about what?


Don't think it has to be about any-thing really, but just that it "is", conceptually.

[Endora]

Well, you put a smile on my face :). I like RP as well.


I sincerely hope your smile has caused no lasting pain.... :uhhuh:

Im pretty sure you shall be safe from me on a server--I have assumed you are a european.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

I sincerely hope your smile has caused no lasting pain.... :uhhuh:


Haha, yes, since I never smile, my facial muscles are aching.


Im pretty sure you shall be safe from me on a server--I have assumed you are a european.

Why do you assume I'm a european?

[Endora]

[QUOTE]Haha, yes, since I never smile, my facial muscles are aching.

Im strangely delighted to know i made you ach....and i feel slightly dirty somehow....



Why do you assume I'm a european?

Am i wrong?

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Im strangely delighted to know i made you ach....and i feel slightly dirty somehow....


Well hey, if you're a woman between the ages of 21-30.. ;)


Am i wrong?

Yep. You still didn't answer why you thought I was european.

[Endora]

[QUOTE]Well hey, if you're a woman between the ages of 21-30.. ;)

Quite possibly...your margin is wide open. I image one could easily fit inside it.


Yep. You still didn't answer why you thought I was european.

and there is the chance i might never answer--maybe you should ponder why you want to know.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Ahh, well thx anyway ^^.

[TheUnchosen]

Fantastic thread.

"Truth"?
Well the way I see this thread going, you're going to need to define the word "truth" before we can even have a good discussion. Everyone seems to have their own slightly different concepts of "truth"..If we can all agree on what IS the definition of "truth", it would make discussions more smooth.

BUT

I'll stick my head on the chopping board and attempt to answer the question.
It maybe seem extremely crude and kinda childish but I always seem to see these type of questions answered by including the topic word within the answer eg:

The meaning of life is to find meaning.
The one thing that never changes is change itself.
I am because I think I am (semi quote..dunno the exact wording).

so following the same train of thought....

The one universal truth is there is no universal truth.

:teeth:

I know that statement will probably end up getting ripped to shreds but I'm sure it will satisfy the majority of people as an answer (Maybe not the OTF Forum but meh..).

I do know at my current stage in life, the following I consider "true":

1) What goes around, comes around.

2) Purpose of life is to find purpose.

3) Mountain Dew is the drink of gods.

4) Sex is good...only with women. (I refuse to be disproven...sheep or no sheep)

5) No one does anything because they think it's wrong, they do it because they think it's right.

They aren't THE universal truths but they are MY universal truths.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Are you from the D2 forums?

I'm lazy today, so I'll just pick apart one small thing.

I am because I think I am (semi quote..dunno the exact wording).

Descartes. "I think therefore I am".. THat would place subjective value on objective reality.

[TheUnchosen]

Yup!
Definitely from the D2 Forums but I'm planning to migrate to WoW so I've started early and begun posting here.

Well I was expecting a massacre of my post but you pick apart my self confessed jumbling of Descartes quote....I've seriously overestimated you, AgeOfAbnegation.

Maybe a bit of this will ruffle your feathers....

*Picks up a stick and pokes AoA*

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Yup!
Definitely from the D2 Forums but I'm planning to migrate to WoW so I've started early and begun posting here.

Well I was expecting a massacre of my post but you pick apart my self confessed jumbling of Descartes quote....I've seriously overestimated you, AgeOfAbnegation.

Maybe a bit of this will ruffle your feathers....

*Picks up a stick and pokes AoA*

Heh, you've no doubt seen me around here before then, cuz I usually do massacre posts. But I said I'm lazy today, which I am - its friday and I got 3 hrs sleep last nite from playing WoW, and having to sleepwalk to work this morning. When the servers go down, I may be bored and/or agitated enough to provide a wholesale slaughter.

[TykeMörbult]

Descartes.

To tired to post my thoughts on this so here is a little unnessacary info;
Descartes died in Stockholm... the poor bastard :hanky: