Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

gecko · Mar 8, 2004, 08:07 pm

are you saying there are more than one correct paths in life?

Mar 8, 2004, 09:32 pm

I am allowing that in fact there could be different paths for different individuals. This certainly appears to be supported by what we know of individuals.

This does not necessitate determinism, which is but one of the points I was making.

Impenitent · Mar 9, 2004, 01:31 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,)
And I ask again upon what, besides your presumptions of omniscience, do you base this groundless claim which denies that paths CAN IN FACT EXIST AND NOT BE ONE PATH.

And as for reading carefully, how about you read YOUR OWN WORDS: <blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
there is no path... they don't know what to do with their free will... if they knew what "to do", they'd do the same thing "to do"...
<hr size="1" /></blockquote><hr size="1" /></blockquote>

:rolleyes: nice try, but I am not presuming anything...

there is no path, they do what they do because they do, not because of some imagined path

:rolleyes: upon what do you base your groundless claim which insists that different paths CAN IN FACT EXIST AND BE ONE PATH.

Mar 9, 2004, 09:26 am

Imp,

The assumption that if there are paths that individuals follow then everyone must make identical choices and follow the exact same paths, is YOURS not mine.

I pointed out that in fact people follow many different paths, and asked for you to clarify your assumption that there could not be many different paths.

Look to the world. People do in fact walk many paths, make many different choices.

BTW since you are the one insisting on ONLY ONE POSSIBILITY, that NOTHING ELSE COULD POSSIBLY HOLD TRUE, the burden of proof that no other possibilities exist lay squarely upon your shoulders. I have simply allowed that the possibilities exist, and asked for something to support this assumption of yours that NOTHING but your view alone is or ever could be true.

Impenitent · Mar 10, 2004, 02:40 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,)
Imp,

The assumption that if there are paths that individuals follow then everyone must make identical choices and follow the exact same paths, is YOURS not mine.

:rolleyes: IF there was one path IF IF IF IF... I never said there WAS

I pointed out that in fact people follow many different paths, and asked for you to clarify your assumption that there could not be many different paths.

:rolleyes: it was your MISREADING

Look to the world. People do in fact walk many paths, make many different choices.

:rolleyes: I never said they didn't, in fact I said exactly the opposite... that because of the DIFFERENT PATHS people choose, there is no ONE path...

BTW since you are the one insisting on ONLY ONE POSSIBILITY, that NOTHING ELSE COULD POSSIBLY HOLD TRUE, the burden of proof that no other possibilities exist lay squarely upon your shoulders.

:rolleyes: I never claimed this

I have simply allowed that the possibilities exist, and asked for something to support this assumption of yours that NOTHING but your view alone is or ever could be true.

:rolleyes: that is YOUR ASSUMPTION, NOT mine...
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Mar 10, 2004, 09:38 am

Well at least you changed positions, though I was actually curious as to why you took the position to begin with. All I could do was point to your actual words, which you simply deny now, so I see no way to progress at this point.

Impenitent · Mar 10, 2004, 02:49 pm

I changed NOTHING...

you finally READ what I said...

deny the words that remain as they were on the other pages? nice try... it wasn't my words but your error in misreading my words...

Mia · Mar 11, 2004, 04:55 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,)
Mia,

Once again I must point out that you have maintained the false accusation that I have offered you ANY insult:

<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

And I adknowledged that. I corrected myself to say that it was 2 others, not you, who had offered the insults.

Whoever said I'm diagreeing with "everyone else" - last time I checked, I never met a person in my life who thinks the way you do. Does this mean you are wrong? Not necessarily. But I don't think that my opinions (which I clearly stated were OPINIONS) about needing some form of government, regulation, and redistribution are pretty widely held. I don't think it can be remotely true I'm going against the grain on this.

Mia · Mar 11, 2004, 04:59 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (roxdog,)
You guys are right. People are stupid. Let's get George Bush to lead us into the light.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Yeah, he's a real beacon, isn't he?

Mar 11, 2004, 09:57 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Whoever said I'm diagreeing with "everyone else" - last time I checked, I never met a person in my life who thinks the way you do. Does this mean you are wrong? Not necessarily. But I don't think that my opinions (which I clearly stated were OPINIONS) about needing some form of government, regulation, and redistribution are pretty widely held. I don't think it can be remotely true I'm going against the grain on this.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Truth is not a popularity contest.

It was once similarly assumed that the earth was flat... however that did not make it so. It was once held that blacks were inferior and less than human but that did not make it so. It was once held that Jews were all evil, but that did not make it so.

Truth is not a popularity contest.

LiveAndLetLive · Mar 11, 2004, 10:46 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,)

Truth is not a popularity contest.

It was once similarly assumed that the earth was flat... however that did not make it so. It was once held that blacks were inferior and less than human but that did not make it so. It was once held that Jews were all evil, but that did not make it so.

Truth is not a popularity contest.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Surely this is so. But, if you stumble onto (or rigorously find) the Truth, the equally important question is, What does one DO with the Truth?

* Could mount a soapbox, spouting unvarnished Truth, and possibly curse those who don't see it.
* Could keep your own counsel, smirking quietly in a cave.
* Could try to find a few fellow travelers, and start a Truth Cabal.
* Could speak the Truth always, when called, but to be mindful that, as Jack N. said in A FEW GOOD MEN, "you can't handle the truth." That's most of humanity at the moment.

That's why strategy, motive and approach are just as important as the Truth, as I see it.

LALL

Mar 11, 2004, 10:50 am

Truth (capitalized only because it starts the sentence) is merely a tool for progress. It is not good, it is not evil, it simply is. I cannot see any progress in the approachs you offer as possibility (surely this was not intended to be a complete list). It seems to me that the primary purpose of knowledge (proven truth) is to move closer to understanding and truth.

Mia · Mar 11, 2004, 03:27 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,)

Truth is not a popularity contest.

It was once similarly assumed that the earth was flat... however that did not make it so. It was once held that blacks were inferior and less than human but that did not make it so. It was once held that Jews were all evil, but that did not make it so.

Truth is not a popularity contest.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

One more time, I specifically said this does not mean "most people" are necessarily right. I was responding to your assertion that I'm disagreeing with "everyone" in the opinion that I hold.

LiveAndLetLive · Mar 11, 2004, 04:12 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,)
Truth (capitalized only because it starts the sentence) is merely a tool for progress. It is not good, it is not evil, it simply is. I cannot see any progress in the approachs you offer as possibility (surely this was not intended to be a complete list). It seems to me that the primary purpose of knowledge (proven truth) is to move closer to understanding and truth.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Light, I think you're onto something, but I'd put it differently, in some ways, the other way 'round.

I think there is "Truth," or "Truths." The self-evident ones are that we have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I totally agree that the state of affairs currently is not good or evil, it simply is. But the current state of affairs are NOT in alignment with the aforementioned Truths, not even close. That is, we don't have Liberty.

Yes, absolutely, let's move closer to Liberty. No, it's not an exhaustive list I posted earlier. How to do so, is the point of this thread that I started. Support moves in toward Truth, do not support moves away from it.

So, I'm chagrined that so many who recognize Truth are so darned impatient. By advocating things like "anarcho-capitalism," which admittedly feels awfully "ballsy," my "fellow travelers" are purposely sitting on the sidelines, on the fringe. Seems not the best use of resources to this observer.

Impenitent · Mar 11, 2004, 04:19 pm

truth is a lie in religious clothing...

god is the truth...

this political system is the truth...

this theory is the truth...

this physics is the truth...

this drug is the truth...

LiveAndLetLive · Mar 11, 2004, 05:01 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
truth is a lie in religious clothing...

god is the truth...

this political system is the truth...

this theory is the truth...

this physics is the truth...

this drug is the truth...<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Imp,
I see, so you say there ARE no Truths, eh? Well, then, I'd say, consider the alternative. Without Truth, then all is false, is that what you're saying?

If, on the other hand, you're saying that Truth must be found by each on his or her own, there we agree.

Mar 11, 2004, 06:56 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
I think there is "Truth," or "Truths." The self-evident ones are that we have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

But better than appealing to the self evident nature of these rights (Truth seems inapplicable) we can examine moral judgements across time and culture and find objective evidence of these rights. Furthermore we can deduce them from the nature of moral agents: rationality, vulnerability, and knowledge.

In your refutation of Imp you left off that his claims are necessarily self defeating.. for if they are true, then they cannot be true because the claims do not allow for anything to be true..

However the idea you seem to be forwarding at the end, that truth is purely subjective necessarily with no connection or correspondence to reality, renders "truth" meaningless.

LiveAndLetLive · Mar 11, 2004, 11:05 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,)

But better than appealing to the self evident nature of these rights (Truth seems inapplicable) we can examine moral judgements across time and culture and find objective evidence of these rights. Furthermore we can deduce them from the nature of moral agents: rationality, vulnerability, and knowledge.

In your refutation of Imp you left off that his claims are necessarily self defeating.. for if they are true, then they cannot be true because the claims do not allow for anything to be true..

However the idea you seem to be forwarding at the end, that truth is purely subjective necessarily with no connection or correspondence to reality, renders "truth" meaningless.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
By "objective evidence," you mean things like freer societies are more affluent -- top to bottom -- than unfree ones, eh? Sure, that's true. But it's not enough for me. Jefferson got it right...we hold these truths to be self evident! He cut through all the crap, did he.

Yes, Imp stepped in it!

Truth is objective, but must be recognized subjectively. I'll do my level best to convince you of Truth, but it's on you to agree. I prefer to recognize reality, but, it appears, most aren't there just yet.

Mar 11, 2004, 11:54 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
By "objective evidence," you mean things like freer societies are more affluent -- top to bottom -- than unfree ones, eh?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Was I somehow unclear??
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
we can examine moral judgements across time and culture and find objective evidence of these rights. Furthermore we can deduce them from the nature of moral agents: rationality, vulnerability, and knowledge.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Nothing in this necessitates any characteristic of any society.

As long as one holds onto the unfounded belief that truth is subjective, or that it is disconnected from reality, then such a person will forever remain unware of reality necessarily.

Impenitent · Mar 12, 2004, 03:10 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (LiveAndLetLive,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
truth is a lie in religious clothing...

god is the truth...

this political system is the truth...

this theory is the truth...

this physics is the truth...

this drug is the truth...<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Imp,
I see, so you say there ARE no Truths, eh? Well, then, I'd say, consider the alternative. Without Truth, then all is false, is that what you're saying?

If, on the other hand, you're saying that Truth must be found by each on his or her own, there we agree.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

there is no Truth... there is truth only as correspondence between language and empirical events... but even empirical events are suspect...

looking for Truth is a waste of time... creating Truth on the other hand...

Mar 9, 2004, 01:31 am	#63 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,) And I ask again upon what, besides your presumptions of omniscience, do you base this groundless claim which denies that paths CAN IN FACT EXIST AND NOT BE ONE PATH. And as for reading carefully, how about you read YOUR OWN WORDS: </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by there is no path... they don't know what to do with their free will... if they knew what "to do", they'd do the same thing "to do"... <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'><hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> :rolleyes: nice try, but I am not presuming anything... there is no path, they do what they do because they do, not because of some imagined path :rolleyes: upon what do you base your groundless claim which insists that different paths CAN IN FACT EXIST AND BE ONE PATH. "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Mar 10, 2004, 02:40 am	#65 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,) Imp, The assumption that if there are paths that individuals follow then everyone must make identical choices and follow the exact same paths, is YOURS not mine. :rolleyes: IF there was one path IF IF IF IF... I never said there WAS I pointed out that in fact people follow many different paths, and asked for you to clarify your assumption that there could not be many different paths. :rolleyes: it was your MISREADING Look to the world. People do in fact walk many paths, make many different choices. :rolleyes: I never said they didn't, in fact I said exactly the opposite... that because of the DIFFERENT PATHS people choose, there is no ONE path... BTW since you are the one insisting on ONLY ONE POSSIBILITY, that NOTHING ELSE COULD POSSIBLY HOLD TRUE, the burden of proof that no other possibilities exist lay squarely upon your shoulders. :rolleyes: I never claimed this I have simply allowed that the possibilities exist, and asked for something to support this assumption of yours that NOTHING but your view alone is or ever could be true. :rolleyes: that is YOUR ASSUMPTION, NOT mine... <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Mar 10, 2004, 02:49 pm	#67 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	I changed NOTHING... you finally READ what I said... deny the words that remain as they were on the other pages? nice try... it wasn't my words but your error in misreading my words... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Mar 11, 2004, 04:55 am	#68 (permalink) (top)
Mia Retired Posts: 7,312	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,) Mia, Once again I must point out that you have maintained the false accusation that I have offered you ANY insult: <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> And I adknowledged that. I corrected myself to say that it was 2 others, not you, who had offered the insults. Whoever said I'm diagreeing with "everyone else" - last time I checked, I never met a person in my life who thinks the way you do. Does this mean you are wrong? Not necessarily. But I don't think that my opinions (which I clearly stated were OPINIONS) about needing some form of government, regulation, and redistribution are pretty widely held. I don't think it can be remotely true I'm going against the grain on this. "...with like-minded people one cannot discuss. With like-minded people one can only participate in a church service, and you know how I feel about church services." Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Mar 11, 2004, 04:59 am	#69 (permalink) (top)
Mia Retired Posts: 7,312	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (roxdog,) You guys are right. People are stupid. Let's get George Bush to lead us into the light.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Yeah, he's a real beacon, isn't he? "...with like-minded people one cannot discuss. With like-minded people one can only participate in a church service, and you know how I feel about church services." Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Mar 8, 2004, 08:07 pm	#61 (permalink) (top)
gecko Molten Ash Posts: 70	are you saying there are more than one correct paths in life?

Mar 8, 2004, 09:32 pm	#62 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	I am allowing that in fact there could be different paths for different individuals. This certainly appears to be supported by what we know of individuals. This does not necessitate determinism, which is but one of the points I was making.

Mar 9, 2004, 09:26 am	#64 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	Imp, The assumption that if there are paths that individuals follow then everyone must make identical choices and follow the exact same paths, is YOURS not mine. I pointed out that in fact people follow many different paths, and asked for you to clarify your assumption that there could not be many different paths. Look to the world. People do in fact walk many paths, make many different choices. BTW since you are the one insisting on ONLY ONE POSSIBILITY, that NOTHING ELSE COULD POSSIBLY HOLD TRUE, the burden of proof that no other possibilities exist lay squarely upon your shoulders. I have simply allowed that the possibilities exist, and asked for something to support this assumption of yours that NOTHING but your view alone is or ever could be true.

Mar 10, 2004, 09:38 am	#66 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	Well at least you changed positions, though I was actually curious as to why you took the position to begin with. All I could do was point to your actual words, which you simply deny now, so I see no way to progress at this point.

Mar 11, 2004, 09:57 am	#70 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by Whoever said I'm diagreeing with "everyone else" - last time I checked, I never met a person in my life who thinks the way you do. Does this mean you are wrong? Not necessarily. But I don't think that my opinions (which I clearly stated were OPINIONS) about needing some form of government, regulation, and redistribution are pretty widely held. I don't think it can be remotely true I'm going against the grain on this.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Truth is not a popularity contest. It was once similarly assumed that the earth was flat... however that did not make it so. It was once held that blacks were inferior and less than human but that did not make it so. It was once held that Jews were all evil, but that did not make it so. Truth is not a popularity contest.

Mar 11, 2004, 10:46 am	#71 (permalink) (top)
LiveAndLetLive Molten Ash Posts: 72	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,) Truth is not a popularity contest. It was once similarly assumed that the earth was flat... however that did not make it so. It was once held that blacks were inferior and less than human but that did not make it so. It was once held that Jews were all evil, but that did not make it so. Truth is not a popularity contest.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Surely this is so. But, if you stumble onto (or rigorously find) the Truth, the equally important question is, What does one DO with the Truth? * Could mount a soapbox, spouting unvarnished Truth, and possibly curse those who don't see it. * Could keep your own counsel, smirking quietly in a cave. * Could try to find a few fellow travelers, and start a Truth Cabal. * Could speak the Truth always, when called, but to be mindful that, as Jack N. said in A FEW GOOD MEN, "you can't handle the truth." That's most of humanity at the moment. That's why strategy, motive and approach are just as important as the Truth, as I see it. LALL

Mar 11, 2004, 10:50 am	#72 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	Truth (capitalized only because it starts the sentence) is merely a tool for progress. It is not good, it is not evil, it simply is. I cannot see any progress in the approachs you offer as possibility (surely this was not intended to be a complete list). It seems to me that the primary purpose of knowledge (proven truth) is to move closer to understanding and truth.

Mar 11, 2004, 03:27 pm	#73 (permalink) (top)
Mia Retired Posts: 7,312	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,) Truth is not a popularity contest. It was once similarly assumed that the earth was flat... however that did not make it so. It was once held that blacks were inferior and less than human but that did not make it so. It was once held that Jews were all evil, but that did not make it so. Truth is not a popularity contest.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> One more time, I specifically said this does not mean "most people" are necessarily right. I was responding to your assertion that I'm disagreeing with "everyone" in the opinion that I hold. "...with like-minded people one cannot discuss. With like-minded people one can only participate in a church service, and you know how I feel about church services." Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Mar 11, 2004, 04:12 pm	#74 (permalink) (top)
LiveAndLetLive Molten Ash Posts: 72	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,) Truth (capitalized only because it starts the sentence) is merely a tool for progress. It is not good, it is not evil, it simply is. I cannot see any progress in the approachs you offer as possibility (surely this was not intended to be a complete list). It seems to me that the primary purpose of knowledge (proven truth) is to move closer to understanding and truth.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Light, I think you're onto something, but I'd put it differently, in some ways, the other way 'round. I think there is "Truth," or "Truths." The self-evident ones are that we have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I totally agree that the state of affairs currently is not good or evil, it simply is. But the current state of affairs are NOT in alignment with the aforementioned Truths, not even close. That is, we don't have Liberty. Yes, absolutely, let's move closer to Liberty. No, it's not an exhaustive list I posted earlier. How to do so, is the point of this thread that I started. Support moves in toward Truth, do not support moves away from it. So, I'm chagrined that so many who recognize Truth are so darned impatient. By advocating things like "anarcho-capitalism," which admittedly feels awfully "ballsy," my "fellow travelers" are purposely sitting on the sidelines, on the fringe. Seems not the best use of resources to this observer.

Mar 11, 2004, 04:19 pm	#75 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	truth is a lie in religious clothing... god is the truth... this political system is the truth... this theory is the truth... this physics is the truth... this drug is the truth... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Mar 11, 2004, 05:01 pm	#76 (permalink) (top)
LiveAndLetLive Molten Ash Posts: 72	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,) truth is a lie in religious clothing... god is the truth... this political system is the truth... this theory is the truth... this physics is the truth... this drug is the truth...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Imp, I see, so you say there ARE no Truths, eh? Well, then, I'd say, consider the alternative. Without Truth, then all is false, is that what you're saying? If, on the other hand, you're saying that Truth must be found by each on his or her own, there we agree.

Mar 11, 2004, 06:56 pm	#77 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by I think there is "Truth," or "Truths." The self-evident ones are that we have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> But better than appealing to the self evident nature of these rights (Truth seems inapplicable) we can examine moral judgements across time and culture and find objective evidence of these rights. Furthermore we can deduce them from the nature of moral agents: rationality, vulnerability, and knowledge. In your refutation of Imp you left off that his claims are necessarily self defeating.. for if they are true, then they cannot be true because the claims do not allow for anything to be true.. However the idea you seem to be forwarding at the end, that truth is purely subjective necessarily with no connection or correspondence to reality, renders "truth" meaningless.

Mar 11, 2004, 11:05 pm	#78 (permalink) (top)
LiveAndLetLive Molten Ash Posts: 72	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Lightbearer,) But better than appealing to the self evident nature of these rights (Truth seems inapplicable) we can examine moral judgements across time and culture and find objective evidence of these rights. Furthermore we can deduce them from the nature of moral agents: rationality, vulnerability, and knowledge. In your refutation of Imp you left off that his claims are necessarily self defeating.. for if they are true, then they cannot be true because the claims do not allow for anything to be true.. However the idea you seem to be forwarding at the end, that truth is purely subjective necessarily with no connection or correspondence to reality, renders "truth" meaningless.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> By "objective evidence," you mean things like freer societies are more affluent -- top to bottom -- than unfree ones, eh? Sure, that's true. But it's not enough for me. Jefferson got it right...we hold these truths to be self evident! He cut through all the crap, did he. Yes, Imp stepped in it! Truth is objective, but must be recognized subjectively. I'll do my level best to convince you of Truth, but it's on you to agree. I prefer to recognize reality, but, it appears, most aren't there just yet.

Mar 11, 2004, 11:54 pm	#79 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by By "objective evidence," you mean things like freer societies are more affluent -- top to bottom -- than unfree ones, eh?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Was I somehow unclear?? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by we can examine moral judgements across time and culture and find objective evidence of these rights. Furthermore we can deduce them from the nature of moral agents: rationality, vulnerability, and knowledge.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Nothing in this necessitates any characteristic of any society. As long as one holds onto the unfounded belief that truth is subjective, or that it is disconnected from reality, then such a person will forever remain unware of reality necessarily.

Mar 12, 2004, 03:10 pm	#80 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (LiveAndLetLive,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,) truth is a lie in religious clothing... god is the truth... this political system is the truth... this theory is the truth... this physics is the truth... this drug is the truth...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Imp, I see, so you say there ARE no Truths, eh? Well, then, I'd say, consider the alternative. Without Truth, then all is false, is that what you're saying? If, on the other hand, you're saying that Truth must be found by each on his or her own, there we agree.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> there is no Truth... there is truth only as correspondence between language and empirical events... but even empirical events are suspect... looking for Truth is a waste of time... creating Truth on the other hand... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...