Absolute truth

[lawtonfogle]

I believe that there is absolute truth, that exist in such a way that it cannot be disproven.

An example

What Timmy does on the 17year, 3 month, 5 day, 9hour, 50minute, 30 second of his life is either right or wrong if the situation is defined in best detail. To say he is cheating on a test might not be enough detail, but to say he is cheating on a test because he knows the teacher will not catch him, and becuase he rather watch TV the night before instead of studing for the test. Also, he is cheating of of Lukes paper, who does not know he is being cheated off of.

Now, you have to say he is doing the right thing, the wrong thing, or else not have enough information to decide.

why i do not give a date is because of the whole time is not a constant theory.

 

[lawtonfogle]

um, anyone there

 

[Bargainfluger]

Right or wrong when judged against what? Human laws?

 

[RoboMastodon]

What makes this "absolutely" wrong? Where is this source of objective morality?

 

[Phred]

I believe that there is absolute truth, that exist in such a way that it cannot be disproven.

An example

What Timmy does on the 17year, 3 month, 5 day, 9hour, 50minute, 30 second of his life is either right or wrong if the situation is defined in best detail. To say he is cheating on a test might not be enough detail, but to say he is cheating on a test because he knows the teacher will not catch him, and becuase he rather watch TV the night before instead of studing for the test. Also, he is cheating of of Lukes paper, who does not know he is being cheated off of.

Now, you have to say he is doing the right thing, the wrong thing, or else not have enough information to decide.

why i do not give a date is because of the whole time is not a constant theory.

Absolute truth means that at all times, in all possible situations, to all people this thing is true. If you try and define away all possible interpretations but one, you will still have as many opinions about it as you have people who can understand it.

There is no absolute truth.

 

[Ellethidhren]

Truth is a verified fact. Psalm 119:160 About sums up the fact that the sum (all of it) of God's Word is TRUTH.

 

[Bargainfluger]

Truth is a verified fact. Psalm 119:160 About sums up the fact that the sum (all of it) of God's Word is TRUTH.

I don't think God is real. You'll have a hard time convincing me using a "God said it" arguement. Sorry.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Absolute truth means that at all times, in all possible situations, to all people this thing is true. If you try and define away all possible interpretations but one, you will still have as many opinions about it as you have people who can understand it.

There is no absolute truth.

from your defintion, it seems to be there is no absolute truth. Ill give you an example of how I understand what you are saying.

If Billy takes something from his neighbor house, and Bob does the same thing, but with permission of the neighbor, what i understand is that absolute truth is saying either they're both right, or both wrong.

Now for the second part. The existence of absolute truth is nesecerry for the existence of the fact their is no absolute truth. If not, then their is not fact, just an oppinion.

 

[lawtonfogle]

What makes this "absolutely" wrong? Where is this source of objective morality?

What he is doing is either wrong or right. It cannot not be both.

Now saying Mary i coping CD's.
this can be right (if their her own CD's, and she will use them for personal use), or wrong (if their illeagaly down loaded.)

 

[lawtonfogle]

Right or wrong when judged against what? Human laws?

to the laws which he agreed to follow by taking the class

 

[SorensScapegoat]

Absolute truth means that at all times, in all possible situations, to all people this thing is true. If you try and define away all possible interpretations but one, you will still have as many opinions about it as you have people who can understand it.

There is no absolute truth.

Actually, most philosopher's disagree with you. In fact, absolute truth is generally considered to be rather separate and apart from the common opinion. Absolute truth, is more frequently defined as a statement of being that admits of no exception, qualification or contingency.

Or more usefully, an absolute truth would be a statement to which nothing could be added that would render it more accurate, and from which nothing could be removed without lessening its accuracy.

--S

 

[chris_J_N]

I believe that there is absolute truth, that exist in such a way that it cannot be disproven.

An example

What Timmy does on the 17year, 3 month, 5 day, 9hour, 50minute, 30 second of his life is either right or wrong if the situation is defined in best detail. To say he is cheating on a test might not be enough detail, but to say he is cheating on a test because he knows the teacher will not catch him, and becuase he rather watch TV the night before instead of studing for the test. Also, he is cheating of of Lukes paper, who does not know he is being cheated off of.

Now, you have to say he is doing the right thing, the wrong thing, or else not have enough information to decide.

why i do not give a date is because of the whole time is not a constant theory.

i posted this exact same topic on another fourm site not to long ago. it didn't get alot of possitive responces.

 

[SorensScapegoat]

Lawton,

I think your impulse is correct, in that there probably are some acts that are absolutely right or absolutely wrong. But your hypo leaves open innumerable possibilities,

What is the consequence of failing the test? What if the cheater in your hypothethical is a former hostage in Iran being smuggled out by the CIA and the test is given by the border guard at the airport, the consequence of failing is to be prosecuted for espionage? Is it dishonest? Decietful. Sure. Does that matter? I'm not sure. I don't know whether it would be absolutely right or absolutely wrong, but I figure if that was my choice, I would cheat. And probably not lose a lot of sleep over it.

Generally, I would say that cheating on tests is probably not the best choice. If nothing else, if one were caught the consequences can be rather severe and persistent, (I had to explain each time I had been subject to "disciplinary action" in my application to law school, what a pain).

 

[RoboMastodon]

from your defintion, it seems to be there is no absolute truth. Ill give you an example of how I understand what you are saying.

If Billy takes something from his neighbor house, and Bob does the same thing, but with permission of the neighbor, what i understand is that absolute truth is saying either they're both right, or both wrong.

Now for the second part. The existence of absolute truth is nesecerry for the existence of the fact their is no absolute truth. If not, then their is not fact, just an oppinion.

There are also things called provisional truths and I can say with provisional certainty that there are no absolute truths.

 

[James T]

Actually, most philosopher's disagree with you.

No, you have this wrong. Philosophers will are a little more precise in their meaning. Kant, for example, talkes about noumena and phenomena. Others will sometimes qualify truth or absolutes as being metaphysical concepts, it being well recognised that we are not capable of directly experiencing the world.

 

[SorensScapegoat]

James could you elaborate?

Actually, reading the original posting, I recognize that I made an assumption that was not merited by the terms of the hypothethical, so I apologize. I think my point was correct, but not relevant.

 

[James T]

SorensScapegoat, sure, I was responding to your criticism of Phred's post as being contrary to what philosophers consider correct. Philosophers generally run a mile from absolute because ... nothing really is.

Phred made some good points about what it would be to have an absolute truth. It has to apply to all people in all circumstances all the time and cannot be subject to interpretation otherwise it would not be an absolute.

I referred to Kant's noumena and phenomena because it is an illustration of how philosophers will some times deal with absolutes. Metaphysically one could suppose there are some absolutes. In a sense I do in that I consider that the world is what it is of itself, irrespective of my subjective interpretation of it. All I know, though, is the phenomena - what I observe.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Lawton,

I think your impulse is correct, in that there probably are some acts that are absolutely right or absolutely wrong. But your hypo leaves open innumerable possibilities,

What is the consequence of failing the test? What if the cheater in your hypothethical is a former hostage in Iran being smuggled out by the CIA and the test is given by the border guard at the airport, the consequence of failing is to be prosecuted for espionage? Is it dishonest? Decietful. Sure. Does that matter? I'm not sure. I don't know whether it would be absolutely right or absolutely wrong, but I figure if that was my choice, I would cheat. And probably not lose a lot of sleep over it.

Generally, I would say that cheating on tests is probably not the best choice. If nothing else, if one were caught the consequences can be rather severe and persistent, (I had to explain each time I had been subject to "disciplinary action" in my application to law school, what a pain).

Yep, you thought of a situation I had not planned on. That is why is said that it is either right, wrong, or needs more info to decide.

 

[lawtonfogle]

SorensScapegoat, sure, I was responding to your criticism of Phred's post as being contrary to what philosophers consider correct. Philosophers generally run a mile from absolute because ... nothing really is.

Phred made some good points about what it would be to have an absolute truth. It has to apply to all people in all circumstances all the time and cannot be subject to interpretation otherwise it would not be an absolute.

I referred to Kant's noumena and phenomena because it is an illustration of how philosophers will some times deal with absolutes. Metaphysically one could suppose there are some absolutes. In a sense I do in that I consider that the world is what it is of itself, irrespective of my subjective interpretation of it. All I know, though, is the phenomena - what I observe.

this borders on the true theory idea, which states that everything is a theory unless all dimesions to locate are added. Lets say you are living. It may seem fact, but one day it will not be true, for you will die. now if i say you are living on May whatever it is 2005. it is a fact. for all dimesions are present.

 

[SorensScapegoat]

Thanks James,

Actually, I have to apologize for what I wrote, I had misinterpreted "for all people" being in each person's opinion, rather than "applying to each, every and any person."

Please forgive me.