Truth or Lies

[allhart]

1. Is morality debatable?
2. Is tolerance then in question? ( look up the word tolerance before you comment)
I find myself talking with a lot of people that have knowledge, but they lack wisdom in putting it all together to formulate a life worth living for.
In a world saturated in anything goes. How can a world with absolutes being railroaded as being intolerant. Which tolerance means, "tolerant of error"
Knowledge doesn't always have wisdom behind the facts.

 

[jayem]

You question is not clearly worded, so I'm not quite sure what you're asking.

But in general---society shouldn't have to tolerate things that are harmful. Unless trying to eliminate them results in greater harm.

So the real issue becomes deciding what is harmful.

 

[TheManeki]

People typically agree about nicely abstract moral concepts (for example, "lying is bad") but start differing when it comes to concrete details (like having to answer the dreaded, "Does this make me look fat?" question).

 

[uberd00b]

Where there is disagreement there is debate. There is a lot of disagreement as to what is moral or ethical.

What is to be tolerated is also up for debate, I think it falls under the above moral/ethical category.

What absolutes are being railroaded? Are there any absolutes?

 

[God-free]

1. Is morality debatable?

Yes.

2. Is tolerance then in question? ( look up the word tolerance before you comment)

Anything can be questioned. If someone engages in a practice that I find disagreeable, but it harms no-one else and is not illegal, then I will tolerate it. However, if someone engages in that same disagreeable practice, but has used it in some way that causes harm to another, or integrated it into an illegal act, then I will not tolerate it.

I find myself talking with a lot of people that have knowledge, but they lack wisdom in putting it all together to formulate a life worth living for.

When someone thinks that life is not worth living, it would behoove them to seek professional help.

In a world saturated in anything goes. How can a world with absolutes being railroaded as being intolerant. Which tolerance means, "tolerant of error"
Knowledge doesn't always have wisdom behind the facts.

I'm not sure what you mean by "a world saturated in anything goes" or "a world with absolutes being railroaded as being intolerant." Please explain. And, please provide an example of "tolerant of error."

~Barbara

 

[allhart]

Where there is disagreement there is debate. There is a lot of disagreement as to what is moral or ethical.

What is to be tolerated is also up for debate, I think it falls under the above moral/ethical category.

What absolutes are being railroaded? Are there any absolutes?

Are you alive? Do you die? Truth is absolute. In how you put it together is wisdom. Life has variables that supersede other truths in wisdom. The absolute truth of facts are known of the day by what you come to know as truth. Like it takes h2o to breath.Life can be built on a lie ,but will you die for it.

 

[God-free]

...<snip> Like it takes h2o to breath.<snip>...

Oh, my! And, you thought WE should look up the definition of a word before commenting? Good grief!

On the other hand, if you're trying to say something else, perhaps you should learn the value of proper punctuation. With the written word, clarity is everything.

~Barbara

 

[quatona]

1. Is morality debatable?
2. Is tolerance then in question? ( look up the word tolerance before you comment)
I find myself talking with a lot of people that have knowledge, but they lack wisdom in putting it all together to formulate a life worth living for.
In a world saturated in anything goes. How can a world with absolutes being railroaded as being intolerant. Which tolerance means, "tolerant of error"
Knowledge doesn't always have wisdom behind the facts.

I´m not sure I understand.
What I seem to get: You claim knowledge and wisdom for yourself - which supposedly entitle you to declare your ideas "absolutes" and to be intolerant towards different ideas.
Am I missing something?

 

[morningstar2651]

People typically agree about nicely abstract moral concepts (for example, "lying is bad") but start differing when it comes to concrete details (like having to answer the dreaded, "Does this make me look fat?" question).

How about the inquiring murderer? What happens when one absolute requires you to break another absolute.

• Bob asks you where he can find Alice.
• You know that Bob wants to murder Alice.
• You know that Alice is at home.
• Bob's next stop is Alice's home.
• You have two choices:
  • Tell the truth: Bob goes to Alice's house and murders her.
  • Tell a lie: Bob goes elsewhere and you warn Alice about Bob.

What should you do and why?

 

[allhart]

I´m not sure I understand.
What I seem to get: You claim knowledge and wisdom for yourself - which supposedly entitle you to declare your ideas "absolutes" and to be intolerant towards different ideas.
Am I missing something?

Have you seen joy in Gods people and them being "Content"
Wondering after all your wants and claims. You find your own desires are far from fulfilling and one's decision making is always wrong. Yes,I have taken on ideas that are not my own. (What) play kiss e kiss e as an enemy! Telling you that everything is alright. (Your alright ) When your not. Truth hurts and its called sin, but I would rather know truth and wisdom. Than to be a slave to my own demise. I declare Gods as an absolute and his ideas will prevail. May he save you and us all with his gracious patience. As he self Indore our selfish ways and teaches us through ill will how we are wrong and through our ill relational problems. May we come to see and to reconcile our difference through Jesus Christ as Lord and save your. The truth the way and the life. God speed. Intolerant to error is called Gods Grace.

 

[Beanieboy]

How about the inquiring murderer? What happens when one absolute requires you to break another absolute.

• Bob asks you where he can find Alice.
• You know that Bob wants to murder Alice.
• You know that Alice is at home.
• Bob's next stop is Alice's home.
• You have two choices:
  • Tell the truth: Bob goes to Alice's house and murders her.
  • Tell a lie: Bob goes elsewhere and you warn Alice about Bob.

What should you do and why?

If you know that Bob wants to murder Alice, why haven't you contacted the police already? If you just found out somehow (and I'm not sure how that is aside from him having a box that says ACME on the side), then you can say, "I think you are going to hit Alice with that anvil, and thus, refuse to tell you where she is out of that suspicion." Then, you still haven't lied. When he leaves, you can warn Alice.

 

[morningstar2651]

If you know that Bob wants to murder Alice, why haven't you contacted the police already? If you just found out somehow (and I'm not sure how that is aside from him having a box that says ACME on the side), then you can say, "I think you are going to hit Alice with that anvil, and thus, refuse to tell you where she is out of that suspicion." Then, you still haven't lied. When he leaves, you can warn Alice.

You're kinda missing the point of the inquiring murderer. Unless you lie, Bob kills Alice.

How about a practical example:
During WWII, Dutch fishermen, while smuggling Jewish refugees over to England, would be intercepted by German patrol boats. the German captains would ask their Dutch counterparts what they were carrying on board and where they were going. Should they have said "We are smuggling Jewish refugees to England"?