Is it correct to ever call something the absolute truth?

lol

Sorry man, but you've got some good lines of thought going on. Which is sadly rare around here these days...

Dictionary of Philosophy: Epistemology

A decent resource.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Man then it's best you did not come by a few years ago when I started out... I made the best out of my philosophy class and a few other that really made me think

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I disappeared, and now I have lots to say.. as some can see.

Thank you for the link.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Again, we go back to the question itself. Are there special circumstances, A giant phase reversed speaker system which instantaneously detects the sound and cancels it before it can spread even far enough to - perhaps it even predicts the sound based on computer models and masks the sound before it even begins, so the sound is made by the speakers and then there is no sound at all as th tree falls. Fine, but if there are special circumstances, this is simply a trick question.

Re: absolute truth - If you define a truth as a thing provable to human beings within the system of their extremely limited but technologically expanded sense-fields - then perhaps there is no absolute truth.
A truth in my definition is not something that is necessarily known but is something that is - but I wouldn't knock someone else who defined a truth as a transmittable concept or thought, that definition is just as valid as mine I suppose, just as it is fair for someone to say that a soundwave unable to be translated by a perceiver is simply a rush of air. Once terms have been agreed upon, your question can be answered in some definitive way, until then, the arguments will be confusing, as we will be talking about different things.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

people often think things are contradictions because they don't understand. what is a contradiction and what is not depends on the person.

 

Absolutely!!!!

It is also “correct” to call the one that does an idiot.

In fact the above is proof of both.

 

Is it correct to call something an absolute truth?

Absolutely.

<i>(also, according to part of the quantum "philosophy", the effect is defined by the existence of the observer. If a tree fall in the forest and there is(are gr?) absolute zero observers, then there can be no sound.)</i>
Hyp.

 

Not at all.
A contradiction, by definition, is a logical incongruity.
That is all.

 

So I think that we've come to a consensus of 'no,' correct? The only problem is whether or not this is an absolute truth. Are we as right as we are wrong? Do contradictions only exists through our interpretation of the world into words? Does the existence of a God lead to the existence of an absolute truth? Does the lack of a God lead to the non-exisistence of an absolute truth?

 

No.
A consensus of "no" has not been reached when 53% of the answerers say "no".

I have noticed that your original question was not , "is there an absolute truth", as opposed to "is it correct to call something the absolute truth". Two totally different questions, and yours has a possibility in my mind to be answered with a "no", while the other one does not, so there is a chance for a consensus to be reached, but I haven't seen any evidence brought forth in relation to the question, nor has there been any consensus on even the definition of the question.

Question - is a truth any less true if people think it is false? The non-flat earth, etc.

 

I guess so, but just because YOU think something is a contradiction doesn't mean it really is!

you shouldn't limit yourself by thinking logically. logic is often personal, and a person is a limitation.

 

Ok? If the statement is false either way, what else can it be?

 

I apologize. The 'consensus' I was referring to was from the posters --not from the poll. There have been many posts agreeing with the 'no' answer, but very few (if any) on for the 'yes' answer.

Also, the question in the title does not need a "definition" because any definition would warp the essence of the question. And please, explain to me how my question can answered 'no' without being oxymoronic?. I don't seem to understand.

 

Wrong again.
A contradiction is defined . That means that its meaning is fixed; it's not a question of what I think, or what you think.

Logic is not limiting here. Given what we're trying to discuss, we must make use of logic. Just as we make use of the english language here on these threads. Logic is never personal; if it is, the person in question is being illogical.

 

I voted yes because an absolute truth is an absolute truth when when it's absolutely true that it's absolutely true, and probably can only be found in an observation of nature before we ruin its truth with our own drama. But we'll deal with that if it happens.

 

Silkworm... but here is the deal.

Is it ever correct to describe something as having a certain quality that we are unsure of? Calling all black people criminals, for example. Or saying Earth is flat hundreds of years ago?

The examples above can be debated and concluded with statements of "truth." But how do we REALLY know it's true? Maybe the Earth really is flat, only our perception is warped by experience that says "what I see with my eyes must be true and what I experience must be true." Perhaps there does not even exist a planet called "Earth" so there are not even qualities to describe it. To steal from Swordfish: "what the eye see and the ears hear, the mind believes."

The only abolute truth I can think of off the top of my head is "this statement is an absolute truth." If it were false, then that statement is not an absolute truth. So we can re-write it as "this statement is not an absolute truth," which must be true because it's negation was assumed false. Wouldn't the first statement's negation produce the second statement which is true, but not an absolute truth? That makes no sense. The only way it can go is true.

Blah blah blah

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

"infinity" is absolutely true...

 

But does "infinity" truly exist as anything but a concept? If all concepts are personal, does this mean that there isn't even a true concept of "infinity"?

 

Umm... I wish I knew how to respond to that.

 

Actually there is a philosphy of math that denies the existance of infinity.. saying it is absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrafinitism

 

that's good, because it shows that infinity is absolutely true. i mean... there are no absolutes... there are infinite viewpoints, infinite opinions... so infinity... is absolute...

so if someone now argues "no it is not so, only finite is true!" it just shows a bit more of that infinity...

sorry, it's a bit hard to explain what i mean. but i've realized that infinity is the law of the world. the law is "no laws", so there can be whatever laws. there is nothing, so there can be whatever...

yeah... infinite personal concepts...