(June 30, 2017 at 12:39 am)Whateverist Wrote:

(June 29, 2017 at 11:29 pm)DogmaticDownSouth Wrote: @Definately Dellusional
Too bad you decided to disengage. I think some of the response, particularly early on, were on point.
If you are still around, here are my few cents
Atheism only asks the question do you believe in god? That's it
It is not a world view, it is a question view. Now that question may spider out to effect other questions, but inherently so do most others, some have bigger impacts then others on our OVERALL worldview, but that one question does not DEFINE the entirety of a worldview.

Anyway, my belief is that if you mean intrinsic value as having value independent of our belief then you have an oxymoron. Value is a product of the mind, so without any consciousness capable of valueing something, there would be no value. The universe does not value gold more than it values hydrogen because near as we can tell the universe has no consciousness  to value anything. Therefore truth or anything else you put in the equation has no intrinsic value. There is no such thing.
I don't go to seek "truth." As a species we try to seek that which allows us to succeed in the reality that we inhabit.
Coming from an Asian background, Ayervedic medicine is will known in my household. Some of these remedies do actually have some empirically demonstratable value, not because the rituals and combinations that support them are true, but as we learn more, the ingredients may have anti-inflamamtory or anti-oxidant properties. This does not mean my ancestors were not seekig truth or they didn';t find it. They found something that worked. They may not have understood why (and our current understanding is also likely incomplete) but they found what they needed in a practical manner and if helped it was functionally true. Was there a more accurate or specific truth? probably. But their reasoning was not arbirtray but functional

In my opinion that's how it is for many of us, cerntainly my self. As the T shirt says I want to believe as many true things and not believe as many not true things as possible. Not because of an inner drive, but for purely practical sake, the more things I believe that comport to the reality in which I live, the more likely I am to be successful in that reality. It has functional value, but again there is nothing intrinsic about.

Anyway I'll take 3 cents for this nickel I just gave

Well said.  We definitely evolved to pursue dinner, not the truth.  Philosophic truths in particular are extracurricular tangents.

I agre about dinner. I don't know what a phiolsophical truth is. Philosophy is a product of the mind. truth is that whcih comports to reality. The mind only examines and processes the reality around us and it is not reality in and of its self (I suppose my mind is my reality and so forth, but there is not universal mind with universal philosphy for whcih there is a universal truth. To reach a conclusion there must be an agree basis of conditions. Any way that's a tangent of a tangent so Im truely differential and integrated.

Indeed the idea of absolute truth has pretty much bit the dust in professional  philosophy . As for concepts and there relations they are reflections of the same systems that tell you no to touch fire . To divorce the two is absurd .

(June 30, 2017 at 1:13 am)Tizheruk Wrote: Indeed the idea of absolute truth has pretty much bit the dust in professional  philosophy . As for concepts and there relations they are reflections of the same systems that tell you no to touch fire . To divorce the two is absurd .

I thought you may have been tainted by excessive study of philosophy too.  Undergrad major here, how deep in did you get?

(June 30, 2017 at 2:00 am)Whateverist Wrote:

(June 30, 2017 at 1:13 am)Tizheruk Wrote: Indeed the idea of absolute truth has pretty much bit the dust in professional  philosophy . As for concepts and there relations they are reflections of the same systems that tell you no to touch fire . To divorce the two is absurd .

I thought you may have been tainted by excessive study of philosophy too.  Undergrad major here, how deep in did you get?

Just about undergrad .But had to switch to biology. Then my path to my current job and all the academic requirements there in .

And all I meant was absolute truth in certain context. The Aristotelian sense  of a justified true belief  the favorite of presups and Christian apologists . Which runs into no end of problems Gettier problem. The Münchhausen trilemma, etc. I'm in no way saying every conception of absolute truth is false thou.

(June 30, 2017 at 1:13 am)Tizheruk Wrote: Indeed the idea of absolute truth has pretty much bit the dust in professional  philosophy .

Is that a statement that is true?

You guys are dumb as rocks and it's hilarious.

So Alex is a physicist and you're a philosopher/biologist? Give me a break. Do you know what a self-referentially incoherent statement is, dumbass? There's no truth? Rofl.

The set of all rules that defines the time/space realm in which we are forced to exist and any realm beyond it may be referred to as being the Absolute Truth.

But, on the other hand, a person can be satisfied fully if he had the chance to discover just the logical coherent answers of all important questions that are related to his personal being; also life in general.
Obviously, what he may know/get would be always just a subset of what we called the Absolute Truth. But, to him in the least, this subset could be, practically speaking, considered as his relative perfect knowledge. It is 'relative' to him and it is perfect since there is no more important questions for him to answer. Naturally, his relative knoweldge doesn't have to be exactly similar to anyone's else.

My point is: If most people on earth find hard to grasp 'Relativity' in modern physics, I wonder what could be the case of presenting Relativity (always relative to the observer) when we talk about knowledge.

(June 30, 2017 at 5:17 am)ManofYesterday Wrote:

(June 30, 2017 at 1:13 am)Tizheruk Wrote: Indeed the idea of absolute truth has pretty much bit the dust in professional  philosophy .

Is that a statement that is true?

You guys are dumb as rocks and it's hilarious.

So Alex is a physicist and you're a philosopher/biologist? Give me a break. Do you know what a self-referentially incoherent statement is, dumbass? There's no truth? Rofl.

Do you know how to read, numb-nuts?  He said there's no "absolute" truth.

Truth supervenes on existence. To say that something is true is to say that X exists with Y properties.

And with regards to God existence is something that doesn't apply.

The truth is God does not exist.

This is quite obvious to all smart people given them enough months or years to think it through. If they're a very emotional person it may be hard to let go of living in denial and they may spend a long time hoping God exists and believing in belief in God but that's different to legitimate belief in God.

(June 30, 2017 at 5:17 am)ManofYesterday Wrote:

(June 30, 2017 at 1:13 am)Tizheruk Wrote: Indeed the idea of absolute truth has pretty much bit the dust in professional  philosophy .

Is that a statement that is true?

You guys are dumb as rocks and it's hilarious.

So Alex is a physicist and you're a philosopher/biologist? Give me a break. Do you know what a self-referentially incoherent statement is, dumbass? There's no truth? Rofl.

And how much fruitful discourse is borne from insults and name
calling?   Clearly, you aren't here for any real discussion.  Your troll is showing.

I feel so sorry for this ManofYesterday guy... he'll never know what it's like to even be one trillionth as smart as a lone speck of dandruff on my testicle hairs.

---

Although that said:

(June 30, 2017 at 1:13 am)Tizheruk Wrote: Indeed the idea of absolute truth has pretty much bit the dust in professional  philosophy .

This is false. All truth is absolute.

Quote:Do you know what a self-referentially incoherent statement is, dumbass? There's no truth? Rofl.

And to say that absolute truth is absolutely not true is indeed self-referentially incoherent. And the very concept of there being no such thing as truth is indeed nonsense.

But that doesn't make this ManofYesterday guy in any way smart. He's acting like a spoilt brat.