(April 9, 2019 at 8:25 am)Acrobat Wrote:

(April 9, 2019 at 8:21 am)Sal Wrote: 1+1 = 2 is internally true. We know what the numbers mean and what they correlate to. Is 1+1 = 2 Objectively true? Hard for me to say, because all of mathematics is a priori and abstract, as I understand it. And to say something to be objectively true, then it has to be true without subjective "interference".

I think most people agree that there exists an external world to ourselves, otherwise we'll simply regress to solipsism, which I find to be useless because it has no real explanatory power.

Are axioms objectively true? If so, which ones?

I have an apple, someone gives me another apple, which leaves me with two apples in total (1+1=2). To me this as objectively true as it gets. If you think otherwise, I would like to hear what you think is objectively true if this isn't? And what makes the two apples in my hand, any less objectively true than your example.

You’re conflating abstract mathematical systems with applied mathematics again.

If torturing a baby for fun was objectively wrong, then it wouldn't ever be done...
Let alone by other children...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Bulger

(April 9, 2019 at 8:30 am)pocaracas Wrote: If torturing a baby for fun was objectively wrong, then it wouldn't ever be done...
Let alone by other children...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Bulger

Sure, if everyone always agreed it was wrong, then they wouldn’t do it, in general. People do still do things they themselves believe to be wrong sometimes though.

There is clearly no kind of universal law which prohibits people from torturing babies. You’d think that if "god" decided that he never wanted it to happen, then it wouldn’t happen. Remove god from the equation, and you just have people having varying judgements on whether or not you "should" do certain things. We can easily draw up facts about it, like the consequences of the actions, including legal ones, but whether or not someone cares about those consequences is up to them.

(April 9, 2019 at 8:23 am)robvalue Wrote:

(April 9, 2019 at 8:18 am)Acrobat Wrote: So is 1+1 =2 objectively true? Or subjective?

Is the wrongness of torturing innocent babies just for fun, objectively true, or subjective opinion? If it's a subjective opinion, should i take it when you say it's wrong to torture innocent babies just for fun, you're just stating a personal taste or opinion, like telling me dominos pizza tastes bad?

I already answered these questions. The first is objectively true with respect to a particular abstract system which says it’s true. It might not be true in another.

The second is subjectively true. I take my morality more seriously than pizza, but if you want to insist all kinds of subjects relating to opinions are equivalent, then that’s fine.

I can make torturing babies objectively immoral, if I want, by defining immoral in a certain way.

This is my point. Words represent vague ideas.

I have two apples on the tables, (One plus One equals Two). This is true or regardless of whatever abstract system you use, or whatever words you want to use, whether in english Spanish, etc. 

Regardless, when it comes to your view of wrongness of torturing innocent babies just for fun, you see it as subjective. The meaning of subjective, implies that you're stating your likes, preferences or opinions, or taste. Or in other words to say its subjectively wrong is just another way of saying that it's wrong simply because Rob doesn't like it.

And this if false of course unless you want to be dishonest about it. If you're telling your children it's wrong to steal, or lie, what you're not saying is that it's wrong because you don't like it, but that there is something truly wrong about these things, and thats why they ought not do them. So come on stop fooling yourself, by believing your own nonsense.

---

(April 9, 2019 at 8:30 am)pocaracas Wrote: If torturing a baby for fun was objectively wrong, then it wouldn't ever be done...
Let alone by other children...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Bulger

That's like saying if the holocaust was objectively true, then no one would believe in holocaust conspiracies. In fact those who tortured innocent babies just for fun, and creationist have some elements in common, such as delusions. 

Also, I've stated numerous times, knowing something is wrong, doesn't mean that we won't do it. You may know it's wrong to cheat on your wife, but may cheat on her.

Nothing to to with gods, whatsoever, Acro..lol.

(April 9, 2019 at 8:27 am)robvalue Wrote:

(April 9, 2019 at 8:25 am)Acrobat Wrote: I have an apple, someone gives me another apple, which leaves me with two apples in total (1+1=2). To me this as objectively true as it gets. If you think otherwise, I would like to hear what you think is objectively true if this isn't? And what makes the two apples in my hand, any less objectively true than your example.

You’re conflating abstract mathematical systems with applied mathematics again.

I'm not doing that, you are. I'm just speaking of 1+1 =2 is very practical way, such as when it comes to apples, you're the one trying to make it about abstract vs applied mathematics.

Also nothing to do with gods.

(April 9, 2019 at 8:48 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Nothing to to with gods, whatsoever, Acro..lol.

Exactly, nothing do whatsoever with what you and other atheists commonly have in mind when it comes to the word "god", as some sort of genie in the sky that grants wishes. 

Let's keep it that way, and stick to what's being discussed.

Nothing to do with gods at all, Acro.  It's not an issue of what atheists do or don't commonly think of as gods.  

None of these things have anything to do with gods, you're wasting your time, and everyone else's... with the endless gish gallup.

(April 9, 2019 at 8:55 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Nothing to do with gods at all, Acro.  It's not an issue of what atheists do or don't commonly think of as gods.  

None of these things have anything to do with gods, you're wasting your time, and everyone else's... with the endless gish gallup.

Whatever you say Gae, I like talking about these topics and subjects, regardless of whether you understand what any of it has to do with my theistic beliefs. If you’re not personally interested in these subjects, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to participate, yet here you are.