In that case, which I have explained before, a subjective truth is only true for the individual experiencing it and loses its validity for objective truth when attempting to apply the concept universally.

(October 1, 2021 at 8:18 am)Ahriman Wrote: 1.  What is "true" in terms of one level/aspect of existence, may or may not be "true" on another level. Reality is layered.

2.  There are objective truths, and subjective truths.

3.  This is a basic level of understanding. Just "one mode of logic" does not account for all the truths in existence.

1.  Explain this.  What are defining as "levels" and how can something be true and also false in anything other than a Heisenberg sort of way.  Examples help.

2.  Name some objective vs subjective truths.  Understand, an "opinion" is not a "truth".

3.  Explain this.  Where did you hear this.  Based on this short comment it sounds like nonsense.

(October 1, 2021 at 9:01 am)Spongebob Wrote:

(October 1, 2021 at 8:18 am)Ahriman Wrote: 1.  What is "true" in terms of one level/aspect of existence, may or may not be "true" on another level. Reality is layered.

2.  There are objective truths, and subjective truths.

3.  This is a basic level of understanding. Just "one mode of logic" does not account for all the truths in existence.

1.  Explain this.  What are defining as "levels" and how can something be true and also false in anything other than a Heisenberg sort of way.  Examples help.

2.  Name some objective vs subjective truths.  Understand, an "opinion" is not a "truth".

3.  Explain this.  Where did you hear this.  Based on this short comment it sounds like nonsense.

1. If "person A" sees in color, while "person B" sees in black and white, then taking both people's experiences into consideration, the statements "the sky is blue" and "the sky is grey" are equally true and equally false.

2. Opinions are a form of truth.

3. In mathematics, there are different modes of logic, as can be proven by the fact that a math problem can have more than one answer.

(October 1, 2021 at 9:28 am)Ahriman Wrote:

(October 1, 2021 at 9:01 am)Spongebob Wrote: 1.  Explain this.  What are defining as "levels" and how can something be true and also false in anything other than a Heisenberg sort of way.  Examples help.

2.  Name some objective vs subjective truths.  Understand, an "opinion" is not a "truth".

3.  Explain this.  Where did you hear this.  Based on this short comment it sounds like nonsense.

1. If "person A" sees in color, while "person B" sees in black and white, then taking both people's experiences into consideration, the statements "the sky is blue" and "the sky is grey" are equally true and equally false.

2. Opinions are a form of truth.

3. In mathematics, there are different modes of logic, as can be proven by the fact that a math problem can have more than one answer.

I´ll have fries with my equivocation salad.

(October 1, 2021 at 9:53 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(October 1, 2021 at 9:28 am)Ahriman Wrote: 1. If "person A" sees in color, while "person B" sees in black and white, then taking both people's experiences into consideration, the statements "the sky is blue" and "the sky is grey" are equally true and equally false.

2. Opinions are a form of truth.

3. In mathematics, there are different modes of logic, as can be proven by the fact that a math problem can have more than one answer.

I´ll have fries with my equivocation salad.

Don't forget the common sense ketchup.

(October 1, 2021 at 9:28 am)Ahriman Wrote:

(October 1, 2021 at 9:01 am)Spongebob Wrote: 1.  Explain this.  What are defining as "levels" and how can something be true and also false in anything other than a Heisenberg sort of way.  Examples help.

2.  Name some objective vs subjective truths.  Understand, an "opinion" is not a "truth".

3.  Explain this.  Where did you hear this.  Based on this short comment it sounds like nonsense.

1. If "person A" sees in color, while "person B" sees in black and white, then taking both people's experiences into consideration, the statements "the sky is blue" and "the sky is grey" are equally true and equally false.

2. Opinions are a form of truth.

3. In mathematics, there are different modes of logic, as can be proven by the fact that a math problem can have more than one answer.

1.  You just described a subjective experience, not anything about truth.  Truth is an objective quality which shouldn't be confused with a subjective experience.  If I murder my wife, but I have schizophrenia and believe that she is still alive, to me she may seem to be alive, but in reality, in TRUTH, she is dead because I murdered her.  See the difference?  You can certainly talk about subjective experiences, but you shouldn't conflate them with objectivity.

2.  I explained why this is false in #1

3.  So 2 + 2 = 4 and some other number?  Really, this is totally nonsensical and you seem to know little about mathematics or you wouldn't have made such a statement.  There are plenty of anomalies in the mathematics world, but you chose to make up something an inane as this?  Please.

But to pretend that your thought has any veracity, click here for information on mathematical logic, which is a real thing, but of course does not "prove" that there are multiple answers to math problems.  To go even further, it is true that there are multiple answers to some math problems, particularly polynomial algebraic equations.  Here is but one example:  x^2+6x+8=0.  Possible solutions are: -3 +/- 1.  But you didn't specify, which says to me you don't really know this.  Anyone familiar with algebra would know this.  And there's a very good reason why such equations have multiple solutions; the equation can be the mathematical representation of a curve.  So there's nothing mystical about it and it doesn't equate to your "multiple truths" idea.  Anyway, the result of a mathematical equation is a solution, not a truth.

I think that sometimes people get these ideas in their head, maybe by watching videos or reading something profound, that they know things that they don't actually know.  Savvy people will take that idea and seek out as much information as they can to fully understand it, and can then speak with confidence about it.  Others just get the idea in their head and then go about speaking as if they know something profound, when in fact they know nothing at all.  And it seems that the less they know, they more likely they are to think they know something.  This is called the Dunning-Kruger effect, from their psychological work in the subject about 20 years ago.  

I believe this describes you very well.  Your grasp of subjects like logic and math seem almost nonexistent, yet you appear to believe you've mastered the subjects.  And you are what, 22 years old?  What books have you read on the subjects of logic, mathematics, philosophy?  What degrees do you have?  For most people these subjects don't just crystalize without years of study and there's such a broad body of work that already exists that describes many of these things, yet you don't appear to be aware of any of it.  I believe the bottom line here is that you've convinced yourself that you are highly intelligent, while at the same time being critical of intelligence and celebrating a lack of intelligence (the lottery example).  You also claim that morals are not relevant, but then say you are a very moral person.  These things are contradictions and suggest that you are either unable to know this or you are just pretending.

Quote:These things are contradictions and suggest that you are either unable to know this or you are just pretending.

Or I'm employing a fundamentally deeper mode of logic than you are. Most people, including you, only understand things on a surface level. You surface dwellers would never understand the kind of deep logic I'm employing.

At work.

(October 1, 2021 at 10:02 am)Ahriman Wrote: Don't forget the common sense ketchup.

After thirty odd years in various industries interacting with numerous types of people?

There's no such thing as 'Common sense'.

Human stupidity, ignorance, arrogance et are ubiquitous.

(October 1, 2021 at 10:37 am)Ahriman Wrote:

Quote:These things are contradictions and suggest that you are either unable to know this or you are just pretending.

Or I'm employing a fundamentally deepity mode of logic than you are. Most people, including you, only understand things on a surface level. You surface dwellers would never understand the kind of deep logic I'm employing.

Fixed it for ya.

(October 1, 2021 at 10:37 am)Ahriman Wrote:

Quote:These things are contradictions and suggest that you are either unable to know this or you are just pretending.

Or I'm employing a fundamentally deeper mode of logic than you are. Most people, including you, only understand things on a surface level. You surface dwellers would never understand the kind of deep logic I'm employing.

How can you know what I understand?  What do you really know about me?  Just what I post on this forum, and I put forth a full explanation of any opinions or ideas that I have, unlike your tendency to just post some contrarian nonsense that doesn't conform to the known body of knowledge at all.  And when questioned, you duck and run, avoiding the opportunity to explain yourself fully.  Anyone who truly has something of value to say would be willing to make their ideas clear.  What you do is just bait and that's actually a form of trolling.

However, if you do know some mystical "deeper mode of logic" that the rest of us aren't privy to, then prove it.  Explain it.  Describe it in detail and let us underlings learn from your genius.

Watch as Ahriman fades like a sunset, nothing to say.