(August 9, 2010 at 7:12 am)rybak303 Wrote: Through logic objective truth appears to exist. To claim otherwise, that truth is relative, is to make a statement of objective truth, hence contradicting the claim that truth is relative and affirming that it is in fact objective. Likewise, to claim that truth is unknowable is also self-contradictory because to claim to know that truth is unknowable is making a claim to know truth. What we believe can change but truth itself does not change. One can believe that 2+2=5 but the truth will remain that 2+2=4. If truth is objective and does not change depending upon our beliefs then doesn't that imply that an absolute truth that is knowable does in fact exist even if we are unable to understand it in its totality. And if absolute truth exists that is exclusive of all untruth, doesn't that imply the existence of a state of being or realm of absolute truth, perhaps one which we could call God.
No, an objective truth is not necessarily absolute thought all absolutes are necessarily Objective, relational measurements, such as the distance between the Earth and the Sun, are objectively true or false, but are not absolute (unchanging).
Objective, put simply, means not grounded in the opinion of person(s).
And the only 'truth' that is necessarily objective is the one with the capital T, implying absolute certainty. Other truths can be subjective truths, like 'Textures are the best band ever' is subjectively true (grounded in my opinion).
For something to be absolutely true only means that it cannot logically be any other way. A tautology is an example, like the law of non-contradiction, A is not =/= A, is an absolute truth, but it certainly isn't contingent on some absolute being or extra realm.
.
