(September 28, 2015 at 4:44 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: So if you deny absolute truths exist, then what you would be saying is truth is relative. The statement, "truth is relative" is self-defeating. It either includes itself or excludes itself. If it includes itself then that statement is also relative and not always true. If it excludes itself it's positing an absolute while denying their existence.
I've seen statements like:
“Although Christianity may be true for you, it isn’t true for me.”
“You may believe in God and that’s okay for you, but it’s not true for me.”
“All religions are just different paths leading to truth.”
Each of these statements assumes truth can be different for different people at the same time. This violates that law of non-contradiction. Christian apologists maintain that although people are free to believe whatever they want to believe about the claims of Christianity, those beliefs have no logical bearing on whether the claims of Christianity are actually true or not true. Regardless of what people believe, God’s existence and Christianity are either really true or really false. If the God of the Bible exists, then what the Bible teaches about God’s existence is true and what an atheist believes about God is false. Conversely, if God does not exist, then what an atheist believes about God is true and what a Christian believes is false. It is logically impossible for both Christianity and atheism to be true, even though people on both sides of the issue may firmly believe their beliefs are true.
I may end up regretting participating in this thread, but here goes anyway. It would be good for a precise definition to be given for "absolute truth" before comments begin, but as that is not likely to be forthcoming in a satisfactory manner, I will proceed without it.
You have given an excellent start. Many people confuse beliefs, knowledge, and truth, but they are three different things (for anyone who needs it, just look them up in an ordinary dictionary; Oxford is usually a good choice).
Instead of "self-defeating," I prefer to say that it is self-contradictory to say that there is no truth. If there were no truth, then it must be false to say that there is no truth. It could not possibly be true to say that there is no truth.
As for examples of truths, there are many that are much easier to deal with than what you have suggested. I know some truths, and will list a few of them. Whether everyone who reads this post knows them or not is something about which I will not presently comment. Nor will I offer any proof, as that will get us into the question of what constitutes a proof, which gets us more in the direction of knowledge than truth, which would be getting us a bit off topic. Here are some truths:
1 + 1 = 2
All bachelors are unmarried.
If all men are mortal and Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal.
Some statements are true.
Anyone who has trouble with the above is someone with whom I do not want to bother having a conversation. So I will offer no proof of any of them, and let others, if they wish to do so, argue about them with whoever has a problem with them.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
