Why atheism cannot escape absolute truth

[Ben Davis]

---

Thus, atheists cannot escape absolute truths, on any level.

If there are any absolute truths, why would we want to escape them?  

But what really does "absolute" add to "truth".  Truth is simply a concept regarding the fit between language and the state of affairs it describes.  Truth is already contingent on the correct use of the language so that it correctly maps to the way things stand.  I simply don't understand what additional condition must be met in order for a bit of language to be not just the truth but also the "absolute" truth.  Is this a coherent idea?  I don't get it.

---

Also true of 'ultimate', 'objective' and other qualifiers. Something is either true or it isn't however each statement of truth, resulting from competent analysis, must, by necessity, include lists of the conditions under which the statement is true; assumptions, preconditions, constraints etc.. This speaks to the utility and pragmatism of 'truth' statements. To rephrase AronRa: if you can't show it, it isn't true. I think this type of 'grey area' (the fact that all truth is dependent on something) scares some people and triggers the type of 'uncertainty response' that can lead to religious dependence.