(August 12, 2009 at 11:37 am)Jon Paul Wrote: You appeal exactly to a minds conceptual realisation [of the laws of logic] by appealing to your own experience and evidence [which is exactly what I wanted you to do], while the task was to substantiate your claim that logic exists independently of a minds conceptual realisation of it.
[quote="EvidenceVsFaith"]
As you say - objective truth exists independently of us (...) It exists independent of us, and independent of whether we believe in it or not.
Where's the problem? As I said it doesn't have to be absolutely substantiated. We can only know what we know through our own (subjective) beliefs. We don't have to absoutely know, there's no reason to believe in transcendence, how we understand the world subjectively, evidence, etc, is enough.
Where's the problem?
You on the other hand, haven't given any evidence whatsover for an 'objective mind', you say you don't need to. But you do if you believe in it. If a belief isn't based on evidence then it's irrational.
EvF
