Does absolute truth exist?

[Togo]

Absolute truth is an oxymoron. Absolutes are what they are independent of sentient minds, but truth is a property of ideas, which can only come from sentient minds.

Truth is not a property of ideas. Truth is a relation between an idea and the world and while it depends as such on the idea in question it does not depend on the mind having the idea for a given idea. Somes ideas may be problematic in this context but not any idea which is not about the mind or part of it.

Hmmm.. Mathematical truths may have no relationship with the real world, and indeed may be impossible to instantiate, and yet still be true. As such, I don't agree that truth is a relation between the idea and the world.

"Absolute truth" is not an oxymoron. It is just that truth is necessarily absolute (so "absolute" is redundant). To talk of absolute truth is therefore to suggest there are truths which are not absolute, and that is idiotic.
EB

1) Superman wears a blue cape
2) Superman wears a red cape

You saying that both of these statements have the same truth value? Are you saying that either of these statements is absolutely true?

If absolute truth is something that is true in all contexts, and we have contexts in which statements can be true (the fictional character superman does indeed wear a red cape) and in which they can be false (there is no real superman, who wears a red cape), then it seems clear that truth is entirely dependent on context, and isn't absolute in the slightest.

 

[PyramidHead]

Truth is not a property of ideas. Truth is a relation between an idea and the world and while it depends as such on the idea in question it does not depend on the mind having the idea for a given idea. Somes ideas may be problematic in this context but not any idea which is not about the mind or part of it.

Hmmm.. Mathematical truths may have no relationship with the real world, and indeed may be impossible to instantiate, and yet still be true. As such, I don't agree that truth is a relation between the idea and the world.

"Absolute truth" is not an oxymoron. It is just that truth is necessarily absolute (so "absolute" is redundant). To talk of absolute truth is therefore to suggest there are truths which are not absolute, and that is idiotic.
EB

1) Superman wears a blue cape
2) Superman wears a red cape

You saying that both of these statements have the same truth value? Are you saying that either of these statements is absolutely true?

If absolute truth is something that is true in all contexts, and we have contexts in which statements can be true (the fictional character superman does indeed wear a red cape) and in which they can be false (there is no real superman, who wears a red cape), then it seems clear that truth is entirely dependent on context, and isn't absolute in the slightest.

That's a problem of vagueness, not context. If you specify the context of "Superman wears a red cape" in the statement you're making, it becomes absolutely true or absolutely false.

 

[rrr6]

Two Kinds of Non-counting Zer{ 0 }

A one{ 1 } 3D somethingness{ propterties } is eternally complimented by the 2nd kind of zero{ 0 } nothingness, abstract concepts of mind/intellect.


Geometry--- shape and/or patterns of space ---is a specific sub-catagory of mathematics, that, we see specific relationships in our everyday lives. Ex the shape/geoemetry of a cars surface effects gas mileage.

Shape of space has effect in our physical/reality ego properties.

Geometry may be the only mathematics that we observe, or least most human can relate, the abstract pattern havinge having direct relationships to our physical/reality.

So now we have two kinds of non-counting zero{ 0 }ness and no less than one kind oneness{ 1 } somethingness- with properties, that occupies space.

r6

Non-counting zero and counting one---- or other numerical counting values ---are symbols or identifiers, or representatives thereof.
Zero{ 0 } existence = nothing aka no 3D thing{ properties } to occupy space
One{ 1 }existence = something aka a 3D thing{ properties } that occupies space
These appear to be absolute truths, only if time/frequency/motion is considered inherent to 3D things{ properties }.
However, their relative to each other and exclude the 2nd kind zero{ 0 } existence.
The truth is out there, for those with sincere desire to find truth, and some effort. imho
Some or all of the above is clarified in my cosmic heirarchy.
Also want to make clear, that, time is specical-case of within a larger set of properties ergo physical/reality.
Time is our special-case temporal property whereas spin or expansion-contraction are more distinct properties, that, and Ive not yet arrive with the correct terminologies to make that distinction other than the word temporal.

 

[none]

before bizarro world showed up to give us some weird coded message I mentioned that absolute truth would be a truth valid in all contexts.
so far there are exclamations there are absolute truths or there is absolute truth, but no example...
if something is true in one context it doesn't mean it is true in all contexts, no need to reminisce about Plato.
and since it isn't true in all contexts it is not an absolute truth.

 

[Kharakov]

and since it isn't true in all contexts it is not an absolute truth.

In all contexts that something is true, it is an absolute truth.

No n e non e none? It's a weird coed message typed by infinite know-ease monkeys!

 

[none]

yeah. it is kind of tricky
take any statement to be evaluated as true and place in it a context where it isn't true, problem solved.
like: all absolute truths are not true in a context where all absolute truths are not true.

 

[Kharakov]

yeah. it is kind of tricky
take any statement to be evaluated as true and place in it a context where it isn't true, problem solved.
like: all absolute truths are not true in a context where all absolute truths are not true.

Ok, I'm backpedaling a bit, I just wanted to do that thing with your name, and felt like yammering a bit about truth as well.

I think your earlier comment about absolute truths being true is spot on- some objective truths exist.

If at some point in time absolutely nothing exists, not even absolute truth, it won't be an absolute truth that absolute truth exists.... or is it? Can nothing exist?

 

[none]

I'm no expert but if something is true in a practical context I should be good with it, I don't need to worry about the other contexts it maybe untrue in except maybe for sporting reasons or entertainment value.
I know very little about nothing.

 

[rrr6]

Yes There Exists Two Kinds of Nothing

Yes, we have two kinds of nothing aka no thingi.e. no properties no physical/energy aka energyless.

Yes, we can use the non-counting zero{ 0 } to represent them both. i.e. either of them.

Yes, we have two kinds of truths;

1} absolute truths

2} relative truths.

The truth can be ascertained, for those with sincerity-of-heart and some effort. imho

r6

A one{ 1 } 3D somethingness{ properties } is eternally complimented by the 2nd kind of zero{ 0 } nothingness, abstract concepts of mind/intellect.
Geometry--- shape and/or patterns of space ---is a specific sub-catagory of mathematics, that, we see specific relationships in our everyday lives. Ex the shape/geoemetry of a cars surface effects gas mileage.
Shape of space has effect in our physical/reality ego properties.
Geometry may be the only mathematics that we observe, or least most human can relate, the abstract pattern havinge having direct relationships to our physical/reality.
So now we have two kinds of non-counting zero{ 0 }ness and no less than one kind oneness{ 1 } somethingness- with properties, that occupies space.

r6

Non-counting zero and counting one---- or other numerical counting values ---are symbols or identifiers, or representatives thereof.
Zero{ 0 } existence = nothing aka no 3D thing{ properties } to occupy space
One{ 1 }existence = something aka a 3D thing{ properties } that occupies space
These appear to be absolute truths, only if time/frequency/motion is considered inherent to 3D things{ properties }.
However, their relative to each other and exclude the 2nd kind zero{ 0 } existence.
The truth is out there, for those with sincere desire to find truth, and some effort. imho
Some or all of the above is clarified in my cosmic heirarchy.
Also want to make clear, that, time is specical-case of within a larger set of properties ergo physical/reality.
Time is our special-case temporal property whereas spin or expansion-contraction are more distinct properties, that, and Ive not yet arrive with the correct terminologies to make that distinction other than the word temporal.

 

[rrr6]

More Absolute Truths

The sum of the angles, of a Euclidean triangle, is eternally 180 degrees, when the base unity is 360 degees.

The sum of the angles, of a positive( Riemann } triangles is eternally more than 180 degrees, when base unity is 360 degrees.

The sum of the angles, of a negative( Lobveskian? } triangle, is eternally less than 180 degrees, when base unity is 360 degrees.

Still waiting for Max Tegmark to address this, tho obvioudly will affirm these absolute truths to his list. Thx Max

r6

 

[Speakpigeon]

Truth is not a property of ideas. Truth is a relation between an idea and the world and while it depends as such on the idea in question it does not depend on the mind having the idea for a given idea. Somes ideas may be problematic in this context but not any idea which is not about the mind or part of it.

Hmmm.. Mathematical truths may have no relationship with the real world, and indeed may be impossible to instantiate, and yet still be true. As such, I don't agree that truth is a relation between the idea and the world.

That's why I restricted myself to ideas which are about the material world. There are indeed well known examples of statements for which the notion of truth does not seem to apply, e.g. "This statement is false". It is unclear to me that mathematical truths are truths at all in the sense that it is true or not true that the Eiffel Tower is in Paris or water is or is not H2O. Of course, whenever a mathematical statement is conceived as being about the material world then the notion of truth applies straightforwardly. In other words, the notion of mathematical truth is a different sense of the word truth.

I take it you're not denying that the truth of the statement "water is H2O" is indeed a relation between the idea that water is H2O and the material world.

"Absolute truth" is not an oxymoron. It is just that truth is necessarily absolute (so "absolute" is redundant). To talk of absolute truth is therefore to suggest there are truths which are not absolute, and that is idiotic.
EB

1) Superman wears a blue cape
2) Superman wears a red cape

You saying that both of these statements have the same truth value?

Some statements don't have a truth value. That's the case here. The reason is that these statements have no non-ambiguous meaning.

Are you saying that either of these statements is absolutely true?

I previously explained that the expression "absolute truth" was idiotic! Do you really expect me to now use it myself?

If absolute truth is something that is true in all contexts, and we have contexts in which statements can be true (the fictional character superman does indeed wear a red cape) and in which they can be false (there is no real superman, who wears a red cape), then it seems clear that truth is entirely dependent on context, and isn't absolute in the slightest.

No, the fictional character superman does not wear a red cape. That a cartoon depicts a fictional character wearing a red cape doesn't mean that a fictional character is wearing a red cape. If philosophers were a bit more serious abuot their language they might get somewhere. As it is, they don't even qualify as both rational beings and intellectually honest. Maybe they are so lazy they can't be bothered to try rationality and intellectual honesty at the same time.

As to the OP, if you mean truth to be dependent on context then you will ever so obviously only get relative truths because all truths would be relative to context, including truths about the world. So, again, the OP is idiotic. Further, since truth in the context of the material world doesn't work like truths in fictional contexts then it's just a different concept. Me, I think it's not even a coherent one.
EB

 

[Kharakov]

..

 

[none]

@Speakpigeon, you do realize what you profess is not true in all contexts right?

 

[rrr6]

Some people cannot access truth, some can only access absolute or relative. This is apparrent in many forums/groups.

There appears to be a genetic aspect that is disabled in some people that allow access to either truths, or it could be their childhood emotional development.

The truth can allow some one onto a free path, only, if they can access, and accept truth. Acknowledging truth is of course not being in denial which becomes exhibited immaturely by many adults at any educational level, tho education does help more so than less so, just not in all cases. imho

Access to education is no gurrantee of those listed above. imho

r6

rrr6--A one{ 1 } 3D somethingness{ propterties } is eternally complimented by the 2nd kind of zero{ 0 } nothingness, abstract concepts of mind/intellect.

Geometry--- shape and/or patterns of space ---is a specific sub-catagory of mathematics, that, we see specific relationships in our everyday lives. Ex the shape/geoemetry of a cars surface effects gas mileage.

Shape of space has effect in our physical/reality ego properties.

Geometry may be the only mathematics that we observe, or least most human can relate, the abstract pattern havinge having direct relationships to our physical/reality.

So now we have two kinds of non-counting zero{ 0 }ness and no less than one kind oneness{ 1 } somethingness- with properties, that occupies space.

r6

 

[Kharakov]

I know very little about nothing.

There's not much to know.

 

[DBT]

Two valued? How so?

You said that "existence is absolute" means that existence is two-valued (something either exists or it doesnt)

I wouldn't say 'two valued' because existence has no relationship with non existence except as a comparison....things that obviously don't exist, square circles, or whatever, which have no relationship to existence. If something exists, it cannot not exist. If it exists, its existence is absolute.

 

[Juma]

You said that "existence is absolute" means that existence is two-valued (something either exists or it doesnt)

I wouldn't say 'two valued' because existence has no relationship with non existence except as a comparison....things that obviously don't exist, square circles, or whatever, which have no relationship to existence. If something exists, it cannot not exist. If it exists, its existence is absolute.

Existence is not a property of things "out there". It is a property of out concepts of those things.

Does the jabberwock exist? No it doesnt. Does tigers exist? For the moment, yes. That something seizes to exist can be caused by either that the reality changes, the do-do doesnt exist anymore, or that the meaning of the word changes: there are not many non-homosexual gays anymore.

"Does A exist?" Means: has A a referent?

 

[DBT]

I wouldn't say 'two valued' because existence has no relationship with non existence except as a comparison....things that obviously don't exist, square circles, or whatever, which have no relationship to existence. If something exists, it cannot not exist. If it exists, its existence is absolute.

Existence is not a property of things "out there".

I didn't say it was, nor did I imply it.

Does the jabberwock exist? No it doesnt. Does tigers exist? For the moment, yes. That something seizes to exist can be caused by either that the reality changes, the do-do doesnt exist anymore, or that the meaning of the word changes: there are not many non-homosexual gays anymore.

"Does A exist?" Means: has A a referent?

It doesn't matter what the object is, or was, nor does it matter that it no longer exists. If a particular object ever existed, its existence was absolute while it existed. The nature and attributes of the bits and pieces are irrelevant to the fact of existence itself.

That there is something rather than nothing.

 

[Juma]

Existence is not a property of things "out there".

I didn't say it was, nor did I imply it.

Yes you do. You may not be aware of it, but you clearly attribute existence to the thing-in-itself.

It doesn't matter what the object is, or was, nor does it matter that it no longer exists. If a particular object ever existed, its existence was absolute while it existed. The nature and attributes of the bits and pieces are irrelevant to the fact of existence itself.

That there is something rather than nothing.

Here you again refer to existence as a property of the thing-in-itself.
"Existence" is part of the human experince of the world. Not the real world. It is a human category.
It is just another way of expressing "it is so".

In that way "existence is absolute" is a tautology.

 

[DBT]

I didn't say it was, nor did I imply it.

Yes you do. You may not be aware of it, but you clearly attribute existence to the thing-in-itself.

I was objecting to the remark "out there" - what exists does not exist 'out there'

Here you again refer to existence as a property of the thing-in-itself.
"Existence" is part of the human experince of the world. Not the real world. It is a human category.
It is just another way of expressing "it is so".

In that way "existence is absolute" is a tautology.

'Existence' refers to the state or status of an object. The object has its own properties and attributes.