Does absolute truth exist?

[Tom Sawyer]

They're good because they work for reasons that don't vary. For instance, if I hold a 10 lb iron ball six feet above the surface of an object with the mass of the Earth, it will fall to that surface at a constant speed every time. These are objective criteria which are very different from the subjective ones such as tastiness. It works for reasons completely unrelated to our opinions about it.

Objective? American or british pounds?
In the end it all goes back to man. There is a reality, but truth is not what you think.

Well, what is an accurate fact about reality other than a truth?

 

[untermensche]

Do you know the difference between absolute knowledge and knowing one thing?

You don't say where you got this idea of absolute knowledge but you should be aware that there are different notions of absolute knowledge. One is from Hegel for example, where absolute knowledge is "knowledge in the form of the complete self-consciousness and self-possession of spirit" and so really has nothing to do with what you seem to be referring to.

Are you claiming that Hegel would make no distinction between this and knowing one thing?

Do you think anybody would have a problem making the distinction between absolute knowledge, however they wanted to define it, and knowing one thing?

And the same is obvioulsy true of the notion of absolute truth.

I agree, nobody would be unable to make a distinction between absolute knowledge and knowing one thing, not Hegel or Husserl, or Emmanuel Kant, no one besides you that is.

Absolute truth is all possible truth. If all I have is one truth I never know for certain it is the whole truth. I never know for certain it is absolute. It could be part of some trick.

Ok, it's what you mean by absolute truth but you give no source.

I am the source. I am a source you can question unlike some long dead so-called authority.

If a there is this thing called truth then it just flows naturally that absolute truth is all possible truths.

What else could absolute truth mean?

How do we separate "absolute" truth from just plain truth then?

If something is true we don't gain anything by saying it is "absolutely" true.

 

[none]

absolutely true doesn't necessarily mean it is an absolute truth.
it boils down to context, as I suggested in the OP
being absolutely true in one context doesn't mean it is true in all contexts.
nice try though

 

[untermensche]

absolutely true doesn't necessarily mean it is an absolute truth.
it boils down to context, as I suggested in the OP
being absolutely true in one context doesn't mean it is true in all contexts.
nice try though

Absolutely true just means true.

The word "absolutely" adds no meaning.

And if something is true it is true in all contexts.

Absolute truth can only mean all possible truths.

If we want "absolute" to have a meaning.

 

[none]

ha, don't like the definition I gave in the OP, feel free to make your own.
one question is why don't you accept the definition in the OP: " Absolute truth is a truth that is true in all contexts."
I don't have a problem with it, why do you?
can't argue against it? can't accept it that there are no absolute truths as defined in the OP?
oh yeah absolute can also mean " Absolute truth is a truth that is true in all contexts" so check your fantasies.

 

[untermensche]

ha, don't like the definition I gave in the OP, feel free to make your own.
one question is why don't you accept the definition in the OP: " Absolute truth is a truth that is true in all contexts."
I don't have a problem with it, why do you?
can't argue against it? can't accept it that there are no absolute truths as defined in the OP?
oh yeah absolute can also mean " Absolute truth is a truth that is true in all contexts" so check your fantasies.

Any truth is true in all contexts.

Give me an example of a truth that is only true under certain contexts.

 

[none]

ha, don't like the definition I gave in the OP, feel free to make your own.
one question is why don't you accept the definition in the OP: " Absolute truth is a truth that is true in all contexts."
I don't have a problem with it, why do you?
can't argue against it? can't accept it that there are no absolute truths as defined in the OP?
oh yeah absolute can also mean " Absolute truth is a truth that is true in all contexts" so check your fantasies.

Any truth is true in all contexts.

Give me an example of a truth that is only true under certain contexts.

1+1=horse <-- that is true under certain contexts
and it is not true in a context where 1+1=horse is false.
need more help?

 

[untermensche]

Any truth is true in all contexts.

Give me an example of a truth that is only true under certain contexts.

1+1=horse <-- that is true under certain contexts
and it is not true in a context where 1+1=horse is false.
need more help?

That is nonsense with no relation to any truth.

Do you even have a clue what a single truth is?

 

[none]

1+1=horse <-- that is true under certain contexts
and it is not true in a context where 1+1=horse is false.
need more help?

That is nonsense with no relation to any truth.

Do you even have a clue what a single truth is?

did you read the OP?

 

[untermensche]

That is nonsense with no relation to any truth.

Do you even have a clue what a single truth is?

did you read the OP?

Are you evading?

Ultimately any truth is tied to context.

It is true under conditions X.

But of course all we know about are the conditions in which we exist. We only know one context for truths to exist.

I have no idea what other contexts you're talking about in the OP.

 

[none]

did you read the OP?

Are you evading?

evading?

Ultimately any truth is tied to context.

It is true under conditions X.

wow,

But of course all we know about are the conditions in which we exist. We only know one context for truths to exist.

then again there is a context where things are false which we may not know about and then again there is a context where everything is false and that context is the context where everything is false.

I have no idea what other contexts you're talking about in the OP.

too bad.

 

[untermensche]

But of course all we know about are the conditions in which we exist. We only know one context for truths to exist.

then again there is a context where things are false which we may not know about and then again there is a context where everything is false and that context is the context where everything is false.

What is this context in which something that is true in the context of our existence, is false?

Where is this context?

What are you talking about?

 

[none]

then again there is a context where things are false which we may not know about and then again there is a context where everything is false and that context is the context where everything is false.

What is this context in which something that is true in the context of our existence, is false?

wait for it wait for it : "the thing that is true in the context of our existence is false in the context where it is false."

Where is this context?

that is very philosophical, right in front of you is the context.

What are you talking about?

what are you talking about, you seem to be agreeing with me that absolute truth doesn't exist in at least a practical context.

 

[untermensche]

What is this context in which something that is true in the context of our existence, is false?

wait for it wait for it : "the thing that is true in the context of our existence is false in the context where it is false."

More nonsense.

For example: In the context of our existence I dropped a ball six minutes ago and it fell towards the earth.

That is a truth.

Under what context is that not a truth?

An actual context, not nonsense.

 

[none]

wait for it wait for it : "the thing that is true in the context of our existence is false in the context where it is false."

More nonsense.

For example: In the context of our existence I dropped a ball six minutes ago and it fell towards the earth.

That is a truth.

Under what context is that not a truth?

An actual context, not nonsense.

in a context that is not dependent upon our existence or the ball your example is false, that is my answer.
that is a context, you may not like it but there you go.
I am sure you can think of other contexts but I don't need to because I gave you one and that is sufficient.
what is this gibberish:"For example: In the context of our existence I dropped a ball six minutes ago and it fell towards the earth."?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

He did say not nonsense. There was a "not" there.

 

[none]

He did say not nonsense. There was a "not" there.

oh, so a context that renders any arrangement false is nonsense, really you shouldn't feed in to his pandering.

 

[untermensche]

More nonsense.

For example: In the context of our existence I dropped a ball six minutes ago and it fell towards the earth.

That is a truth.

Under what context is that not a truth?

An actual context, not nonsense.

in a context that is not dependent upon our existence or the ball your example is false, that is my answer.
that is a context, you may not like it but there you go.

That is not a real context.

I asked for something real, not imaginary.

All we can say about truths is that they are tied to context. Something is true within a context.

I dropped the ball in the context of my existence at this time.

The truth that it fell to the ground is tied to the context of my existence at this time.

And there is no possible context in which it is not true that I dropped the ball and it fell to the ground.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

He did say not nonsense. There was a "not" there.

oh, so a context that renders any arrangement false is nonsense, really you shouldn't feed in to his pandering.

Not isn't a complex word. You can look it up.

 

[none]

oh, so a context that renders any arrangement false is nonsense, really you shouldn't feed in to his pandering.

Not isn't a complex word. You can look it up.

at least you acknowledge the context I provided. call it nonsense ? what are you calling nonsense, a context? seriously....pfft