Does absolute truth exist?

[rrr6]

none---and thus all this^ is rendered false in a context where it is in it's sum or part is false therefore not absolute truth.
colorful, and poetic but rrr6 it is fiction dreamed up by you maybe in part or whole but still fiction.

Mathematics is not poetry and your comment has no coherently rational, logical common senses. Merely stating, that, there is no absolute truths is just ignorance of well known facts ergo truths not to mention those that are absolute.

I've given many examples of absolute truth accepted by most or at least many of some intellectual integrity. Youve given your oppinion that is example of ignorance.

Reads like this, ratio of circumference of a circle to the diameter of a perfect circle is transcendental Pi.

Pi looks like this 3.145..........

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 obviously will affirm these absolute truths to his list. Thx Max

Someone mentioned goemetry and here is a perfect example of Universal absolute truth existing as metaphysical-1 concept that is complementary to any context of our finite, occupied space Universe.

Ex there exists, only metaphysical-1 mind/intellect, 5 only 5 regular/symmetrical, polyhedra, that, may manifest as an occupied space.

1} icosa{20}hedron--- stably structural system,
2} octa{8}hedron--stably structural system,
3} tetra{4}hedron---stably structural system,
------------------------------------------------
4} pentagonal-dodeca{12}hedron--non-stable ergo non-structural system,
5} cube aka regular hexa{6}hedron---non-stabel ergo non-structural system.
Thank you Max Tegmark for your confirmation thereof.
r6

and thus all this^ is rendered false in a context where it is in it's sum or part is false therefore not absolute truth.
colorful, and poetic but rrr6 it is fiction dreamed up by you maybe in part or whole but still fiction.

 

[none]

Mathematics is not poetry and your comment has no coherently rational, logical common senses. Merely stating, that, there is no absolute truths is just ignorance of well known facts ergo truths not to mention those that are absolute.

I've given many examples of absolute truth accepted by most or at least many of some intellectual integrity. Youve given your oppinion that is example of ignorance.

you take artistic expressions of mathematical expressions and and have claimed it is truth.
any absolute truth must be true in all contexts ( something I stated in the OP thus defining absolute truth ) all absolute truths are false in a context where all absolute truths are false.
all your truths you present are false in a context where they are false and thus therefore they are not true in all contexts and therefore not absolute truths.
tell me what you fail to understand? plus you haven't presented any absolute truths, you just claim they exist.
1+1=1 is a mathematical expression and poetically it can nullify your 4 primary kinds of existence because it is truth that it does, it is self evident.
the answer is walrus not metaphysical.

 

[rrr6]

You can not address my given examples with any rational, logical common sense that invalidates them as stated i..e you have given no rationale because you have non. Oppinion without example or basis. Appears as ignorant of mathematical facts tome.

You appear to be ignoring mathematical facts. Sad This conversation cannot go much further as you avoid addresses specific comments and certainly give no rational example that invalidates them. You do not because you have not substantiating examples. imho

Reads like this, ratio of circumference of a circle to the diameter of a perfect circle is transcendental Pi.

Pi looks like this 3.145..........

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 obviously will affirm these absolute truths to his list. Thx Max

Someone mentioned goemetry and here is a perfect example of Universal absolute truth existing as metaphysical-1 concept that is complementary to any context of our finite, occupied space Universe.

Ex there exists, only metaphysical-1 mind/intellect, 5 only 5 regular/symmetrical, polyhedra, that, may manifest as an occupied space.

1} icosa{20}hedron--- stably structural system,
2} octa{8}hedron--stably structural system,
3} tetra{4}hedron---stably structural system,
------------------------------------------------
4} pentagonal-dodeca{12}hedron--non-stable ergo non-structural system,
5} cube aka regular hexa{6}hedron---non-stabel ergo non-structural system.
Thank you Max Tegmark for your confirmation thereof.
r6

Mathematics is not poetry and your comment has no coherently rational, logical common senses. Merely stating, that, there is no absolute truths is just ignorance of well known facts ergo truths not to mention those that are absolute.

I've given many examples of absolute truth accepted by most or at least many of some intellectual integrity. Youve given your oppinion that is example of ignorance.

you take artistic expressions of mathematical expressions and and have claimed it is truth.
any absolute truth must be true in all contexts ( something I stated in the OP thus defining absolute truth ) all absolute truths are false in a context where all absolute truths are false.
all your truths you present are false in a context where they are false and thus therefore they are not true in all contexts and therefore not absolute truths.
tell me what you fail to understand? plus you haven't presented any absolute truths, you just claim they exist.
1+1=1 is a mathematical expression and poetically it can nullify your 4 primary kinds of existence because it is truth that it does, it is self evident.
the answer is walrus not metaphysical.

 

[none]

You can not address my given examples with any rational, logical common sense that invalidates them as stated i..e you have given no rationale because you have non. Oppinion without example or basis. Appears as ignorant of mathematical facts tome.

You appear to be ignoring mathematical facts. Sad This conversation cannot go much further as you avoid addresses specific comments and certainly give no rational example that invalidates them. You do not because you have not substantiating examples. imho
..gibberish...

you cannot grasp the simple fact that there are contexts where your declarations are false.
any and all of your expressions which you call truth are themselves false in a context where they are false and as such they are not absolute truths.
all of them, cry me a river.
so yeah, absolute truths in a context where absolute truths are false and are not true in all contexts.

 

[rrr6]

Sorry None, you have not a shred of evidence, examples or ratonal logical common sense, ergo talking to you is like playing tennis with some one who shoves back shoe under the net. Offers of nothin significant to the game of absolute truths imho

Perhaps that is why you chose name none. You none of significance to any topic here at 'talk free ridicule'. imho

r6

You can not address my given examples with any rational, logical common sense that invalidates them as stated i..e you have given no rationale because you have non. Oppinion without example or basis. Appears as ignorant of mathematical facts tome.

You appear to be ignoring mathematical facts. Sad This conversation cannot go much further as you avoid addresses specific comments and certainly give no rational example that invalidates them. You do not because you have not substantiating examples. imho
..gibberish...

you cannot grasp the simple fact that there are contexts where your declarations are false.
any and all of your expressions which you call truth are themselves false in a context where they are false and as such they are not absolute truths.
all of them, cry me a river.
so yeah, absolute truths in a context where absolute truths are false and are not true in all contexts.

 

[none]

Sorry None, you have not a shred of evidence, examples or ratonal logical common sense, ergo talking to you is like playing tennis with some one who shoves back shoe under the net. Offers of significant to the game of absolute truths imho

ha, give me an absolute truth and quit playing around.
pretty simple.

 

[Kharakov]

Sorry None, you have not a shred of evidence, examples or ratonal logical common sense, ergo talking to you is like playing tennis with some one who shoves back shoe under the net. Offers of significant to the game of absolute truths imho

ha, give me an absolute truth and quit playing around.
pretty simple.

Like the unicorns flying out of my butt, rrr6's statements are crazy ass shit.

 

[Juma]

Interesting. How does your proof of this look like?

Reads like this, ratio of circumference of a circle to the diameter of a perfect circle is tracendental Pi.

Pi looks like this 3.145..........

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 obviously will affirm these absolute truths to his list. Thx Max

Someone mentioned goemetry and here is a perfect example of Universal absolute truth existing as metaphysical-1 concept that is complementary to any context of our finite, occupied space Universe.

Ex there exists, only metaphysical-1 mind/intellect, 5 only 5 regular/symmetrical, polyhedra, that, may manifest as an occupied space.

1} icosa{20}hedron--- stably structural system,
2} octa{8}hedron--stably structural system,
3} tetra{4}hedron---stably structural system,
------------------------------------------------
4} pentagonal-dodeca{12}hedron--non-stable ergo non-structural system,
5} cube aka regular hexa{6}hedron---non-stabel ergo non-structural system.
Thank you Max Tegmark for your confirmation thereof.
r6

This is not a proof. A proof is a stepwise argument from the premisses to the conclusion where each step is clearly explained and cannot be disputed.

 

[Speakpigeon]

I'm not sure how existence could be conceived of as relative. We may be mistaken when we believe that the universe exists for example but if it exists then its existence is absolute. If it does not exist then its existence does not exist either and so cannot be said to be relative (or not absolute).

Of course the notion of existence might be regarded as somehow meaningless or without a referent but that would be a different issue.

Finally, that human beings conceive of the existence of things does not make the existence of these things somehow dependent on us, or relative to our own existence, or non-absolute.
EB

I see a lot of typing and not one absolute truth, try harder.
It is my contention that absolute truth does not exist, a truth that exists in all contexts doesn't exist.. need only one context where absolute truth is not true to illustrate absolute truth doesn't exist.
I propose that absolute truth doesn't exist in all contexts especially where absolute truth is false.
you can continue to fumble around if you want.

When do you see your doctor?
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

ha, give me an absolute truth and quit playing around.
pretty simple.

Like the unicorns flying out of my butt, rrr6's statements are crazy ass shit.

And me who thought craziness was relative!
EB

 

[none]

I see a lot of typing and not one absolute truth, try harder.
It is my contention that absolute truth does not exist, a truth that exists in all contexts doesn't exist.. need only one context where absolute truth is not true to illustrate absolute truth doesn't exist.
I propose that absolute truth doesn't exist in all contexts especially where absolute truth is false.
you can continue to fumble around if you want.

When do you see your doctor?
EB

yeah it's everybody else....
seriously you can drop the ad hominen attacks and produce an absolute truth
YOU believe there is absolute truth, so for arguments sake provide a truth that is true in all contexts or peter out.

 

[rrr6]

Do there exist any mature A.I. Bots here at 'talk free ridicule'? Few to no mature adults, or mature teenagers/childrne so just maybe A.I. Bots can help validate truth when posted here.

Reads like this, ratio of circumference of a meatpysical-1, perfect circle, to the diameter of samemetaphysical-1, perfect circle is transcendental Pi.

Pi looks like this 3.145..........

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 obviously will affirm these absolute truths to his list. Thx Max

Someone mentioned goemetry and here is a perfect example of Universal absolute truth existing as metaphysical-1 concept that is complementary to any context of our finite, occupied space Universe.

Ex there exists, only metaphysical-1 mind/intellect, 5 only 5 regular/symmetrical, polyhedra, that, may manifest as an occupied space.

1} icosa{20}hedron--- stably structural system,
2} octa{8}hedron--stably structural system,
3} tetra{4}hedron---stably structural system,
------------------------------------------------
4} pentagonal-dodeca{12}hedron--non-stable ergo non-structural system,
5} cube aka regular hexa{6}hedron---non-stabel ergo non-structural system.
Thank you Max Tegmark for your confirmation thereof.
r6

 

[beero1000]

Do there exist any mature A.I. Bots here at 'talk free ridicule'? Few to no mature adults, or mature teenagers/childrne so just maybe A.I. Bots can help validate truth when posted here.

Reads like this, ratio of circumference of a meatpysical-1, perfect circle, to the diameter of samemetaphysical-1, perfect circle is transcendental Pi.

Pi looks like this 3.145..........

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 obviously will affirm these absolute truths to his list. Thx Max

Someone mentioned goemetry and here is a perfect example of Universal absolute truth existing as metaphysical-1 concept that is complementary to any context of our finite, occupied space Universe.

Ex there exists, only metaphysical-1 mind/intellect, 5 only 5 regular/symmetrical, polyhedra, that, may manifest as an occupied space.

1} icosa{20}hedron--- stably structural system,
2} octa{8}hedron--stably structural system,
3} tetra{4}hedron---stably structural system,
------------------------------------------------
4} pentagonal-dodeca{12}hedron--non-stable ergo non-structural system,
5} cube aka regular hexa{6}hedron---non-stabel ergo non-structural system.
Thank you Max Tegmark for your confirmation thereof.
r6

Do you think you're talking to Max Tegmark? Or are you just copy/pasting the same gibberish over and over?

If not, it's hella ironic that the author of the 'cosmic hierarchy' can't seem to get the value of pi right...

 

[Speakpigeon]

When do you see your doctor?
EB

yeah it's everybody else....
seriously you can drop the ad hominen attacks and produce an absolute truth
YOU believe there is absolute truth, so for arguments sake provide a truth that is true in all contexts or peter out.

I asked you to give me a list of all the contexts you think exist:

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

I know of only one context so it seems good to me that what I say should be true in it.

But maybe you could help me by giving me the list of all the contexts?
EB

But you ignored this post and chose to answer my other post, which was not about truth but about existence.

So I inferred you needed to see a doctor.

Also it's a misrepresentation of what I said to claim that I believe in absolute truth. I told you this notion is misleading. I know of only one context and trivially any truth in it would be true in all contexts and you could call that absolute truth but that would still be misleading since it would suggest that the notion of non-absolute truth is meaningful but it isn't.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

It is obvious that you have no clue what existence means.

It is just plain wrong to say of a physical thing, for example a coffee pot, a neutron star or even existence, that it means anything.

Juma could have said that I have no clue about what the word "existence" means but that's not what he said. Yet even this would have been a confused utterance since words don't actually mean anything by themselves. Only people can mean something, possibly by using words but not even necessarily. To say that a word means something is a naive view of language. Let's assume for exemple that the word "existence" means something all by itself. So, are you going to ask the word what it means before you can use it? Oh, you say you're going to look up in the dictionary! Ok, let's do that:

Existence: The fact or state of existing; being.
To exist: To have actual being; be real.
Being: The state or quality of having existence.​

Not really moving forward are we?

I guess you all knew that but then I am left with the only interpretation that can still make sense: Juma for some obscure reason thinks he knows what existence, or possibly "existence", means. And he doesn't say.

Me, I'm more modest. I don't know what existence or the word "existence" could possibly mean and I think it doesn't mean anything. Instead, I would say that I certainly know what I mean by the word "existence". Am I wrong? But I can't be wrong about what I mean. Maybe somebody else's meaning would be somehow a better meaning but so far I don't know of any alternative view I could see would be better.
EB

 

[Juma]

It is obvious that you have no clue what existence means.

It is just plain wrong to say of a physical thing, for example a coffee pot, a neutron star or even existence, that it means anything.

Juma could have said that I have no clue about what the word "existence" means but that's not what he said. Yet even this would have been a confused utterance since words don't actually mean anything by themselves. Only people can mean something, possibly by using words but not even necessarily. To say that a word means something is a naive view of language. Let's assume for exemple that the word "existence" means something all by itself. So, are you going to ask the word what it means before you can use it? Oh, you say you're going to look up in the dictionary! Ok, let's do that:

Existence: The fact or state of existing; being.
To exist: To have actual being; be real.
Being: The state or quality of having existence.​

Not really moving forward are we?

I guess you all knew that but then I am left with the only interpretation that can still make sense: Juma for some obscure reason thinks he knows what existence, or possibly "existence", means. And he doesn't say.

Me, I'm more modest. I don't know what existence or the word "existence" could possibly mean and I think it doesn't mean anything. Instead, I would say that I certainly know what I mean by the word "existence". Am I wrong? But I can't be wrong about what I mean. Maybe somebody else's meaning would be somehow a better meaning but so far I don't know of any alternative view I could see would be better.
EB

So we agree then? (Taking into account what you already guessed: it was the meaning of the word I meant)

 

[Speakpigeon]

I'm not sure how existence could be conceived of as relative. We may be mistaken when we believe that the universe exists for example but if it exists then its existence is absolute. If it does not exist then its existence does not exist either and so cannot be said to be relative (or not absolute).

Of course the notion of existence might be regarded as somehow meaningless or without a referent but that would be a different issue.

Finally, that human beings conceive of the existence of things does not make the existence of these things somehow dependent on us, or relative to our own existence, or non-absolute.

So we agree then?
EB

 

[Kharakov]

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

Do you think you're talking to Max Tegmark? Or are you just copy/pasting the same gibberish over and over?

If not, it's hella ironic that the author of the 'cosmic hierarchy' can't seem to get the value of pi right...

That's a false dichotomy!

As a certified psychic medium who speaks to the future dead, I can assure you that the future ghost of Max has responded to r6's statements. I have encrypted Max's future ghost's response with a simple substitution cypher "ASGHFADANGIGDSCA".

 

[beero1000]

Do you think you're talking to Max Tegmark? Or are you just copy/pasting the same gibberish over and over?

If not, it's hella ironic that the author of the 'cosmic hierarchy' can't seem to get the value of pi right...

That's a false dichotomy!

As a certified psychic medium who speaks to the future dead, I can assure you that the future ghost of Max has responded to r6's statements. I have encrypted Max's future ghost's response with a simple substitution cypher "ASGHFADANGIGDSCA".

That's true. He could think he's talking to Max Tegmark AND be copying/pasting the same gibberish over and over...

 

[Kharakov]

That's a false dichotomy!

As a certified psychic medium who speaks to the future dead, I can assure you that the future ghost of Max has responded to r6's statements. I have encrypted Max's future ghost's response with a simple substitution cypher "ASGHFADANGIGDSCA".

That's true. He could think he's talking to Max Tegmark AND be copying/pasting the same gibberish over and over...

There really is a substitution cypher for the comment Max's future ghost made...