- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
03 Oct 06
Originally posted by StarrmanSo the statement, "There is no absolute truth" is not an absolute statement ?? 😲
That is not an absolute statement, or a self-defeating statement. That you don't understand that is not my problem, go back to your cut & paste jobs, I have no time for your lack of reasoning ability.
03 Oct 06
2 edits
Originally posted by Starrmanso lemme get this straight....we have to have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of our doubt (which of course would no longer be doubt under such conditions)...yet you need only to tell us that we don't have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of your faith?
That is not an absolute statement, or a self-defeating statement. That you don't understand that is not my problem, go back to your cut & paste jobs, I have no time for your lack of reasoning ability.
ok...If you don't have the absolute truth then the flying spaghetti monster is the only true god...do *YOU* have the absolute truth?...do you have absolute knowledge?
better still...If you don't have the absolute truth then God *does not exist*......and your answer is?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
03 Oct 06
Originally posted by Agerg?
so lemme get this straight....we have to have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of our doubt (which of course would no longer be doubt under such conditions)...yet you need only to tell us that we don't have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of your faith?
ok...If you don't have the absolute truth then the flying spaghetti mo ...[text shortened]... dge?
better still...If you don't have the absolute truth then God *does not exist*...well?
Was that maybe directed at me?
03 Oct 06
2 edits
Originally posted by dj2beckerhmm...wrong reply and quote (sorry starrman)....but from the nature of what I wrote it should be blatantly obvious that I was reffering to you!, I'll try again
?
Was that maybe directed at me?
so lemme get this straight....we have to have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of our doubt (which of course would no longer be doubt under such conditions)...yet you need only to tell us that we don't have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of your faith?
ok...If you don't have the absolute truth then the flying spaghetti monster is the only true god...do *YOU* have the absolute truth?...do you have absolute knowledge?
better still...If you don't have the absolute truth then God *does not exist*......and your answer is?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
03 Oct 06
Originally posted by Agerg"Absolute truth" is defined as inflexible reality: fixed, invariable, unalterable facts.
so lemme get this straight....we have to have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of our doubt (which of course would no longer be doubt under such conditions)...yet you need only to tell us that we don't have absolute knowledge to demonstrate the credibility of your faith?
ok...If you don't have the absolute truth then the flying spaghetti mo ...[text shortened]... ill...If you don't have the absolute truth then God *does not exist*......and your answer is?
Making the claim that absolute truth exists does not require absolute knowlegde.
03 Oct 06
Originally posted by whodeyWhen someone says, "Hitler was a good man," that is a positive claim. They are asserting something as being true.
So the burden of justification is always on the person who makes any positive claim and not a negative claim? Try saying that in a court of law after you have defamed anothers reputation by expousing negative untruths about them. At least you see one truth, however, the theist holds claim to the postitive and the atheist holds claim to the negative. That w ...[text shortened]... r to hold on to the positive claim. I suppose the atheist will always see the glass half empty.
When someone counters by saying, "No, Hitler was not a good man," that is a negative claim. They are denying the truth of the first person's statement.
The terms "positive claim" and "negative claim" have absolutely nothing to do with the moral content or desirability of the claim. As christians so often do, you are egregiously committing the fallacy of equivocation. I do not understand why, but christians are drawn to this fallacy like moths to a flame.
03 Oct 06
2 edits
Originally posted by dj2beckerWrong, my claim is a parsimonious one, not an absolute one. It is relative to my common sense view of existence. Read my initial post about the nature of inductive acceptance again.
"Absolute truth" is defined as inflexible reality: fixed, invariable, unalterable facts.
Making the claim that absolute truth exists does not require absolute knowlegde.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
03 Oct 06
Originally posted by StarrmanBy saying "There is no absolute truth" you are making an absolute statement whether you would like to admit it or not.
Wrong, my claim is a parsimonious one, not an absolute one. It is relative to my common sense view of existence. Read my initial post about the nature of inductive acceptance again.
03 Oct 06
1 edit
oh...and if your answer is no, then I say that you are making an absolute statement that there is an absolute truth when you clearly do not have absolute knowledge, and thus how could you know there is absolute truth and that it is knowable!!!
and as such you should see the futility in your favourite line of attack and get back to the drawing board
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
03 Oct 06
1 edit
Originally posted by AgergIn order for me to know that the statement "There is gold in China" is the absolute truth, all I need is to validate one ounce of gold within the borders of China. I do not need absolute knowledge to do that.
oh...and if your answer is no, then I say that you are making an absolute statement that there is an absolute truth when you clearly do not have absolute knowledge, and thus how could you know there is absolute truth and that it is knowable!!!
and as such you should see the futility in your favourite line of attack and get back to the drawing board
03 Oct 06
Originally posted by dj2beckerso you don't know the absolute truth of *all* things...well then how do you know there is absolute truth, and that it's knowable eh?
I know the absolute truth about some things, with my limited knowledge.
If I had absolute knowledge I would know the absolute truth about everything.
can you please, pretty please find a more intelligent argument so that I no longer have to stoop so low to your level?