The post that was quoted here has been removedAll right, I will qualify that statement to mean any absolute truth which contains enough content to include (or at least imply) directives for human behaviour (call it a code of ethics or whatever). Mathematical formulas, though absolutely true, do not contain directives pertinent for human conduct.
The root evil is thinking one has a monopoly on absolute truth. Whenever a group of people think they have a monopoly on absolute truth, it is not long before they think they have an absolute duty and a right to impose it on others.
Is all that absolutely true Moonbus?
And here you are putting forth your absolute truth.
So you are imposing your "absolute truth" on everyone.
You're self contradictory.
@sonship saidThis is sophistry, sonship. I think you understand the point moonbus is making well enough.
@moonbus
The root evil is thinking one has a monopoly on absolute truth. Whenever a group of people think they have a monopoly on absolute truth, it is not long before they think they have an absolute duty and a right to impose it on others.
Is all that absolutely true Moonbus?
And here you are putting forth your absolute truth.
So you are imposing your "absolute truth" on everyone.
You're self contradictory.
I think by attaching the label "absolute truth" to his observation is you playing with words in a miserable reprise of one of the agonizingly limited number of glib-ditties from the dj2becker playbook.
Unlike you, moonbus is not claiming that he has a belief in a supernatural being and he is not claiming that this means his beliefs are "absolute truths" about the reality he and everyone else, regardless of the sincerity and certainty they have regarding their beliefs, lives in.
All this stuff about supernatural causality [or 'not-supernatural causality'] is subjective. It's aspirational. It's speculative. It's personal. It is subjective.
Claiming your faith creates "absolute" and "objective" facts on the ground for everybody is profoundly subjective on your part.