From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: What is truth? Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 09:36:28 -0600
----- Original Message ----- From: "Travis Edmunds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 5:25 PM Subject: RE: What is truth?
> > > > > I see where you are coming from. But it all comes down to ones
own
> > > >concept
> > > > > of evil now doesn't it?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >Unless, of course, truth actually exists. :-)
> > > >
> > > >Dan M.
> > >
> > > <lol> Well, what exactly is truth?
> >
> >Truth is that which is valid apart from our beliefs and perceptions. If
> >truth doesn't exist, then everything is arbitrary. If it does, than
some
> >ideas are actually better/more accurate than others. I certainly cannot
> >prove that it is wrong to take a 4 year old girl, rape and torture her
in
> >the most hideous manner possible before killing her. However, I believe
> >that it is a true statement that she deserves better than that because
of
> >her inherent worth as a human being.
> >
> >Another word you bandies about is fact. Facts are actually a lot more
> >limited than a casual observation might lead one to believe.
> >
> >Dan M.
> >
>
> So, you cannot prove that truth exists, you are the holder of your own
> beliefs, and I am a casual observer. How wholly unremarkable. And there
you
> have it, a truth if you will. You cannot prove anything, and hence you
> revert back to your beliefs. That sir, is exactly what I'm talking about.
As far as I can tell, my point wasn't communicated to you.
Far be it for me to read between the lines. I shall endeavor not to in the future. Keep in mind that I am human though, and prone to imperfection.
Proof is virtually impossible to come by without postulates being agreed upon beforehand. So, there is no way to prove much of anything to a full true skeptic. All I know without doubt is that I pereceive, since I have an awareness of perception and a reflective self awareness of the perceiving. Everything else takes at least some faith.
Faith. Such a fickle word isn't it?
As for your thoughts on proof, well I couldn't agree more. The problem however lies within the realm of faith. Instead of people unanimously agreeing upon what would seem to be apparant truths, they revert back to faith. And I find that quite perplexing.
> In order to cushion the backwash towards myself though, let me say that I
> agree with you on the score of someone having "inherent worth as a human
> being". That one stems not from morality I think, but from the fact that
> life, in the grand scheme of things is rare. Or at least we cannot prove
> otherwise at this point in time. Also, humans are the only sentient
beings
> known to exist, so there is something special, different about us. And
> though torture is at the best of times cruel, the needless loss of life
of a
> human being is...needless. If I were born and raised in circumstances
where
> killing was commonplace, and completely ethical, I still think some side
of
> my intellect would have reservations. Though not reservations stemming
from
> morality, but rather from something unique being destroyed. There is a
> difference.
In a market economy, scarcity can give value. However, that's also a function of demand. Even more rare than sentience is anti-hydrogen. Is that more valuable than humans?
Well that depends. Are we paying in American or Canadian dollars?
Paintings by me are rarer than paintings by Monet, does that make them more valuable?
Dan M.
Again it depends. Are they any good? Are you going blind?
-Travis "that's an easy way out" Edmunds
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
