Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

On knowledge v belief: who to trust?


moxieflux66

Recommended Posts

  • Super Moderator
22 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Prof,

 

So long as Ed asserts that all truth is subjective he has no choice but to make claims he cannot support.

 

That is what across-the-board subjectivity means.

 

A claim is relevant and meaningful ONLY to the claim-maker.

 

Not to anyone else.

Ed doesn't claim that all truth is subjective, though.  He also espouses the belief that there is an Absolute Truth.  This is where the point of contention presently exists between he and I.  Quite why he can't understand that Absolute and Subjective are opposites; but somehow believes that 1 and 100 are, is beyond me.  

 

He also seems to think that certain of his own "truths" are purely objective.  The idea that a question, example, or discussion point that he puts forth should be immediately addressed, to his satisfaction, and readily accepted by all involved seems to be one such "truth" he views as objective.  Of course, were we to ask him to answer a question, we're simply being subjective and close minded.  It must be confusing to live inside his head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might as well join us M.....if you would like to answer the question as well. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Here's my last question...Prof and Walter: do you agree with Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal"?

 

Just a simple yes or no will suffice.  Thanks.

I reject the question as irrelevant.  Just because you're attempting to use "men" instead of numbers isn't going to make your example any more relevant or acceptable.  Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humans were not created, Ed.

 

We evolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Ed doesn't claim that all truth is subjective, though.  He also espouses the belief that there is an Absolute Truth.  This is where the point of contention presently exists between he and I.  Quite why he can't understand that Absolute and Subjective are opposites; but somehow believes that 1 and 100 are, is beyond me.  

 

He also seems to think that certain of his own "truths" are purely objective.  The idea that a question, example, or discussion point that he puts forth should be immediately addressed, to his satisfaction, and readily accepted by all involved seems to be one such "truth" he views as objective.  Of course, were we to ask him to answer a question, we're simply being subjective and close minded.  It must be confusing to live inside his head.

It's basically phyl

 

Just now, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I reject the question as irrelevant.  Just because you're attempting to use "men" instead of numbers isn't going to make your example any more relevant or acceptable.  Have a nice day.

No brother, lol, you asked me attempt to understand the law of whatever rule that you keep touting.....this is my attempt.  Bow out in defeat if you must...lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, walterpthefirst said:

Humans were not created, Ed.

 

We evolved.

That's not what was asked...Elroy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

That's not what was asked...Elroy...

 

Then the Declaration of Independence is based upon a falsehood.

 

I can't treat a falsehood as a truth so that I can answer your question, Ed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

No brother, lol, you asked me attempt to understand the law of whatever rule that you keep touting.....this is my attempt.  Bow out in defeat if you must...lol.

And your question demonstrates you still have no clue what the Law of Excluded Third means.  This isn't an attempt at anything other than altering your example.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

It's basically phyl

 

No brother, lol, you asked me attempt to understand the law of whatever rule that you keep touting.....this is my attempt.  Bow out in defeat if you must...lol.

 

Apples and oranges.

 

There is no direct, like-for-like comparison between the Prof's Laws of Identity and Non-Contradiction and the Declaration of Independence.

 

So you are asking a malformed question, Ed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, walterpthefirst said:

 

Then the Declaration of Independence is based upon a falsehood.

 

I can't treat a falsehood as a truth so that I can answer your question, Ed.

Well, your answer is an answer Walter.....thanks.  I don't believe you are being honest, btw.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

And your question demonstrates you still have no clue what the Law of Excluded Third means.  This isn't an attempt at anything other than altering your example.  

It's philosophy based on what we can't answer.  You excuse yourself with "as a scientist" we see no proof for lives are equal....but you contradict that in your heart.  Stop bullshitting a bullshitter bud... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

Well, your answer is an answer Walter.....thanks.  I don't believe you are being honest, btw.

 

 

And I don't believe that you can't see the contradiction in your beliefs that the Prof has shown you.

 

The contradiction between your belief in Absolute Truth and Subjective truth.

 

You're not stupid.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

It's philosophy based on what we can't answer.  You excuse yourself with "as a scientist" we see no proof for lives are equal....but you contradict that in your heart.  Stop bullshitting a bullshitter bud... 

 

How many more times?

 

Proofs only exist in math and in logic.

 

Nowhere else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

You might as well join us M.....if you would like to answer the question as well. :)

 

Baiting me? No, I still think you're doing fine without me. 

 

17 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

You might as well join us M.....if you would like to answer the question as well. :)

 

Meanwhile, I posted another topic. Since you seem to be in an energetic mood, how 'bout that one? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
7 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

It's philosophy based on what we can't answer.  

It is irrelevant.  We can answer whether or not a jug is full or empty.

 

8 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

You excuse yourself with "as a scientist" we see no proof for lives are equal

Produce a quote in which I express this sentiment.  Or admit that you are bald-faced lying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can tear yourselves away from what has now become a bit tedious, I posted two topics I'd love to hear from Egarcito about if he may....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

@walterpthefirst, let us kindly give deference to Ms. Moxie and allow Ed the space he needs to engage in these other threads.  We will, I have no doubt, resume with Ed on the topic of Absolute Truth on another day.  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

@walterpthefirst, let us kindly give deference to Ms. Moxie and allow Ed the space he needs to engage in these other threads.  We will, I have no doubt, resume with Ed on the topic of Absolute Truth on another day.  Thanks.

I humbly thank you 😔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and please feel free to also contribute your thoughts that I may better know you all in the community too! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

@walterpthefirst, let us kindly give deference to Ms. Moxie and allow Ed the space he needs to engage in these other threads.  We will, I have no doubt, resume with Ed on the topic of Absolute Truth on another day.  Thanks.

Lol, I'm all giddy with excitement...lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

Lol, I'm all giddy with excitement...lol.

Me too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.

 

Edgarcito being who he is, will no doubt drag us back over the same ground at some point in the future.

 

Till then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if you would be so kind as to hurry up since I am on a social budget and don't want to waste time. No offense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, walterpthefirst said:

Agreed.

 

Edgarcito being who he is, will no doubt drag us back over the same ground at some point in the future.

 

Till then...

Is this person more than one person? Seems entirely different from last night's version....or is that rude? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing is obvious.  All men are not “created” with equal IQs.  😁

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.