Quote:
Originally Posted by NotConvinced  I believe that's a hard thing to wrap my mind around Shaun. If you give me some examples of absolutely true statements I think I could reflect on whether they're true or not. What if they're not? Hmmmm.....relative truth? |
Sure. Let me first state that I am not arguing that
everything is absolutely true in the sense that if I say, "Shaun is 6 feet tall" that every Shaun in the world is 6 feet tall. I am saying in more of the sense of
axioms, such as First Principles, that are necessarily true by their very definition. Here are some First Principles, defined a priori:
1. A is A (law of identity)
2. A is not Non-A (law of contradiction)
3. Either B or Non-B (law of excluded middle)
Quote:
|
Answer: I believe that beliefs can't always be true.
|
We're not talking about beliefs here. We're talking about axioms. Again, you're confusing perspective with context. I am saying that certain things are always, absolutely true no matter what we think about them.
Just because you think something is not true does not inherently define its truth.
Truth is exclusive. To say that it is not is to state an exclusive truth to prove all truths are relative, ie: "I believe that all truths are relative" is using an absolute truth claim to try and say there are no absolute truth claims. It fails because it contradicts itself.
Just because you believe something to be true or false does not make that thing true or false. If I believe that my $1 bill in my pocket is worth ten million dollars, and go tell that to someone and tell them to give me ten million dollars in change, does not mean I will get that ten million dollars - nor do I act as if I believe this to be real.
The law of non-contradiction, which states that something cannot be itself and not itself at the same time, proves this - a tree cannot be both a tree and a giraffe at the same time, no matter what I believe about it. A common example is when someone says, "All religions are the same," they are using a vague generalization, and what they should say is that "I believe that some religions are similar to others in certain contexts." What they cannot mean is that all religions are the very same in every respect and context - such thinking is absurd, because the very idea of difference and the implication of the word "all" disproves this.
The law of identity is similar - if I say I am Shaun, that means (regardless of what anyone else says) that I mean I am Shaun. That is absolutely true. (think "I think therefore I am" descartes) If I define something to be an orange, I am not meaning it is an apple - I am meaning it is an orange.
Without these laws and concepts, communication is impossible. There have to be absolute truths that are exclusively true and are
a priori, otherwise we fall into a reductio ad absurdum infinitum fallacy.