TRUTH IS UNIVERSAL
-
- Posts: 286
- Joined: December 12th, 2008, 5:30 pm
If this is not a joke, then: congratulations, you have achieved many points at the Crackpot index!nameless wrote:Belinda wrote:QM and Relativity can neither account for 'gravity'. It is completely accounted for in my theory, along the same lines as the paradoxes of 'time' and 'motion'. Wait and you can read about it in Scientific American in 5 or 10 years, maybe 15, considering the ocified grey academic hoards pledged to guard the 'past'...
The value in 'theories' is that which they can describe and predict.
We live in 'exciting times'!
Stay tuned. *__-
See especially 26. and 34. here:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
-
- Posts: 1230
- Joined: May 13th, 2008, 9:06 pm
- Location: Here/Now
(Actually, it is an offer, 'bait', for questioning my meaning, thereby allowing me to expound and elucidate on such. But you, regardless of your ignorance of my meaning, react emotionally in your (attemptedly) 'humorous' dismissal of that which you are ignorant. Isn't that the definition of 'stupid'?)Jarle10 wrote:If this is not a joke, then: congratulations, you have achieved many points at the Crackpot index!
Your response is almost 'cute' and all, but every true thinker that has advanced human understanding has always been called 'crackpots' by the mediocre minds appointed to guard the past. Eventually, they fade into well deserved obscurity. 'Time' will most certainly tell!
Your thoughtful discussion, in-depth understanding, and rigorous refutation, however, has been noted (primarily by it's absence).
Your ad hom attack, as such, fails.
You have said nothing of value to anyone (besides your own shaky ego) in your post.
Thanx (for the attempt at a response) anyway.
I suggest that you ignore me in the future. "Lay down with dogs and wake with fleas", eh? You might catch my 'crackpotism'!
Bye bye
-
- Posts: 286
- Joined: December 12th, 2008, 5:30 pm
Anyway, I have said what needs to be said in our previous discussion - and your reply did not contain anything that had not been covered, so I saw no reason to continue.
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 739
- Joined: July 10th, 2009, 3:24 am
Many ask me when I say talk of universal truth "ah! but how do you know that is the truth?" which frustrates me because that is totally missing the idea, one might NOT know! It changes nothing, for truth doesn't give a damn what you think! Reality does not revolve around what you do and do not know after all, at least, this is provided other stuff besides you exists, which is debatable but as I've said to many people, solipsim gives you absolutely nothing but an inflated opinion of yourself.
-
- Posts: 3314
- Joined: April 6th, 2009, 9:55 pm
That's easy, Wanabe:wanabe wrote:it's settled then, truth is universal. if something is true, it is always true everywhere. now, to find out what is true...
If something is true everywhere,
then everywhere something is true,
then everything is true!:)
Since to the pure, everything is pure, Titus 1:15,
then it is true that everything is pure everywhere to the pure.
Hi Trevwinn.trevwinn wrote: Pain is defined by pleasure. Without (idea of) pleasure you can have no (idea of) pain.
Perfect!--in Love of imperfect!Smile
-
- Posts: 739
- Joined: July 10th, 2009, 3:24 am
Nooooo, the first two bits make sense but the last does not. You say everywhere something is true not everything. In this place of space and time that I am occupying, something is true and that is that I am typing (at least this is what my senses are telling me) but it is false that I am drinking from a cup thus not everything is true.ape wrote:That's easy:wanabe wrote:it's settled then, truth is universal. if something is true, it is always true everywhere. now, to find out what is true...
If something is true everywhere,
then everywhere something is true,
then everything is true!:)
Since to the pure, everything is pure, Titus 1:15,
then it is true that everything is pure to the pure.
-
- Posts: 3314
- Joined: April 6th, 2009, 9:55 pm
Ss,Simon says... wrote:I think the problem is that whilst facts may indeed by objective, words are not and it is with words that we communicate, which inevitably leads to confusion. Words are like algebra, x means nothing unless you define that x = 1, and it is the same with words, if I now invent a word like floopdagle (maybe that is a word in some language, i hope not) then that word is utterly meaningless until I say: Floopdagle, a method of linguistic communication involving popping noises...suddenly floopdagle means something. It is the same with truth unfortunately, truth has been Hijacked to mean various things, which I think misses the point of the origional concept, which was to outline something that is totally and irrefutably inflexible whether you know what it really is or not!
Many ask me when I say talk of universal truth "ah! but how do you know that is the truth?" which frustrates me because that is totally missing the idea, one might NOT know! It changes nothing, for truth doesn't give a damn what you think! Reality does not revolve around what you do and do not know after all, at least, this is provided other stuff besides you exists, which is debatable but as I've said to many people, solipsim gives you absolutely nothing but an inflated opinion of yourself.
Have you ever tried to break down reality in to 2 realities:
Outer Reality in which words only represent the things that are in that OR;
and
Inner Reality in which words are the reality?
It wd solve the problem you mention about objectivity and subjectivity, and truth.
-
- Posts: 739
- Joined: July 10th, 2009, 3:24 am
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023