[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 141 KB, 500x676, o3J1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591039 No.4591039[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

does an absolute, objective truth exist?

>> No.4591047

op is always, indubitably a fag

>> No.4591050

>>4591039
1+1=2
A=A

>> No.4591110

perceptions

>> No.4591157

>>4591039
Logical tautologies exist, although one cannot communicate them only using objective methods.

There is truth, yet, one cannot tell the truth.

>> No.4591160

>>4591050
>1+1=2
>Anon can't into maths

Come on, let's not do this shit. A does equal A don't, mainly because the alphabet is a modelling system that isn't delved into by autists for centuries.

>> No.4591162

>>4591160
>A does equal A don't
though*

>> No.4591163

>>4591039
Yes.

My taste > your taste

>> No.4591171

>>4591160
Stop crying, you manchild. 1+1=2 is an immutable truth.

>> No.4591173

Yes, from our perspective

>> No.4591176

>>4591171

1 and 2 and + and = are just meaningless signs. Really there's nothing stopping me from claiming 1+1=3

if one and one didn't make three, I wouldn't have been able to type that.

>> No.4591178

>>4591171
>stop crying

I was just telling you you're wrong, I wasn't crying about it. Again, it's because mathematics is the field of autistic people and they found a way to disprove fucking everything based on more advanced concepts - maths is just a modelling system after all, it has flaws.

>> No.4591182

>>4591176
You'd just redefine the signs which doesn't change anything fundamentally.

>> No.4591183

>>4591039
Yes, but it's not perceivable for anyone. Also theres always a certain error in every measurement, replication and so on. Theoretically there is an absolute truth but as humans we can just perceive a certain part of it.

>> No.4591184

>>4591176
Well no, because the moment you do that you're using a different modelling system and/or lying. My point >>4591178 is that the modelling system we actually use for maths, where on a basic level 1+1=2, advanced areas of the system can potentially disprove that.

>> No.4591185

>>4591039
what a beautiful image

>> No.4591187
File: 22 KB, 400x400, Thats wrong.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591187

>>4591176

>> No.4591190

>>4591160
y+y=x
>immutable truth

>> No.4591199

>>4591190
Still theres a certain chance that humans read it wrong or you wrote it wrong. Theres always a certain chance of error hindering humanity to perceive absolute truth. l2numerical analysis

>> No.4591206

>>4591199
Except the reader's ability to read doesn't factor into the fact that, in relation to the fucking modelling system of modern maths, 1+1=2 on one level and not on another.

The moment you read it wrong or someone writes it wrong, you're using a different modelling system. Suddenly, your 1+1=3 isn't maths, it's whatever the fuck you just wrote. It doesn't change modern maths or what's true within it.

>> No.4591211

>>4591039
anyone has the SOUCE of the OPs image?

>> No.4591212

>>4591199
i meant 2 quote the guy u did

>> No.4591218

>>4591211
Kobayashi Eijiro, High Bridge

>> No.4591234

>>4591218
>Kobayashi Eijiro, High Bridge
thanx anon

>> No.4591255

>>4591039
no

>> No.4591272

>>4591039
Yes it exists, and its burried beneath the heart of all mens all the same, but the filtration of cultures, time makes everyone's truth crippled , with only a part of it remainig stable.

>> No.4591277

>>4591050
Have you ever heard of Fichte or Hegel motherfucker.
I think not

>> No.4591281

>>4591206
people on their pc computers saying 1+1 =/= 2

>> No.4591315

Of course it does. Do you even science?

>> No.4591322

Only the fact that OP is a faggot.

>> No.4591341

Truth is a romantic and vague notion of perpetual interpretative systems, by virtue of information it is restricted to entropic variance within the axiomatic configuration of the proto-perception feedback allocation.

>> No.4591344

>>4591315
Of course it doesn't. Do you even science?

>> No.4591348

In terms of observational science, yes.

In terms of morality or philosophy, never.

>> No.4591349

>>4591344
>cannot know nuffin

And this is why philosophy is nothing more than a joke nowadays.

>> No.4591357

>>4591039

Yes. It's reality.

The catch is that an objective truth can't be reached by faulty humans. So the question isn't too relevant anymore.

>> No.4591360

>>4591348

Morality is the easiest objective truth to reach. Short of being a psychopath, anyone can reach moral truths.

>> No.4591366

>>4591349
Aww, babby's upset because he can't handle the fact that he doesn't know anything?

>> No.4591367

>>4591277
>implying you understand either of those philosophers
top key, faggot

>> No.4591368
File: 606 KB, 2556x1767, buddha.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591368

>>4591039
Four of them do.

>> No.4591380

>>4591360
Moral truths you are not born with, but develop through forced morality abstraction over time

>> No.4591388

>>4591366
Don't project your ignorance into others.

>> No.4591399

>>4591388
Don't try to appear more intelligent and correct by using childish ad hominem arguments.

>> No.4591401

relevant question is not whether an absolute, objective truth EXISTS - i think it more or less has to - but whether an absolute objective truth is KNOWABLE, as such, by us. and it does not seem to be.

>> No.4591416

>>4591341
>>4591176
>>4591160
>Sup guise! I have no idea how Mathematical Logic and its foundations work!!!!!!!! Let me just derp these brain-farts as if I knew what I was talking about!!!!

>> No.4591423

>>4591399
I am factually more intelligent (IQ > 170) and more educated (MSc from a top tier university) than you. Either get on my level, pleb, or have fun dwelling your teenaged pseudo-intellectualism.

>> No.4591425

>>4591416
Be careful average person, you can't tread lightly in here but you should.

>> No.4591433

>>4591423
I apologize, sir. I had no idea I was beaten before my hands ever hit the keyboard.

>> No.4591436

>>4591176

And I can TYPE A =/= A, but that doesn't make it true. You're merely assuming a sort of formalism without giving your reasons for supporting it. The whole Formalism vs. Intuitionism vs. Set-theoretical Platonism vs. Indispensabilism debate has not simply been solved, and by saying something like this, you've gotta properly enter it, instead of merely assuming your gut feeling is right.

>> No.4591451

If there are literally no absolute, objective truth exists, then isn't it absolutely objectively true that "no other absolute, objective truths exist but this one?"

So there's at least one.

>> No.4591454

>>4591451
Welcome to Philosophy 101.

>> No.4591455

>>4591176
What is being said, that you're missing, is that the idea EXPRESSED by 1+1=2 is always true, not that those symbols can't be used differently.

>> No.4591464

>>4591451
Nihilism implies an initial value in the rules of logic, because nihilists think their view is logical.

>> No.4591468

>>4591039

Tautologies, you retard

>> No.4591476

>>4591039
Is it raining in that pic? Why have the people on the bridge no umbrella.

>> No.4591489

>>4591476
if it was raining the water would show it

stop being a peabrain

>> No.4591490

>>4591476
>Is it raining in that pic?
No.

>> No.4591497

>>4591476
That's not a picture, that's a painting.

>> No.4591501

>>4591436

Man what's with all these -ism words? No wonder normal people can't into philosophy.

>> No.4591506

>>4591501
>anti-intellectualism

>> No.4591516

>>4591501

Well I mean the ideas behind those -isms are fairly simple (though the arguments for them, typically not so). There's no need to be intimidated. Though I was trying to intimidate him with the formal sound of the -isms, since I don't want someone so stupid even trying to understand proper philosophy.

>> No.4591519

>>4591425
If I am average then you are borderline clinically retarded.

Go take some Mathematical Logic class.

>> No.4591544

>>4591341

Come now, you know full well you could have worded that more simply.

Here's a better way to say what I think you're trying to say:
Truth is a vague concept we try to apply to the fundamentally chaotic (or "entropic", if you prefer) raw information given to us by our senses and more basic mental faculties. Put this way, nobody will misunderstand you, and nobody will be confused.

>> No.4591562

>>4591544
>Truth is a vague concept
Oh wow. Yet another postmodernist.

It's like you toddlers have never heard of Tarski and the subsequent developments that followed.

Why is /lit/ so shit these days?

>> No.4591575

>>4591562

I wasn't implying I AGREE with him you fucking Mongoloid. I was just rephrasing his decidedly confusing sentence.

>> No.4591594

>>4591050
cmon we all know 1+1=3

>> No.4591626

if an objective truth falls from a tree but there's no one around to catch it, does it still exist?

>> No.4591631

>>4591050
There is no 1 or 2 for simpler organisms, so if you think that's an "absolute, objective truth" you're mistaken.

>> No.4591639

>>4591631

>not everybody can recognize the truth
>therefore it doesn't exist

Not everybody recognizes that you're not a faggot, so let's assume the opposite.

>> No.4591646

>>4591639
I didn't say it doesn't exist, it's just not absolute or objective because it's dependent on our biological systems.

>> No.4591657

>>4591646

What if I told you that truth actually was entirely dependent on these "biological systems", a la coherentism?

>> No.4591670

>>4591657
Elaborate, because it sounds like you just repeated what I was saying.

>> No.4591677

>>4591670

Sorry, I have a fever, forgive me. I meant to say "that THE WORLD actually was entirely dependent"

>> No.4591679

>>4591677
Oh, then you'd be preaching to the choir.

>> No.4591695
File: 35 KB, 480x640, 139096637496.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591695

every fucking day. every singe fucking day this little faggot just sits there and gives me this stupid fucking look on his face.

>> No.4591696

>>4591679

Then why do you feel as though it's relevant to bring up biological systems? I thought you were assuming a sort of reductionism.

>> No.4591699

>>4591050
>2014
>doesn't know math is language

>> No.4591705

>>4591451
or not

>> No.4591712

>>4591699
even if it's language the relations it expresses are absolute

>> No.4591714

>>4591712
still conventional and created by humans, not an universal truth

>> No.4591741
File: 22 KB, 200x226, 1308238135272.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591741

>>4591696
>truth is dependent on biological systems
>the world is dependent on biological systems
mean the same exact thing to me.

>For we have no organ whatever for knowledge, for 'truth': we 'know' (or believe or fancy) precisely as much as may be useful in the interest of the human herd, the species: and even that which is here termed 'usefulness' is only a belief, a fancy, and perhaps precisely that most fatal piece of stupidity through which we shall some day perish.
Gotta love Nietzsche.

>> No.4591746

Everything is distance.

>> No.4591756

>>4591039
PHENOMENA
PHENOMENA
BLEEP BLOOP
PHENOMENA

PHENOMENA
PHENOMENA
PHENOMENA
OP IS A FAGGOT

>> No.4591757

>>4591368
Noble truths aren't absolute truths in regards to the flower sermon

>> No.4591769

Yes, it does exist but all the nitpicky little 4channiarian philosophers would like to pull ridiculous 'but le we cant be sure' arguments out of their ass.

>> No.4591781

>>4591769
But we can't be le sure

>> No.4591789

>>4591741

No, fuck Nietzsche. Fuck Continentalism in general. Fuck you.

>> No.4591795
File: 1.59 MB, 2398x1200, nietzsche-heidegger-derrida.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591795

No

>> No.4591800

>>4591795
Lel
Stop thinking and try just being for once

>> No.4591812
File: 243 KB, 913x1186, sir_karl_popper_1902-1995-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591812

>>4591795

>cuntinentals

>> No.4591814

>>4591800

>being instead of Being-in-the-world

>> No.4591825
File: 36 KB, 450x302, kuhn.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591825

>>4591812

>ill-formed, unargued dig at continental philosophers
>posts a continental philosopher

Get rekt faggot.

>> No.4591841

>>4591451
"There are no absolute, objective truths" and "There are absolute objective truths" would both be justified.

>> No.4591842
File: 1.04 MB, 4096x4096, distance in the singularity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591842

>>4591814
>being in the world instead of being the world
Top wat m8

>> No.4591848

>>4591519
The illusory extremity of unfound projectile, you're approaching an assumption of grasp-esque radiation, a resurrected downfall is you.

>> No.4591857

>>4591842
Just saying "being" does not tell you anything specific when questioning being and in the case he used it, it was wrong. What he meant was In Der Welt Sein or Being In The World which is the state of being (here you can use being) where the Dasein is grounded..

>> No.4591859

>>4591039

Im not sure what you're asking for. What's the difference between "truth" and "absolute truth"? What exactly does the adverb "absolute" add? If I were to say "it's is true that Obama is president of the United States of America" and you were to respond with "yes, but that's not *absolutely* true", I'm not sure what you'd be looking for.

Do you mean something like infallibly truth? Truth which rules out the possibility of error? Analytic truths would seem to fit the bill. "A bachelor is an unmarried man" is a good contender for statements which holds as true come what may.

>> No.4591865

>>4591741
>believing that truth exists is gonna kill us guys woah am I being nonsensical yet
What a faggot.

>> No.4591880

>>4591865
Believing in error can definitely cause great error.

>> No.4591905
File: 655 KB, 300x168, 1358402567069.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591905

Yeah, all is truth. But not to you, -if you think something is certain then it is certain to you.
If something is certain in a natural sense, than it is true to those in that natural paradigm. Accepting a refutation if anyone has one,

>> No.4591930
File: 79 KB, 429x508, The Blessed Virgin Mary.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4591930

God exists.
More than that, God is the foundation of all being. Everything that has being takes its being from God.

>> No.4591958

>>4591930

How dare you bring that here. That is not at all how you format a hexadecimal number; it's led with a 0, not an O.

>> No.4591974

>>4591930
I don't even disagree but why use Catholic imagery?

>> No.4591995

>>4591958
>why refer to the one true church

kek

>> No.4592022

It's more likely than an absolute, subjective truth would exist. As of yet, no one can name any objective truth which is absolute.

>> No.4592028

>>4592022
>more likely that

>> No.4592029

>>4591995
I wasn't talking about that. #lrn2read

>> No.4592149

>>4591039
truth, insofar as there are properties of the material world which we can describe with statements in language, and those statements, with a given understanding of them, are more less accurate, does exist
this truth is intersubjective
truth, insofar as some statements in language follow from others, given a certain understanding of those statements, also exists and is also intersubjective
the idea that truth is an inherent property of statements in language is stupid & wrong

complete truth is inaccessible to human beings, but we can relate to it with language to mediate the relation

>> No.4592176

>>4591848
>if I respond as obscure as possible, surely I will show him!!!!!!

Again, go to your class.

>> No.4592376
File: 254 KB, 1920x1080, 1386892214777.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4592376

I am

>> No.4592408
File: 26 KB, 590x349, spinozapaint.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4592408

>>4591930
I agree, furthermore, ascribing antropomorphic properties to the one Being is an error in reasoning.

>> No.4592443

>>4591865
>believing that truth exists is gonna kill us guys woah am I being nonsensical yet

What is global warming, deforestation, nuclear weapons, poison drinking water, strip mining, drought, spreading deserts etc. etc.

Do you even read non-fiction or newspapers?

>> No.4592487

>>4592376
k-kettu pro is that you? ;__;

>> No.4592547

you guys are so retarded and boring

>> No.4592549

Of course, if you believe in it.

>> No.4592551

>>4591039
Grow the fuck up.

>> No.4592632

All I know is that either I know or I dont know

>> No.4592860

>>4592029
sry i quoted te rong post :(