Absolutes

by **Keesa** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 5:18 pm

I believe in an absolute right and wrong.

I don't believe that truth changes with people's perceptions of it.

I also believe that the majority of the civilized and educated world will disagree with me.

I won't be around to defend myself for the next few days (so do go easy on me!

) but take that and run with it, and I'll catch up when I get a chance.

Keesa

by **Mongoose42** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 6:21 pm

Many people claiming to represent the "enlightened" community have claimed that there is no absolute truth, however such a belief is selfcontradictory (see the "we know nothing again" thread.

Often times the arguement over the existence of absolute truth is mistaken for the answer to questions that can not be proved by science, such as is there a god or a gravitational monkey.

by **Mongoose42** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 7:45 pm

"enlightened"=those who think they are abnormally bright

by **threewood14** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:48 pm

lol monkey.

by **Eureka** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:28 am

1. Define "goodness"

2. Define "badness"

3. Now do it without using relative terms

4. Don't put quotations around "enlightened"

by **threewood14** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 2:32 pm

goodness is something that will work for someones benefit or something that someone can give to another's benefit.

badness is something that will create conflict or a trait in someone causing conflict

is that right?

by **Mongoose42** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 6:18 pm

How much time is something given to be of benefit for someone else?

by **threewood14** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 6:42 pm

its all relative to what the benefit is

by **Mongoose42** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:52 pm

A parent keeps his or her child from a weekend ski trip for no better reason than the person is a parent (kid's point of view)

Is this absolutly good or bad?

Kid doesn't go and everyone else ends up in an accident and in the hospital.

Has the qualification of good or bad changed?

by **threewood14** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 12:33 am

not only is the benefit relative but also the point in time...that is why i voted no

by **Eureka** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 12:35 am

threewood14 wrote:goodness is something that will work for someones benefit or something that someone can give to another's benefit.

Exactly, so it's easy to see that an event can be good for one person, and bad for another (in other words "relative").

by **Jung He Fah Toy** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 2:11 am

Einstein

by **Eureka** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 2:42 am

Jung He Fah Toy wrote:Einstein

It's got nothing to do with relativity.

by **Mongoose42** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 12:11 pm

If we look at a two second time gap for something to be determined good or bad, then everything is relative because the outcome is not known. If we were to look at all events in time from a perspective from outside of time, we could see all outcomes and decide whether the event is good or bad. An event judged from such a position would be absolutly good or absolutly bad.
Imagine a car moving through a forest. To a person in the front seat looking ahead, the trees are moving at a slow pace past the cars. To a person in the back seat looking out a side window, the trees are moving past so fast that the trees are just blurs. To the person floating in the sky over the forest, the cars is moving but the forest is absolutly not moving.

by **Emma_85** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:41 pm

I voted no, the reason being, that right and wrong are concepts we humans created. So right and wrong does change depending on the perspective.

by **Jung He Fah Toy** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 11:19 pm

It's got nothing to do with relativity.

"It is all relative." -Einstein. This quote does include general relativity, but it has a lot more leaning than just that. It does apply to this topic. All Einstein is saying is that there really are no absolutes.

by **Mongoose42** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 12:09 pm

Does Einstien say that there are no absolutes or that human perception can't determine absolute truth?

by **Apotheosis** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 12:22 pm

The only absolute truth is reality. It is true simply because it exists. We cannot deny the fact that it is there. It is always true. It is always absolute. When we start to add words like "right" and "wrong", we are now no longer talking in terms of facts. We are talking in terms of opinions. I'm not exactly sure if I've answered any questions here, but I figured I'd just add my two cents.

by **Barrius** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 12:38 pm

Keesa wrote:I believe in an absolute right and wrong.

I don't believe that truth changes with people's perceptions of it.

I also believe that the majority of the civilized and educated world will disagree with me.

I believe that God is the epitome of "right", but the universe was infused with right and wrong - how else could someone have free will?

Our perception of what is right & wrong does not alter God's perception of an event, nor can it alter it. It is as if it were written in stone for time immemorial.

In my humble opinion of course

:wink:

by **threewood14** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 2:43 pm

Its all how we interpret reality. Reality is patterns of energy in points in time.

Website · by **benissimus** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 2:59 pm

I think right and wrong are opinions, why else would we need judges? Religious people are probably more likely to believe in absolute right, wrong, and truth and all that good stuff.

by **Emma_85** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:33 pm

Religious people are probably more likely to believe in absolute right, wrong, and truth and all that good stuff.

Yes, I think you are right there benissimus. I know klewlis and Keesa are religious and they both voted for yes and Barrius also seems to be religious. So it greatly depends on wether you believe in God or not. I won't start another debate on religion here, as we've already had one.

But judges are there to try and find out who is lying and who isn't...

by **threewood14** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:58 pm

I am very religious an I voted no. I believe in God but in a different way I guess.

by **Emma_85** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 5:48 pm

I believe in God but in a different way I guess.

Yeah, must be in a different way then. What the others mean I think (correct me if I'm talking rubbish please!!!) is something along the lines of: God exists, he's the reason why good and evil exist, as he is the reason why everything exists. He created good and evil, therefore they can't be things that change depending on which way people look at them, as God knows what is good and as Barrius put it, doesn't change his mind. That does not mean of course that we can know what is good and what is evil. God may want to hide that from us (the details that is) so that we use our brain, which he gave us, and think about it.
So how do you believe in God, but voted for no absolute good and evil. I must admit I had a bit of trouble following your argument in this thread. I suppose basically we are thinking along the same lines as you voted no too, but I'm a bit uncertain.
How does God come into it all in your point of view (for he must somehow as you believe in Him)? So you believe that good and evil are relative, depending on what the consequences are? I'm not too sure what you mean.... Is there just no such thing as good an evil at all? Are there no actions that can be called 'evil' and none that can be called 'good' for themselves (I believe that there are actions of people we can call good and others evil)? Do you believe that good describes a state of being, a point in time, caused by some actions (which can be good or evil) in the past? For if you say that good and evil do exist, who else created them but your God? And if he did... (see the first bit of my thread). I'm interested in what you think, as I'm not sure I understand it right now.

by **threewood14** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 5:51 pm

Okay. I believe in the creation a little bit different. I believe that God caused two branes to collide and create a huge explosion. A lot different than the 7 days thing. I believe that God has the best intentions for us. He controls 'time' or whatever time may be. In other words, he controls everything. Our decisions are made by him. Satan tries to take control of time control and this is done by possesion.

by **Emma_85** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 5:56 pm

Wow, you replied quickly! I take my time with my posts, so I just edited it... :oops:

.

Ok, now I understand the basics of your religion, so: God made the world and he has good intentions and controls everything, even Satan. But why does he let Satan exist if he has the best intentions? Who is Satan, if he is't the absolute evil?

by **threewood14** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 12:00 am

Thats a tough question. But I think that God allows Satan aka evil to exist to make man strong. Without challenges to defeat temptation, what good would life be?

I also strongly believe in Newtonian physics. I'm reffering to his 3rd law.

"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." meaning that everything has an opposite.

Satan is obviously the evil and tries to take souls to hell which is also not in our universe or whatev.

Anything else?

by **mingshey** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:19 am

threewood14 wrote:Thats a tough question. But I think that God allows Satan aka evil to exist to make man strong. Without challenges to defeat temptation, what good would life be?

And if he's found not to be strong enough, wash him out with flood or throw him into fire? What a loving God he is! :twisted:

by **threewood14** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:24 am

And if he's found not to be strong enough, wash him out with flood or throw him into fire? What a loving God he is!

He washed all those people because He knew it would teach the ppl of the future to worship Him and not idols. The ppl in the floods were probably forgiven by God and some probably went to Heaven. That is why He is a loving God.

by **mingshey** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:30 am

threewood14 wrote:He washed all those people because He knew it would teach the ppl of the future to worship Him and not idols. The ppl in the floods were probably forgiven by God and some probably went to Heaven. That is why He is a loving God.

I want to love God! (In his way.

)

by **Emma_85** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:09 pm

Now you are confusing me though. Wouldn't that mean that you believe in absolute evil, if you believe that Satan is evil?
Just wondering, have you read Goethe's Faust?

by **threewood14** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:20 pm

In order to believe that Satan is absolute evil, I would have to believe that God is absolute good...correct? This is not the case. I believe that God is an extremely wonderful Being, but if He was absolutely wonderful, I think He could find better ways to challenge us instead of giving us evil to make us strong. Or maybe not flood the planet and somehow convince everyone that God is the true and only God. God does cause pain and it is for good cause, but there are other ways for Him to change the way we think without causing pain. Plus, He does not have absolute control over time. The devil has taken a small piece but enough to do possession. If He was absolute good, He could prevent this.

Just wondering, have you read Goethe's Faust?

Nope sorry.

by **Mongoose42** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 6:39 pm

So, if you agree that God created everything, including satan, and was therefore around before everything else, then how do you acount for His lack of complete control. If God created everything, is omniscient, and is omnipotent, then He must have known all of the possible ways to create a universe. If you look at the thread on fate or free choice, the idea of determinism grants the idea that God saw all of the possible options for a universe and chose the best option. He either chose the best option or He is a sadistic overlord that would deny His creation the very best. Into all of this the devil was thrown. He is a created being and is part of the planned timeline. Thus, he has no more control over time than any human. All of this leads to God being used as the perspective for determing the ultimate of everything (at one time He was the only thing existing) and as the ultimate perspective He must be immutable and therefore absolute.

P.S. what did you mean by the Faust reference?

by **threewood14** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 6:43 pm

If God created everything, is omniscient, and is omnipotent, then He must have known all of the possible ways to create a universe.

God created everything in the universe. He did not create Heaven or Hell. God is limited to Fate only in Heaven. I believe that Heaven is not in our universe but in some other...place. Therefore God does not have complete control over events in Heaven.

by **Emma_85** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 6:59 pm

I hope this question isn't too personal, it's just that I've never come across this belief before... why do you believe this is so? Are there any texts concerning this that God left on earth for us to understand him, does he want us to understand what's going on? Where does your belief come from?

by **threewood14** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 7:49 pm

I'm still trying to figure that out too! But I'll try.

I am really into the begining. The begining of the universe. The begining of everything. I've read about the Big Bang and thought that was a pretty good idea. Now, I realize that it would be very weird to have the Big Bang because it is a singularity. A singularity is a point of infinite density and the laws of physics break apart. While I was reading about all this, I kept trying to figure out how I could tie my religion, Roman Catholic, into all of this and if I even could. The current newest well known theory about the universe is the Brane theory. I haven't read much about it myself (shame on me!) but I think I have a general understanding of it. It basically says that our universe is on a big brane much like a plane in geomertry. You can picture it as the top layer of soup. There are many branes. For some reason, two branes collided and spewed matter and energy everywhere. The neat thing about it is that the closest brane to ours is less than a photon away!

But this just raises more questions. What caused the branes to collide? I also got into 'time'. What is time? Do we have control over our lives? I thought and thought about this and came to the conclusion that we do not have much control over what happens to us. We make decisions based on our memory or observations and information from the past, our current observations and our environment. Everything is a big reaction. Everything reacts to everything. Now if this is the case, then from the start, whatever that may be, it is sort of like fate.

So I have always wondered how everything started. I thought and thought and thought and came to the conclusion that there must have been a start. I don't believe that the universe existed forever. If this is the case, then our age compared to the age of the universe is 0. We are 0. Nothing can happen the way it does. If the univrese if finite, then things can happen even though our age compared to the universe's is like 1:vigintillion. So now, if the universe had a begining, what started it? Well I believe that with the begining of the universe, also came the flow of time. They go together like a cute couple. But if the flow of time came with the universe, how could anything cause it to start? No events can happen because there is no time right? This brings in God. God started the universe simply because, he was bored! Nothing but Him existed. Time does not apply to God. He is everywhere in the universe and at every point in time always. He has no begining and will have no end.

So this is how I believe everything started. God first created the branes and jsut banged them together. He knew that all this would eventually happen and its not like He had to wait. Time does not apply to Him. I believe that the fate of the universe is kind of like an atom. See the Solution to the Expansion of the universe thread. I think that God is the supreme ruler of the universe and Satan tries to capture His control. He has suceeded very little and has no where near the amount of control that God has.

This is how God controls the universe. I said that Time does not apply to Him. So in theory, He is starting the universe at this moment. If He sees something He doesn't like in the universe, He changes the begining slightly to tweak it. God is not the perfect unflawed being, but still highly supreme and in control. He has the best intentions for us because HE simply loves us.

I belive that God does not want us to worry about these things too much and HE does not want us to understand Him completely until we go to Heaven. This is why no one does! He wants to be sure that you have faith in Him. He wants you to trust Him; have Faith in Him. For He knows that if you have faith in Him, you love Him. Regardless if you understnad Him or not, He wants trust.

Why do some people not trust God, because they have been corrpted unfortunatly by Satan. He has very little control, but has some control nonetheless.

So believe...

by **Barrius** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 7:59 pm

Emma_85 wrote:
Religious people are probably more likely to believe in absolute right, wrong, and truth and all that good stuff.

Yes, I think you are right there benissimus. I know klewlis and Keesa are religious and they both voted for yes and Barrius also seems to be religious. So it greatly depends on wether you believe in God or not. I won't start another debate on religion here, as we've already had one.

But judges are there to try and find out who is lying and who isn't...

Certainly if one believes in God - as I do - that dictates their response. For the life of me, I cannot conceive of any other position for me to hold. Without the absolute there is nothing to strive for, as everything would be relative and subjective.

In my humble opinion of course.

by **threewood14** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 8:27 pm

fear God, hate sin

by **mingshey** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 11:46 pm

I hate fear and hatred.

by **threewood14** » Thu Apr 29, 2004 1:32 am

fear as in respect...hate is man's greatest weakness...love is man's greatest strength...

Absolutes

Do you believe in an absolute right and wrong?

Absolutes

Re: Absolutes

Who is online