# Thread: What's your take on absolute truth?

1. In terms of an absolute truth, it does seem that there is some "absolute truth" as to what is really happening in the world and how it works, even though it may be that I'm just some wispy consciousness imagining all this.

In terms of morality, I cannot say whether there is an absolute morality or not, but to live day to day life i assume there is, and pick it based on a way that seems to work best for helping people get along and get things done, which of course is influenced by my upbringing and experiences.

2. It's useful to assume some things as absolute in engineering tasks. For me, understanding and living in the world is an adventure, but also a huge engineering task I can't hope to find unified solution, but I can solve much of it piece-wise.. if you know the mathematical analogy... meaning, in different situations. So in some situations I assume the company rules as absolute, whereas in other, I take them the obedience to them as a variable.

A person can solve problems with only so many variables, so some parameters will have to be assumed as constant for the calculation - unchanging, absolute. It's similar with other thinking processes.

Of course we're discussing a lot to bring such a good truths and definitions which rarely need be be altered for new situations. It's easier with absolute truths.

Or, easy and easy. It's not always easy to find an universal law between seemingly contradictory instances of that law. So, many people find it much more reasonable to go for case-by-case analysis. I think it's inferior to a truly absolute law, but going case by case does work for some, making their "truths" only as big as the current task they're doing.

Yeah, I was considering truths and absoluteness from practical perspective.

3. I don't know if I missed it earlier in the thread if someone did talk about this, but I am seeing hints of the same in some other posts [Zergling's post distinguishes it, for example]; there is a difference to me between "absolute truth" and "absolute morality," although some people seem to equate the two.

4. Originally Posted by Jennifer
I don't know if I missed it earlier in the thread if someone did talk about this, but I am seeing hints of the same in some other posts [Zergling's post distinguishes it, for example]; there is a difference to me between "absolute truth" and "absolute morality," although some people seem to equate the two.
Yes, as I said they are very different things

It's pretty much impossible to have an absolute morality without relying on supernatural forces, I think.

5. Originally Posted by Jennifer
I don't know if I missed it earlier in the thread if someone did talk about this, but I am seeing hints of the same in some other posts [Zergling's post distinguishes it, for example]; there is a difference to me between "absolute truth" and "absolute morality," although some people seem to equate the two.
I would see "absolute morality" as a subset of "absolute truth", but perhaps some see these as independent.

6. Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser
I would see "absolute morality" as a subset of "absolute truth", but perhaps some see these as independent.
I wonder if it is necessary to believe in both absolute morality and absolute truth in order to see one as a subset of the other? ...or, perhaps, disbelieving in both would also make it possible?

I see them as separate because I don't think there is absolute morality, so logically it couldn't be a subset of absolute truth.

7. Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser
I would see "absolute morality" as a subset of "absolute truth",
Me too. I see absolute morality as being dependent on absolute truth, and as being a natural result of it.

8. The absolute truth is something that's there but not truly within anybody's gasp. I see it as being the net sum of all the possible solutions under every perspective. All I think we can do is speculate and derive the absolute truth by deduction... Doing so you either get a smaller summed up piece of the truth to be applied... or you end up with something so vague and generalized that it's useless. Like a cloth with a ton of holes inside.

What is morality? A subjective thing... what is absolute anything? A net sum of everything? Morality being totally subjective means nothing when summed up. I view morality as personal. Sticking them together makes no sense at all. So no, I doubt morality can be absolute.

9. Absolute truth is a silly notion.

That's all I got.

10. I generally agree with Randomnity. I believe in absolute truth absolutely, but absolute morality is a murkier subject. I find it interesting that so many have taken the term "absolute truth" to necessarily concern ethics, because I don't see it that way at all.

To demonstrate my opinion on absolute truth, I like to use the "banana example". If you get ten friends and try to figure out who likes bananas the most, you will fail to find a certain answer. Everyone is expressing their taste for bananas on their own internal scale, and those scales aren't going to match up. That said, there is certainly one person in that group who likes bananas the most. That answer will not and probably cannot be determined, but that doesn't mean that the answer is any less certain or real.

Absolute morality is different. I would like to think, and perhaps suspect that such a thing exists, but as a species we've not reached a level of maturity that would allow us to find the answer. I can't disagree with anyone who dismisses the idea of absolute morality, because what evidence we do have argues against it.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO