SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Think4Yourself who wrote (256634)6/25/2010 11:07:57 AM
From: yard_manRespond to of 306849
 
>> Relativity offers good examples of truths that are not absolute. For objects going extremely fast two observers at different vantage points can give different values for it's speed and both can be correct (gamma factor). Two (seemingly) contradictory facts and both are correct. <<

You don't understand special relativity ... but it is not prerequisite to understanding the concept of truth. Forget human behavior for a minute. If I say your car is a certain color. The statement for the time being can be judged as being true or not true -- there is no multiplicity of answers and if you'll be honest and think about it there are many things that DO fall into this category.

When it comes to spirituality, there may be a multiplicity of descriptions or explanations -- but lets take something easy.

Some have asserted that consciousness is purely a chemical phenomena, cessation of said chemical processes and consciousness ceases to exist.

This is either true or it is not true ... I believe (yes, cannot prove) that there are many things that support the idea that the above statement is false.

Re moral categories being solely cultural -- this is what they teach in courses in sociology -- but if one looks closer one will see common threads -- all explainable by science? Of course not -- science can't address purpose, if said "purpose" exists. Of course, if you reject purpose or morality as fancy imagination or human invention to "control your thinking," then throw off all pretense -- reject all mores and live as suits you -- adopt only those mores that are necessary to meet your own selfish ends. Why not be a hedonist, then?

There is a popular writer -- I don't call him a scientist who has popularized this idea in his book The God Delusion -- Dawkins isn't much of scientist -- but he is the priest of a new religion -- yes, let's be honest -- it is a religion -- and there are masses that love to let people like him do all their thinking for them.

You see the conviction that "no truth" exists -- is simply contradictory on its face -- that is asserting a "truth" of sorts in itself -- an ultimate truth -- there is no truth -- it is contradictory on its face.

The point is this: You live your life based on a number of things that you take as being true (absolutely -- that is redundant, but you used the word) -- you could not live reasonably without doing so. Many of these beliefs have to do with human-human interactions, too.



To: Think4Yourself who wrote (256634)6/25/2010 2:31:56 PM
From: yard_manRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 306849
 
For objects going extremely fast two observers at different vantage points can give different values for it's speed and both can be correct (gamma factor) -- you NEED to go read a textbook. The velocity observed will be the same for both?? WTF?? --

you don't UNDERSTAND special relativity at all. Calling me a fool privately -- sheesh. You don't understand the theory!!

the time observed between two events can be different depending on the relative speed of an observer and the lengths of objects can appear different, but all speeds are relative -- to say one measures one speed and one measures another is BS -- you don't understand the theory. Einstein's point was that relative velocity is the only thing that counts -- there aren't a multiplicity of velocities for just 2 observers. If you are teaching the subject, you shouldn't be!!