Rosicrucians (Split from: Standard Model in Trouble)

[Lance]

Yeah, but I just don't get why people of faith can't just admit that they don't really know.

But they do "know". It is just a different definition of the word "know".

[Lonewulf]

Huh. Looked up the different definitions on www.dictionary.com .

Apparently, one of the definitions (an archaic one) for "know" is "to have sexual intercourse with".

Ooooookay.

[teri tait]

Yeah, but I just don't get why people of faith can't just admit that they don't really know.

But they do "know". It is just a different definition of the word "know".

Exactly

[MM_Dandy]

Huh. Looked up the different definitions on www.dictionary.com .

Apparently, one of the definitions (an archaic one) for "know" is "to have sexual intercourse with".

Ooooookay.

Well, sure. If I may expand on that - people often say know "in the biblical sense," meaning the same thing.

I'm quite sure, though, that in the context of this debate, "know" means something else.

[teri tait]

Kinda like I know France exists, although I've never actually been to France. This is just a loose example, Wulfie.

[Lonewulf]

Er, right. So you "know" God exists, just like you "know" France exists.

No, no, this isn't a new definition for me. You're claiming knowledge.

Well, I "know" God doesn't exist, so there you go. Just like I "know" Santa Clause doesn't exist.

[teri tait]

Er, right. So you "know" God exists, just like you "know" France exists.

No, no, this isn't a new definition for me. You're claiming knowledge.

Well, I "know" God doesn't exist, so there you go. Just like I "know" Santa Clause doesn't exist.

Right, that works for your belief structure so it is a truth to you. You also have no proof that God doesn't exist but that does not lesson your certanty of his non-existence for you.

Same for my faith in God.

[Lonewulf]

Subjective truth is not truth at all.

Saying that it's "my" truth is useless, and saying that something is "your" truth is useless as well.

I do not say that gravity is "my" truth, I say that it is Truth; that gravity works according to physical laws. I say that Physics is "truth", and it is. Ther is no subjectivity, there is no "my" truth, or "your" truth.

Truth does not belong to an individual, truth belongs to reality. Reality is not subjective. There is no such thing as "your" reality or "my" reality.

I mean, I sure as hell wouldn't like to see an engineer walk up and say, "My truth states that this structure would hold up..."

And another engineer goes up and says, "Well, my truth says that that wouldn't work..."

[teri tait]

You're mixing apples with oranges again. There are many types of truth. You are mixing truth and fact which can be quite different.
In the Catholic blief, you need last rites to ensure the salvation of your soul no matter who you are. That is a truth to Catholics that is not a truth to anyone else.
Fact is universal, the same dead guy whether a Catholic, Athiest, or Jew is still dead. Please try not to clould the issue with examples that are not applicable to the subject of intangible truths. Doing so is pointless and doesn't add to the discussion.

[Lonewulf]

You're mixing apples with oranges again. There are many types of truth. You are mixing truth and fact which can be quite different.
In the Catholic blief, you need last rites to ensure the salvation of your soul no matter who you are. That is a truth to Catholics that is not a truth to anyone else.

No, it is a belief. Belief is not truth. It can be, if it's lucky, but belief is not, form the get-go, truth. There is no such thing as "personal truth". There are other terms to use, "truth" is not one of them.

You are redefining a word in order to make it seem like their beliefs more viable.

Fact is universal, the same dead guy whether a Catholic, Athiest, or Jew is still dead. Please try not to clould the issue with examples that are not applicable to the subject of intangible truths. Doing so is pointless and doesn't add to the discussion.

I'm sorry, just thought some facts and reality could be inserted into the conversation...

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

I agree that France doesn't exist.

A country is an abstraction, or a cultural construct.
It is not something tangible.

Yet there are bottles of wine marked 'produce of France' and passports
which say 'citizen of the French republic'.
Which proofs that an abstraction can have an influence on objects,
but only through human action.

That doesn't make an abstraction 'real' though.

Anyway, there are countless examples of people perceiving something
to be true and real, while in fact they were demonstrably wrong.

The experience of observing in it self does not proof that there is an object to observe.

[Мастер]

Excellent point, HD. If France does exist, I would ask when it came into existence. This is not such an easy question...

Does IRU exist?

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

Excellent point, HD. If France does exist, I would ask when it came into existence.
This is not such an easy question...

Does IRU exist?

It started as a twinkle in Lance's eye.

Mmm...
It does have physical aspects, on/off bits, electrons whooshing around,
pixels on CRT or LCD screens.
But the only thing that sets those apart is organisational.
The label put on them.
:?
It mostly exists in the (hearts and) minds of people.

[MM_Dandy]

Excellent point, HD. If France does exist, I would ask when it came into existence. This is not such an easy question...

Does IRU exist?

Of course it does. I've seen it! :D

There's controversy over whether or not ethanol is as cost-effective as petroleum. Various scientists have studied this issue and have come to contradictory conclusions.

The problem isn't that the reality of the matter is different, though. But, it's not in how they perceive reality, either. It is exactly the scenario that Lonewulf describes that he would not like to see: the first scientist says: my truth is that ethanol is more cost-effective, the second scientist says: my truth is that petroleum is more cost-effective. The problem is that they use different selections of observations. This is subjective, and acceptable to many, and is still a part of science, whether we like it or not.

[Мастер]

Of course it does. I've seen it! :D

There's controversy over whether or not ethanol is as cost-effective as petroleum. Various scientists have studied this issue and have come to contradictory conclusions.

Since many scientists are flaming woowoos and sworn enemies of rational thought when it comes to economics, that's hardly surprising.

The problem isn't that the reality of the matter is different, though. But, it's not in how they perceive reality, either. It is exactly the scenario that Lonewulf describes that he would not like to see: the first scientist says: my truth is that ethanol is more cost-effective, the second scientist says: my truth is that petroleum is more cost-effective. The problem is that they use different selections of observations. This is subjective, and acceptable to many, and is still a part of science, whether we like it or not.

I would argue that the question is not well-defined.

[teri tait]

Hey, I said France does exist!! I'm pretty sure IRU exists as well but I'm beginning to think HD is a figment of my imagination.
KOS is all too real...

MM has been validated as real by the dead jackalope that is currently helping me haunt Lonewulf.

You guys all check out, now I will contemplate how real reality really is...

Oooooooommmm ooooooooommmm

[umop ap!sdn]

Yup, France exists. But Spain doesn't. Unless it does. But it didn't used to exist. That is, until it did.



Ohmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Vooooooooooooooooooolt.

Microfaraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.

[teri tait]

See Wulfie, by introducing reality to our discussion you opened the door to the universe counter-balancing with slightly wacky humor to compensate.


Ooooooommmm Oooooooommmmm I am visualizing the perfect balance of rationality and insanity.... Oooooooooommm

[pmcolt]

I'm suddenly having an existential crisis. If we're not certain if God exists, and we're not certain if France exists, and we're not certain if IRU exists, then how can I be sure that I exist? Isn't it possible that I don't even exist, but I'm just a figment of the collective imaginations of God, France, and IRU, which themselves may be a figment of the collective imagining of something that I cannot even imagine?

Maybe I should just join the chanting.

Ampeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere

Ohmmmmmmmmmmmm

Ohmmmmmmmmmmmm

On the raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaange

[teri tait]

Of course you exist PMColt, the flying bunny (cousin of the jackalope) told me it was so...

[umop ap!sdn]

IRU exists. Thus spoke the FSM.

[teri tait]

IRU exists. Thus spoke the FSM.

God saw the IRU and it was good.

[umop ap!sdn]

Right after proclaiming, Let there be illumination! :D

[Мастер]

Let There Be More Light.