Quote:All truth is relative to the being of Dasein. Thus the claim that there could be "eternal truth" seems to Heidegger to be "fantastic." Against the background of this relativity of truth to the being of Dasein, Heidegger asks anew: why must we presuppose that truth "is given"? His answer is that the possibility of truth (authenticity) and untruth (inauthenticity) belongs to the facticity of human Dasein. From the point of view of existential ontology, the being of human Dasein (its disclosedness) and truth are synonims.
....the views of Martin Heideggar...
A NAZI :wink:
Half an hour later....silence from the thicko camp !
Perhaps "Dasein" escapes them or they are fractically trawling for "Jewish Influences" on Heideggar.
Hi folks.
Even though this is the philosophy section, various people pop in from time to time, and quite frankly, most people in this thread know very little about the skillset of philosophy, in fact, our opponents have typically just name dropped and made appeal after appeal to authority, eg, "OMG, how dare you doubt the wisdom of one of the great's of science" etc.
Put simply, most modern cosmology is nonsense, ie, the very idea of suggesting that we might be able to construct a scientific model of the universe's origin is utter BS
."why"
.because of the implications of that belief, namely that something can come from nothing, or that God did it
both scenario's are illogical, and thus, any scientific theories that purport to lend credence to either scenario is clearly a load of BS, regardless of how many "big names" are currently at work on it, or how many past celebrity cosmologists/physicists inspired the latest round of time wasting.
The only logical assertion we can make about the universe is that it must be eternal regardless of its dynamic form, IOW, matter and energy have always existed within the void of space, as such, the universe has no start, end, or possible measure other than between 2 established points within the void.
As I said before, science should be dealing with that which it can measure, and as the universe is beyond measure, it's pointless and literally stupid trying to construct a scientific model to explain "the whole thing"
..yes, sure, we can certainly acquire knowledge about matter and energy and how it travels and operates throughout space, but we can never get past the fact that religious premises are at the base of any scientific model to account for the universe's age, size or origin
..the universe has no age nor size, it is infinite in age and size even if it's contents have taken on various form over extraordinary amounts of time, bearing in mind that billions of years is insignificant up against infinity.
Remember folks, some of the people in this thread have no definition for truth, think that existence exists has merit, but then turn around and question how we really know what "real" is
sound a bit silly to you, it should, but hardly surprising from my POV as most people are regurgitating and worshipping celebrity philosophers rather than go to the bother of doing the hard work of thinking about it and applying the necessary logical filters to any assertions regardless of how famous the person who originated or popularized the statement
this is typically known as critical thinking, however, one must have a deep respect and knowledge of logic.
With the exception of JJ, I'm the only person who tries to speak in plain language, with minimal reference to name brand philosophers, and I've actually explained why things must be a certain way
of course, we're still in a religious/scientific paradigm, and being that most academic and popular philosophy question knowledge, truth, logic, concepts etc, etc, it should come as no surprise that these guys mimic that onslaught against objective knowledge.
David or Jenifer,
Can you explain, step by step, how your philosophical "skillset" leads to a mistrust of anything related to Jews?
Is this thread going anywhere?
Is anyone on this thread actually coming to any conclusions?(no dumb comment from David at this point)
Is the futile nature of this thread going to continue?(again no dumb comment David)
What is funny David is that you feel you have to try and persuade others that there is a definition of truth.
If there was such a definition of truth, why would it be so unintuitive?
Why do you try and persuade us, don't you have anything better to do other than sitting at you computer, endlessly trying to make people believe that you have THE answer. What is it that you see in yourself that makes you believe that you hold the truth. Does it worry you that you must need a definition of truth, maybe it frightens you that really you must be in denial in order to say I am wrong and you are right. Do you really think that the truth would be that difficult to show other people if it was the truth? Maybe you have nothing better to do with your life other than to try and show yourself that you are the bearer of truth.
"Nothing is true, everything is permitted."
This quote has been attributed to Hassan-I Sabbah, but there is some disagreement amongst historians as to the authenticity of this claim.
e p
Other threads on this issue have proceeded quite satisfactorily. (See my above citation). The accusation of "hero worship" is typical of those without the intellectual capacity to understand the literature, and to deny credibility on the infantile grounds of racial or religious origins merely underscores such incapacity.
However, here's an original comment (not one of mine) on objectivity from the other thread of 2002/4. It is typical of many excellent responses without reference to celebrated sources.
Quote:Objectivity is very tricky, indeed. And that is because whatever we think we know is always encompassed in something we do not or cannot know. It's like that gag Christmas gift where you open one box and find another box inside it...and another box inside that one etc. Only it is in reverse. The "realities" get bigger and bigger...and stranger and stranger.
For example, suppose you were pondering whether abortion is immoral. You start to think about that and it gets you thinking about human interaction in general. And that gets you thinking about human culture. And that gets you thinking about human history. And that gets you thinking about human nature. And that gets you thinking about the evolution of the species. And that gets you thinking about the evolution of life. And that gets you thinking the evolution of planet earth. And get gets you thinking about the evolution of the solar system and the galaxy and the universe. Then things REALLY start to get weird. You start pondering things like 1] why does anything exists at all? 2] is existence infinite? 3] was it, instead, created? 4] if created by whom or what---out of what? 5] out of nothing at all? 6] what is nothing at all? 7] is there a Purpose "behind" existence?
Suddenly it begins to dawn on you: how in the world can you realistically decide whether killling a human fetus is right or wrong unless you can truly understand all the larger circumstantial contexts a question like that is embedded in. Then after you admit you can't you are still stuck with acknowledging that doesn't make the moral quandary go away, does it?
Most folks, of course, don't like admitting this at all. Most folks prefer to Just Know...to just know what is The Truth.
So, in order to make the uncertainy and confusion and ambiguity and contingency go away they turn to God or Science or some Great Mind in Philosophy to tell them What To Think. Or again, the overwhelming preponderance of folks on the planet obviate the whole thing by not really thinking about it at all. They just internalize the social constructions of the world around them as Reality instead.
BTW two obvious points about "logicality" is that it is (a) subservient to general semantics and (b) is a product of "adult thinkng" and therefore cannot itself be a criterion of "knowledge". As Thalion pointed our previously, "Truth" is "what works" (for prediction and control) even if such workings are counter-intuitive as in the case of sub-atomic or cosmological realms. References can be supplied.
All the evidence any rational human would need to show that there is no truth is scattered throughout this thread.
Respondents are advised to google "DavidIg" aka "DavidHenry" for a pathological overview, and his relationship with JJ with respect to "Zionist Conspiracy" lunacy. They infiltrate philosophy forums merely for the purposes of spreading their pathetic garbage.
wandeljw wrote:David or Jenifer,
Can you explain, step by step, how your philosophical "skillset" leads to a mistrust of anything related to Jews?
Because of Zionism and the heavy concentration of Jews in western media, but especially the US media.
wandeljw,
The basis for establishing right from wrong, which legitimizes all individual interaction, is established by the objective axiom of "NO one has the right to violate the individual rights and sovereignty of another individual". Moral authority is established in individualism by following objective law, the right to act.
Now take Judaism, a political system of control, that uses the collectivist mentality of "born a Jew" to create the collectivist paradigm, in order to use the sock puppet of "God said" as the ultimate moral authority, to have dominion over the individual, which is promoted and perceived as the greater good, which in reality is, for the benefit of the controllers.
Therefore, at the core of Judaism, is the subjective criteria of the "might makes right" mentality, where one uses the collective to do what they could never get anyone to do, individually, a fraud. Therefore, a crime against humanity.
It is the difference between good and evil, knowing the difference between right from wrong.
Projecting blame to a single group of people is the method used by fascist regimes to promote collectivism among their subjects.
wandeljw,
What we are talking about is a dogma.
In your mind, are you capable of separating the dogma, from dog ****?
Quote:You're a little late.
Agreed....I'm surprised it kept going after your exposure !
Quote:Israeli death squads have been authorised to enter "friendly" countries and assassinate opponents in a move that raises the prospect of political killings in Australia.
news.com.au :wink:
fresco,
This thread will go on as long as there is a trail of head bangers, willing to line up to expose their subjective reality, because they can't differentiate between the wailing wall and reality.
Here is a reality check for you.
Thanks JJ.
I wondered what you looked like.
BTW Which one is you here ?
existential potential wrote:
What is funny David is that you feel you have to try and persuade others that there is a definition of truth.
I'm exposing the fact that this forum{like many others} is full of bullshitters, the Israel friendly and an endless supply of "devil's advocates" who know nothing and question everything.
Your
disguised agenda is pro-Zionism, pro-collectivism and anti-truth.
Years ago, I joined a philosophy style forum and was confronted with the truth about Zionism, including the fact that Jews by and large own and control the US mass media........I didn't believe it at first, but I had no way of being able to discount the list of Jews in positions of control/influence/ownership of the media, so I went to the bother of seeing whether I could dig up any dirt on Israel etc, and sure enough, I determined they weren't the innocent and helpless little victims that mass media had been portraying.
The problem with you numbskulls is that you have no regard for truth, knowledge, justice and ethics, as such, you have no way of determining who's right or wrong, and you're prepared to constantly give Israel/Zionism the benefit of the doubt.
David,
What would you do without your obession with "the Jews" ? Your very self-coherence is dependent on them. Your "reality" and your "truth" are mono-dimensional as reflected in your monotonous whining. You call reasonable opponents "numbskulls" but it is your own 40 year old brain that has prematurely ceased its creative activities. You have become a mental parasite feeding off the need for a "collective" enemy (aka "Jews").
What a waste !
fresco wrote:
What would you do without your obession with "the Jews" e !
I'm obsessed with the truth, including the nature of ethics, so naturally any group of turds that seek to distort the truth are on my radar.
Btw, fresco, I'm glad you're just here for a good time, there's plenty of thrillseekers at this dump
