Absolute truth?

guigus, Absolute truth is based on personal belief; it's not universal.

I have always accepted absolute truth as the individual's reality, but not everyone reality is the same.

What you say is also true; that the sun rises every morning is accepted as absolute truth.

everyones reality is basically the same , because without the sun and its ramifications , life on Earth this discussion would not and could not take place

everyones reality is basically the same , because without the sun and its ramifications , life on Earth this discussion would not and could not take place

I disagree; it depends a great deal on the individual's environment, culture, genes, education, government, climate, period of life, and many other variables. Even today, the life of many who live in isolated locations where their lifestyles have not changed for generations have a life that is much different than the reality of those in developed countries. Many cultures in Africa still live simple lives, and their reality in no way resemble the reality of those in developed countries.

Excuse me ? What other truth then Truth do you thought I was speaking about all this time ??? not truth in temporal phenomenological terms...its not about correspondence or knowledge...on that I just limited my reply on functions truthful operating state for what they were, if yet, granted that, these functions are always parcelar incomplete descriptions of "things" as meta phenomenons operating at multiple levels and layers...I even in several occasions used the neologism "meta-objects" in order to include an explanation regarding multiple operativeness, remember ? I am sure you do...
...But bottom line, its not about objects, or the exact knowledge on all their relational potential, rather its about an holistic approach to a final state of interlinked conditions which in itself as a final state is transcendental to time or space although phenomenologically described through it...its about intuit from the example of our "happening" in the world, our being there, as the best and only example of a truthful valid condition...its about what is real, in the sense that we live it directly, we operate in it, and not on how we describe things to the full...as I said I am not concerned about what is true being true or not true...my interest falls upon understanding on what context they fit...even beliefs are true beliefs...(in the sense that people believe them) ( unnecessary remark ? maybe not depending on whom is reading...not addressed to you though, obviously fresco... )

Look North you don´t even know what is being debated...The Sun can be described in many forms...starting with atoms and ending with waves... or even just information...yet the sun truly shines everyday...this is about layers functions and context not for the things as parcelar object descriptions but for the whole as justifying every and each context and its true function...meaning, there was a true reason to once think the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the Earth...this is about (there I go again) "entanglement"...

Your assertion that "all truth is 'what works' and is always open to revision" asserts again an absolute truth,

Quote:

Your assertion that "all truth is 'what works' and is always open to revision" asserts again an absolute truth,

Forget "thinking" !

No, my assertion is about the nature of "truths" such as as "the earth orbits the sun". Such an assertion "works" and continues to "work" for astronomical purposes. Mathematically the earth and the sun orbit each other but that "fact" lacks pragmatic value aka utility. But the phrase "Absolute truth" implies there is a vantage point beyond such utilitarian requirements....a transcendent "God's eye view"....we as thinkers have no conception of it !

Quote:

Your assertion that "all truth is 'what works' and is always open to revision" asserts again an absolute truth,

Forget "thinking" !

No, my assertion is about the nature of "truths" such as as "the earth orbits the sun". Such an assertion "works" and continues to "work" for astronomical purposes. Mathematically the earth and the sun orbit each other but that "fact" lacks pragmatic value aka utility. But the phrase "Absolute truth" implies there is a vantage point beyond such utilitarian requirements....a transcendent "God's eye view"....we as thinkers have no conception of it !

...Absolute Truth only gives context to Relativism...there´s no advantage point in the sense that one explanation is better then the other..."what happens" is that given x context one explanation is better then the other at a given point in History...all contexts have true causes to be what they are is what I mean...or at least a correlation causal simulated, which bottom line very much goes in the same direction...

...oh, so when I say there was a true reason why people use to believed the Earth was flat you disagree ?

Relativism goes on operativeness and context..."Sun" for explanatory purposes is only a partial description on the multitude of "things" that are there, not to mention the even bigger multitude of relations that arise depending with whom or what the Sun is operating with, functionally or relatively speaking...do you understand it now ? hope so...
(what I say is nevertheless that "partial description" is justified...it did happen)