Retrospective?

Spinoza · Post by **Spinoza** » Sat Feb 15, 2003 8:39 am

mosespa wrote:
Spinoza wrote:The TRUTH doesn't exist and if it existed we can not fully know it.

Wait...let me guess...you consider this a truth, right?

Just like those who say "There are no absolutes," and consider it an absolute.

Or those who say that "Nothing can be known" and insist that this is knowledge.

The truth can be known if you use you mind to analyze and meditate and use insight.

i said: "THE TRuth", not a particular subjective kind of thruthness, like "i am now typing on my keyboard".

Post by **mosespa** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 7:40 pm

Spinoza wrote:
mosespa wrote:

Wait...let me guess...you consider this a truth, right?

Just like those who say "There are no absolutes," and consider it an absolute.

Or those who say that "Nothing can be known" and insist that this is knowledge.

The truth can be known if you use you mind to analyze and meditate and use insight.
i said: "THE TRuth", not a particular subjective kind of thruthness, like "i am now typing on my keyboard".

Right...and I am mocking you for saying that objective truth cannot be proven.

Bricks are hard...this is an objective truth.
Water is wet...this is an objective truth.
Oxygen is necessary for human life...this is an objective truth.

Spinoza, I sense that you are one of these poor deluded souls who thinks that reality is dependent upon perception.

Nothing could be further from the truth since without objective reality there would be nothing to perceive.

That people miss this simple yet so pertinent fact shows how far the human race has to come.

David Smith · Post by **David Smith** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 9:15 pm

Ok, i don't know quite hoe relevant this is, but an absolute truth is as follows:

1 + 1 = 2

That can't be argued. no matter what you get if you get another of it then the amount you have is doubled. There is no way to disprove that formula and ultimatly there's no way to argue it.

So i'm not sure who i'm proving right, I think it's Mosespa right? Well anyway, that's an absolute truth, we all know that, it can't be argued and nothing else is as true as it because that is the only ABSOLUTE truth.

Now objective truths like Mos mentioned, they to are a form of truth based on reality rather than preception and those to are all ture.

The truth is out there... And we can all find it if we think about it.

Post by **mosespa** » Wed Feb 19, 2003 9:55 pm

Well said, David.

You know, I have always found as ultimately pathetic those who would take...for example, the statement "Pink Floyd is a rock group and this is an absolute truth,"...and say things like, "Are you sure? I think Pink Floyd is a rock BAND, not a rock group," thinking that they are somehow coming across as intellectual, when in reality they are only coming across as argumentative and ignorant of the fact that an intellectual argument consists of more than simple contradiction.

These are the people who don't realize that the statment "If a tree falls in the woods and there's no one there to hear it, does it make a sound?," is NOT an intellectual comment. It's ridiculous. Of course it makes a sound.

"But how can you be sure?," they ask. "Sound is not a naturally occuring thing...sound is only created by the ears."

Perhaps this is true...perhaps without ears, there would be no "sound" as we know it...however, the vibrations that create sound would still be there.

Cause and effect.

So, yes, the unobserved falling tree still creates the conditions for sound to occur...which is just a complicated way of saying "YES, IT WOULD MAKE A SOUND NOW LEAVE ME ALONE AND LET ME DRINK MY BEER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

*ahem*

Anyway...objective reality exists...this can be proven because existence exists. The notion of perception presupposes the notion of something to be perceived. In order for there to be something to be perceived, it must exist independent of perception.

This is what most subjectivists miss.

Those who think that the world is created by one's perceptions totally miss the fact that in order to be percieved, there must first be a world to perceive.

It goes back to something I've said elsewhere...perception is NOT reality...perception is merely an interpretation of reality, but it is not reality itself. Reality is reality.

It's really that simple.

Does anyone else really want to continue arguing this?

Spinoza · Post by **Spinoza** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:54 am

Well i will. It's you Mosespa that doesn't grasp my comments. I said THE TRUTH can not be fully known. If you said : "Bricks are hard...this is an objective truth.
Water is wet...this is an objective truth.
Oxygen is necessary for human life...this is an objective truth. " , then you call this objective truths. They are in fact from the same kind as my statement that i called a subjective truth. I could have better called it a particular or a partial truth. Have you , Mosespa, said everything about a brick when you say: "Bricks are hard" ??? No. Indeed you call it AN objective truth. But i wasn't in fact talking about AN objective thruth. Of course i wouldn't argue with you about something like that. My point was: can we know THE Thruth. My answer still is: No. When can know thousands, even millions of facts about Pink Floyd and it's members and still we wouldn't know the fully thruth behind Pink Floyd and it's history.The same can be said about the brick or oxygen. I know a nice article ( in dutch ) from Cornelis Verhoeven with the title: "Can We Swim in H2O ?" Water is so much more than only a chemical formula. To conclude We can't even fully understand ourselves ( Nietzsche ), although Buddhism claims you can, but i read much about there claimed results but never saw concrete methodes beside all that meditationstuff. I'm sometimes even thinking that all that meditationstuff leads just to another conditioned state of mind. Any reactions ??

Spinoza · Post by **Spinoza** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:57 am

Right...and I am mocking you for saying that objective truth cannot be proven.

Bricks are hard...this is an objective truth.
Water is wet...this is an objective truth.
Oxygen is necessary for human life...this is an objective truth.

Spinoza, I sense that you are one of these poor deluded souls who thinks that reality is dependent upon perception.

Nothing could be further from the truth since without objective reality there would be nothing to perceive.

That people miss this simple yet so pertinent fact shows how far the human race has to come.[/quote]

I'm not that stupid.

David Smith · Post by **David Smith** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 3:32 pm

Ahem, 1+ 1 = 2 is absolute truth and THE TRUTH

Post by **drafsack** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 4:30 pm

Ahem, 1+ 1 = 2 is absolute truth and THE TRUTH

This is only the truth if you are using a denary system. If you are using a binary system 1+1 = 10

David Smith · Post by **David Smith** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 6:08 pm

Excuse me for asking cause i am only 16, but what's a binery system and how can it be 10?

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 6:36 pm

Hahahaha I suppose the truth only exists and is the same for 2 or more people if the assumptions on which the opinion is based are equal!!

David Smith · Post by **David Smith** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 6:40 pm

I say we stop arguing over this, if you anyone here wants to beleive that they have no grasp upon reality and that they are oblivious to truth then who are the rest of us to argue? If anyone wants to deny that if you get one thing, then get another, then you have double the amount, then let them.

I have no problem personally with someone denying that there's no such thing as truth about concepts people invented. I do however pity them.

bong · Post by **bong** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 6:53 pm

Reality sucks, thats why my life is a constant payote trip.
Money only has value because the person you give it to agrees that it does.
Do you really think that there is 20 dollars worth of paper in a 20 dollar bill??

grateful pink · Post by **grateful pink** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 11:49 pm

the truth is whatever you perceive it to be. that is my opine and i am sticking with it!

David Smith · Post by **David Smith** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 8:13 am

Hmm, ok, perhaps i was to hasty in my last reply, i got a pm from spinoza telling me exatly what context he ment it in and i assure you he does have a grasp of reality.

Hmm, now truth meanig how you preceive it, i'm slowly thinking more in that direction now. Slowly though.

Post by **drafsack** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 12:44 pm

Excuse me for asking cause i am only 16, but what's a binery system and how can it be 10?

The denary system is a number system based on the number 10 and its multiples (10, 100, 1000 etc) and uses the digits 0 to 9, so that 01 is followed by 02 which in turn is followed by 03 etc.
When we get to 10 what we are expressing is 1 lot of 10’s and no units and with eleven we are expressing 1 lot of 10’s and 1 unit. If we have 24 we are saying we have 2 lots of 10’s and 4 units etc.

The Binary system is a number system based on the number 2 and its multiples ( 2, 4, 8, 16 etc) and uses the digits 0 and 1 so that 1 is followed by 10 which in turn is followed by 11 which is then followed by 100 etc.
In binary 10 is expressed as 1010 – 1 lot of 8’s, no 4’s, 1 lot of 2’s and no units. If we have 11000 we are saying we have 1 lot of 16’s, 1 lot of 8’s, no 4’s, no 2’s and no units (answer 24).

Using this theory 1+1 = 10 as we have 1 lot of 2’s and no units.

So David your homework for this weekend is to:

1. Convert the following binary numbers into denary numbers

i. 11101
ii. 10101
iii. 100001
iv. 101010
v. 1110001

2. Convert the following denary numbers into binary numbers.

i. 19
ii. 40
iii. 89
iv. 37
v. 100

If your Homework is in by Monday I will send you a ROIO of your choice from my trade list.