Materialism (championed by Darwinists) makes reason Impossible.

punshhh said:
We may know the truth and the purpose without realising it. We could not know if we knew it if we concluded that we did know it.

I can see no way of determining if we can know or not or if there is such a thing. I am assuming an intellectual posture of them being unknowable, as I can see no other considered option.
Click to expand...

Um dude, the problem is using them in the abstracted vague sense. Purpose and meaning have functional coorelates that are defined and studied by people who do things like psychosocial rehabilitation, life skills and the like.

But if the world has design and meaning outside of that humans assign to it, the there is some very sick and twisted ****.

It looks chaotic, it looks as though it is undesigned.

Without spiritual meaning genocide and rape are easier to accept, if there is spiritual meaning then it is one sick ass sadistic bastard.
 
Animal kingdom would never have evolved if Nature respected the human moral code.
 
punshhh said:
I have no training in formal logic, so have to learn it as I go along.

I have arrived at my own metaphysical position using my own reasoning process. It may or may not approximate formal inference, I don't know.

However to claim my position is weak is an appeal to authority.
Click to expand...

So whether your thinking process is actually correct or not doesn't matter to you, because I take that statement as an admission that validity isn't part of your metaphysical position.

And notice that it's not an appeal to authority. I said that by ignoring inferences your position is weak is all. It may seem strong to those who also ignore inference I guess so I can see what you mean then...
 
Last edited:
Lowpro said:
So whether your thinking process is actually correct or not doesn't matter to you, because I take that statement as an admission that validity isn't part of your metaphysical position.
Click to expand...
It is correct for me or I would revise it.

It is not a difficult conclusion to reach that the truth is unknowable. Rather the idea that the truth can be known is quite a bold statement.
 
Dancing David said:
Um dude, the problem is using them in the abstracted vague sense. Purpose and meaning have functional coorelates that are defined and studied by people who do things like psychosocial rehabilitation, life skills and the like
Click to expand...
.Yes, I was using the words in an Philosophical or theological sense.

But if the world has design and meaning outside of that humans assign to it, the there is some very sick and twisted ****.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your point, however we cannot come to this conclusion without making assumptions regarding the purpose of an entity which has created our existence.
We are in the position of having a limited perspective(anthropocentric view) on the issue and cannot realistically make these assumptions.

It looks chaotic, it looks as though it is undesigned.
Click to expand...
Anyway, I am not refering to the purpose of a God, rather an innate purpose in nature.

You see for my philosophy the existence of God(or not) is irrelevant, one of those meaningless questions folk accuse me of asking. The existence of creative entities approximating God in their activity is as far as I am concerned a natural process of nature. Their activity in part contributing to the destiny of our little lives is the purpose I am referring to. Which is I assure you no less an influence than that of a so called notional God.
 
Last edited:
punshhh said:
It is correct for me or I would revise it.

It is not a difficult conclusion to reach that the truth is unknowable. Rather the idea that the truth can be known is quite a bold statement.
Click to expand...

What truth? I know a lot of true things.
 
Robin said:
The position of Materialism is that science can answer the meaningful questions about existence.
Click to expand...
I agree, in the knowledge that we are only just taking our first steps on that path.

Nothing wrong with it. Everybody is free to subscribe to whatever views they want.
Click to expand...
Thankyou.

But they just have no value when it comes to answering questions and seeking truth.
Click to expand...
I disagree.
 
Last edited:
punshhh said:
You see for my philosophy the existence of God(or not) is irrelevant, one of those meaningless questions folk accuse me of asking. The existence of creative entities approximating God in their activity is as far as I am concerned a natural process of nature. Their activity in part contributing to the destiny of our little lives is the purpose I am referring to. Which is I assure you no less an influence than that of a so called notional God.

Without spiritual meaning genocide and rape are easier to accept, if there is spiritual meaning then it is one sick ass sadistic bastard.
Click to expand...

Creative entities that are not god? Semantics again. You say they are irrelevant and then you speak of their activity. Make your mind up. First of all you have to prove that they exist.
 
punshhh said:
It is correct for me or I would revise it.

It is not a difficult conclusion to reach that the truth is unknowable. Rather the idea that the truth can be known is quite a bold statement.
Click to expand...

I can believe that for you truth is unknowable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom