Uncovering objective truths

[QED]

There exist many objective truths that form the fabric of our universe. This is why we can see exactly the same outcomes from the action of certain laws at work irrespective of whereabouts in the universe they are operating. Consider therefore these truths to be things awaiting discovery. Things that may furnish an explanation of phenomena having a bearing on our existence.

I would say that science is the only discipline with the potential to access all such truths given the application of sufficient critical thinking.

This is because the scientifc approach is framed in such a way as to be subject to falsification. It can never know when it is right, only when wrong. So while not necessarily knowing that it has ever reached the truth, it may indeed have already arrived. No harm is done by such over-reaching, what counts is that the conclusions will remain the same in the absence of contradictory data (which by definition will never emerge once an objective truth has actually been arrived at).

It is as though a systematic 'sweep' for a conclusion has been made through the enormous space of 'possibilities' - a sweep that automatically stops at the proper conclusion upon encountering an objective truth even though we may errantly continue to consider more possibilities.

Contrast this with the use of faith (in all its forms) to furnish such fundamental truths - while faith might stumble across the odd truth by accident now and then, it has no feedback mechanism to tell it when it is wrong (as if it would listen anyway!) Thus many a false conclusion will inevitably be arrived at - given the vast number of possibilities to choose from.

Given enough time then, science is capable of gradually revealing a coherrent and accurate interpretation of all the unerlying objective truths that embody our universe. Whereas revelations arising through the channel of faith alone will beome more and more incoherrent with the passage of time.

Supporting evidence for this analysis can already be found in the consistency of information contained in students textbooks world-wide. I leave it to your imagination to consider the subjects I might be referring to.

[BeHereNow]

Asajoseph:But that's the point of objectivity - it exists whether it's observed or not. What you seem to be discussing is whether or not objectivity is knowable.

My point exactly.
BTW, I’m BeHereNow, not QED.
You want to talk about knowing or discussing objective truths. I’m just countering your claim that such a thing does not exist.
Existence is objective truth. Do you disagree?

[asajoseph]

??? I was responding to Vlad???

[BeHereNow]

Yes, asajoseph, I was meaning you and I agree with each other.
I’m sorry for the confusion. My post was poorly worded.

[asajoseph]

Oops, I get it now. Sorry mate.

On with the discussion!

[QED]

heh

I couldnt get past your first sentence without taKing up an issue of debate.

There exist many objective truths that form the fabric of our universe.

Thats conjecture, I dont think any one of us is in a position to even define objective, much less define views from such a position.

Please don't put yourself out trying to get past this one... if you're stuck, go and have a lie-down under a starry night-time sky and have a think about it some more

From those of us who don't imagine that we are just imagining it all, I invite further deabate

[Vladd44]

Please don't put yourself out trying to get past this one... if you're stuck, go and have a lie-down under a starry night-time sky and have a think about it some more

Sorry If I implied I was stuck. I simply cannot accept that anyone is capable of existing in a frame of reference to be qualified to make such a statement.

[QED]

Perhaps it might help you if I frame my statement about there being 'objective truths' in the context of 'all that which is capable of having influence upon man". These truths exist whether vladd44 or anyone else is directly aware of them or not.

It appears somewhat straightforward, however I might be missing something here becasue I couldn't completely parse your last sentence:

I simply cannot accept that anyone is capable of existing in a frame of reference to be qualified to make such a statement

[BeHereNow]

QED: There exist many objective truths that form the fabric of our universe. This is why we can see exactly the same outcomes from the action of certain laws at work irrespective of whereabouts in the universe they are operating. Consider therefore these truths to be things awaiting discovery. Things that may furnish an explanation of phenomena having a bearing on our existence.
I would say that science is the only discipline with the potential to access all such truths given the application of sufficient critical thinking.

I need help understanding what you mean by phenomena. When I experience love for my wife, is this one of the phenomena science is most capable of identifying or explaining?

“all that which is capable of having influence upon man”

This statement has no meaning to me.
Is there anything, real or imaginary, truth or lie, which does not have capability of having influence upon man?
To make a statement “in the context” of the entire universe or real and imaginary things, thoughts or ideas, seems a waste of effort. “In the context” normally applies to a clearly defined, restricted reference.
Can you help me?

[Vladd44]

Perhaps it might help you if I frame my statement about there being 'objective truths' in the context of 'all that which is capable of having influence upon man". These truths exist whether vladd44 or anyone else is directly aware of them or not.

I could broadly state that there is no such thing as "objective truth". But I would be in as grave an error as you are. I am not qualified to say they don't exist, and neither are you qualified to state existence. In actuality, I am inclined to believe that there is one truth, however its size and scope is beyond us. There are already billions of years of uncollected data.

************** The following is my only my perception ***************

Reality = Objective Truth. To know and define truth would require an observation of reality in totality. All we can do is identify and observe a small portion, and that is called perspective.

It appears somewhat straightforward, however I might be missing something here becasue I couldn't completely parse your last sentence:

I simply cannot accept that anyone is capable of existing in a frame of reference to be qualified to make such a statement

I was simply stating what I said before, no one is capable of existing in the plane of being required to know of objective truth. If they were, they would be a god.

[BeHereNow]

Enlightenment: existing in the plane of being required to know of objective truth.