-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter kinch
- Start date
Isn't Cobb County the one with the stupid little "evolution disclaimer" stickers?
Which, last I heard, are no longer in the textbooks?
Which, last I heard, are no longer in the textbooks?
Upvote
0
muffler dragon
Bien. Bien chiludo.
I was referenced to this thread, and I have to admit that I have found the information contained therein informative and enjoyable.
I have noticed that one major driving force of discussion is literalism. This will then delve into a number of other topics.
If I may, I would like to bring up a topic that is related; however, it is only tangentially. It may provide for more discussion in a thread that has been dormant for a few months. Or I may just post this for my own future usage.
Either way is fine by me.
Anyway... what I thought I would discuss is "objective" and "subjective".
Defining each item from Merriam-Webster Online and using the particular definition that I am discussing:
Objective
3 a: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations <objective art> <an objective history of the war> <an objective judgment> bof a test : limited to choices of fixed alternatives and reducing subjective factors to a minimum
Subjective
4 a (1): peculiar to a particular individual : personal <subjective judgments> (2): modified or affected by personal views, experience, or background <a subjective account of the incident> b: arising from conditions within the brain or sense organs and not directly caused by external stimuli <subjective sensations> c: arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes <a subjective symptom of disease> ? compare objective 1c
The realm within which I would like to describe these two items is "truth".
And this is how I am using this term:
Truth
2 a (1): the state of being the case : fact (2): the body of real things, events, and facts : actuality (3)often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b: a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics> c: the body of true statements and propositions
It is my contention that the truth as described above and pertinent to religious belief systems is SUBJECTIVE.
Where this comes into conflict is when people state that their religious belief is a universal truth. In essence, they are claiming that this "universal truth" that they accept is an objective truth; because it transcends the personal.
Whereas, I am of the mind that human beings cannot perceive objective truth when it comes to religious beliefs or systems.
What do you think?
I have noticed that one major driving force of discussion is literalism. This will then delve into a number of other topics.
If I may, I would like to bring up a topic that is related; however, it is only tangentially. It may provide for more discussion in a thread that has been dormant for a few months. Or I may just post this for my own future usage.
Either way is fine by me.Anyway... what I thought I would discuss is "objective" and "subjective".
Defining each item from Merriam-Webster Online and using the particular definition that I am discussing:
Objective
3 a: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations <objective art> <an objective history of the war> <an objective judgment> bof a test : limited to choices of fixed alternatives and reducing subjective factors to a minimum
Subjective
4 a (1): peculiar to a particular individual : personal <subjective judgments> (2): modified or affected by personal views, experience, or background <a subjective account of the incident> b: arising from conditions within the brain or sense organs and not directly caused by external stimuli <subjective sensations> c: arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes <a subjective symptom of disease> ? compare objective 1c
The realm within which I would like to describe these two items is "truth".
And this is how I am using this term:
Truth
2 a (1): the state of being the case : fact (2): the body of real things, events, and facts : actuality (3)often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b: a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics> c: the body of true statements and propositions
It is my contention that the truth as described above and pertinent to religious belief systems is SUBJECTIVE.
Where this comes into conflict is when people state that their religious belief is a universal truth. In essence, they are claiming that this "universal truth" that they accept is an objective truth; because it transcends the personal.
Whereas, I am of the mind that human beings cannot perceive objective truth when it comes to religious beliefs or systems.
What do you think?
Upvote
0
I would tend to agree that man can only know truth in a subjective way... That is, we cannot disassociate ourselves from our own selves and our own history's, level of eduation and so on. To me, objective truth exists regardless of knowledge of it. How ever the universe is, it is exactly how it is. If water is indeed made of hydrogen and oxygen, then my subjective knowledge of that changes nothing.
Of course, this means sometimes one's own subjective belief is the exact same thing as objective truth. I am certain that at least some of the things I believe are objective truths. But, I cannot be certain as to which of the things I hold subjectively true are objectively true.
I would think religious matters are bound to be subjective in nature, as religion is quite unlike math (1+1 = 2). Thus, while I may subjectively believe God is real, that does not MAKE him real. My subjetive belief that He is not real, doesn't crush Him out of existence if it is the objective truth that he is. I figure that organized religion, in some sense, is a confirmation of independent understandings of subjective truths. Validiation. Objective reality, however, may be very different from any collection of subjective truth agreement. If we all agreed that the sun was made out of Mustard, we have not come any closer to Truth than we have by all believing it is made out of various gases. Despite the fact, of course, that it is indeed made out of something. It would be my contention that we can only ever know objective truths in terms of probability. I'm 99.9% certain that the sun is made out of gases and not mustard. I am so confident, probabilty speaking, that I am willing to say it is an objective truth. But, I cannot know.
And, of course, in terms of the Bible or really any religion, this collection of subjective truths, as they may not agree with other held subjective truths leads to some serious problems... or can... Throughout the ages, disagreements about our subjective truths as they conflict with some other groups subjective truths has lead to death, war and so on. I guess what I'm trying to say is this, NONE of us can know if Judiasm, Christianity, Islam, Hindu, etc. are THE TRUTH. My best guess is that NONE of them are the TRUTH.. Anyway, we cannot know..and yet we behave as if we DO know... and we argue about who's truth is more true....
In my quest religious, I try to gain knowledge of objective truth. However, knowing that this is completely governed by subjective elements, I cannot in good conscious ever insist I'm right about something, even if in fact, I am.
I suppose it would be my contention that objective truths about nature MUST NOT conflict with other objective truths. I think that statement is itself an objective truth. So, I guess I'm proposing a test of sorts... we might continue to offer as a candidate for real actual truth those things which do not require reality to be different than it is. It's still not a 100% effective test, I'd say, though. I mean, whether or not this stapler before me is made of Iron or Aluminum, reality doesn't cease to work... dependent on the answer. It might be either. I suppose the more closely I examine it, the more sure I can be, and then we can wonder if reality "makes sense"
I don't know if I addressed your question.... But, on matters religion, a little understanding that all we have is subjective knowledge of potentially objective truth might lead to a lot less hostility amongst differing religions.
Of course, this means sometimes one's own subjective belief is the exact same thing as objective truth. I am certain that at least some of the things I believe are objective truths. But, I cannot be certain as to which of the things I hold subjectively true are objectively true.
I would think religious matters are bound to be subjective in nature, as religion is quite unlike math (1+1 = 2). Thus, while I may subjectively believe God is real, that does not MAKE him real. My subjetive belief that He is not real, doesn't crush Him out of existence if it is the objective truth that he is. I figure that organized religion, in some sense, is a confirmation of independent understandings of subjective truths. Validiation. Objective reality, however, may be very different from any collection of subjective truth agreement. If we all agreed that the sun was made out of Mustard, we have not come any closer to Truth than we have by all believing it is made out of various gases. Despite the fact, of course, that it is indeed made out of something. It would be my contention that we can only ever know objective truths in terms of probability. I'm 99.9% certain that the sun is made out of gases and not mustard. I am so confident, probabilty speaking, that I am willing to say it is an objective truth. But, I cannot know.
And, of course, in terms of the Bible or really any religion, this collection of subjective truths, as they may not agree with other held subjective truths leads to some serious problems... or can... Throughout the ages, disagreements about our subjective truths as they conflict with some other groups subjective truths has lead to death, war and so on. I guess what I'm trying to say is this, NONE of us can know if Judiasm, Christianity, Islam, Hindu, etc. are THE TRUTH. My best guess is that NONE of them are the TRUTH.. Anyway, we cannot know..and yet we behave as if we DO know... and we argue about who's truth is more true....
In my quest religious, I try to gain knowledge of objective truth. However, knowing that this is completely governed by subjective elements, I cannot in good conscious ever insist I'm right about something, even if in fact, I am.
I suppose it would be my contention that objective truths about nature MUST NOT conflict with other objective truths. I think that statement is itself an objective truth. So, I guess I'm proposing a test of sorts... we might continue to offer as a candidate for real actual truth those things which do not require reality to be different than it is. It's still not a 100% effective test, I'd say, though. I mean, whether or not this stapler before me is made of Iron or Aluminum, reality doesn't cease to work... dependent on the answer. It might be either. I suppose the more closely I examine it, the more sure I can be, and then we can wonder if reality "makes sense"
I don't know if I addressed your question.... But, on matters religion, a little understanding that all we have is subjective knowledge of potentially objective truth might lead to a lot less hostility amongst differing religions.
Upvote
0
muffler dragon
Bien. Bien chiludo.
I, too, believe that objective truth exists regardless of whether we know it, can comprehend it, experience it, evaluate it, etc. And I also agree that there are certain instances where we CAN evaluate objective truths. It's good to see that you feel the same way in regards to religious matters.
Not only did you address my question, but you have also latched onto the underlying reasoning behind bringing up said items: humility. We hope that what we know is the "truth", but, ultimately, our personal belief system is truth only within our personal spheres (and the collectives in agreement). Because we cannot know objective truth as it pertains to religious matters, personal humility is something to try our best to keep at the forefronts of our minds. Not only does this humility offer the fruit of peace, but also openness, a removal of fear, and the potential for comradery even in the face of disagreement (along with a myriad of other things).
As I think back on this thread, there are so many wonderful topics of discussion:
documentary hypothesis
literalism
creation/evolution
flood/ark
nature of G-d
etc.
These are all great things to talk about and discuss. Civility just makes them all the moreso.
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;1011198; said:
Not only did you address my question, but you have also latched onto the underlying reasoning behind bringing up said items: humility. We hope that what we know is the "truth", but, ultimately, our personal belief system is truth only within our personal spheres (and the collectives in agreement). Because we cannot know objective truth as it pertains to religious matters, personal humility is something to try our best to keep at the forefronts of our minds. Not only does this humility offer the fruit of peace, but also openness, a removal of fear, and the potential for comradery even in the face of disagreement (along with a myriad of other things).
As I think back on this thread, there are so many wonderful topics of discussion:
documentary hypothesis
literalism
creation/evolution
flood/ark
nature of G-d
etc.
These are all great things to talk about and discuss. Civility just makes them all the moreso.
Upvote
0
Jake
Once a Buckeye, always a Buckeye
‘17 The Deuce Champ
Fantasy Baseball Champ
'18 The Deuce Champ
GoBucks89;886616; said:
What facts do you have that support it?
To suggest that the Bible is factual until someone proves otherwise is logical fallacy. It's akin to saying that the tooth fairy is real until someone proves it doesn't exist. The burden of proof lies on those who believe it to be real.
I agree. Your opinions of the Bible, no matter how strong, are not facts.
Upvote
0
Wow, Jake.... digging up posts from nearly 3 years ago, eh?
Besides - the Bible most certainly does contain actual real facts about things. Now, I'm not saying Noah rounded up 2 of everything and hopped on board a boat and floated around for a while before landing on the tip of a mountain and repopulating the planet. But, I am saying that some event happened - the story isn't pure fiction. It is based on some actual happening. (If you haven't seen "Ancient Aliens" you should watch it, by the way.... pretty cool interpretation of several ancient documents, including the Bible).
So, no... it's very much unlike the tooth fairy.
Besides - the Bible most certainly does contain actual real facts about things. Now, I'm not saying Noah rounded up 2 of everything and hopped on board a boat and floated around for a while before landing on the tip of a mountain and repopulating the planet. But, I am saying that some event happened - the story isn't pure fiction. It is based on some actual happening. (If you haven't seen "Ancient Aliens" you should watch it, by the way.... pretty cool interpretation of several ancient documents, including the Bible).
So, no... it's very much unlike the tooth fairy.
Upvote
0
muffler dragon
Bien. Bien chiludo.
MaxBuck;1707495; said:
Pop Quiz: according to your calculations, how many people came out of Egypt?
Upvote
0
PlanetFrnd
Head Coach
buckeyegrad;1707738; said:
I actually like Numbers, too. Tons of info in that book.
Upvote
0