Debate:If there is no objective truth, then is the claim "there is no objective truth" also not an objective truth?

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rebiu (talk | contribs) at 15:27, April 2, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Jump to navigation Jump to search

So there must exist some objective truth? Jaques 10:39, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

That is the ultimate failing point of postmodernist thinking. In philosophical terms, they say that each person has their own narrative (story), but any push of a meta narrative (overarching life story... eg. The Biblical God created the world and hs a plan for each of us) is viewed as oppressive. Of course then they become the oppressors because their meta narrative is that there should be no meta narrative :-). --Ymmotrojam 10:45, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

This is the problem with all absolutes. They contradict themselves. We conservatives have the God given privilege to apply different standards to out own arguments than we apply to the arguments we oppose. How else could conservapedia be so incredible conflicted.Rebiu 10:51, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

If all absolutes contradict themselves, then is the claim "all absolutes contradict themselves" also a contradiction? Jaques 10:54, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
I'm not sure what Rebiu meant, but I think it is important to realize (at least from my current understanding of it) 1) a meta narrative is required (without meta narrative, we have no purpose other than what we happen to scramble together ourselves), and 2) there can be only one meta narrative. In other words, saying there are multiple absolutes is a contradiction because there can only be one absolutely absolute. In terms of belief systems, it could be said that either Islam or the teachings of Jesus Christ are correct, or neither of them are. They cannot both be correct. --Ymmotrojam 14:32, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
As I said God has given me, as a conservative, the privilege to apply different standards to my argumentsRebiu 16:39, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
I sense some facetiousness in the tone of your writing. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. I am very interested in where you got this message from God. Can you cite a bible passage? --Ymmotrojam 23:16, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
That is facetious to me as I sense some facetiousness in all remarks that invoke divine inspiration in others, they usually do not agree. One does not need to validate their faith to other mortals. My relationship to god is between He and I.Rebiu
God gives you the privilege because you are a sentient human being. Your privilege to "adjust" your reality to your political views is between you and your intellectual honesty (or lack thereof). Crackertalk 11:02, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
Your facetiously toned attack on my faith amounts to a violation of the spirit of conservapedia. Your obviously facetious attitude towards faith base understanding is an attack on the foundations of the conservative movement. "The Devil hides behind a facetious tone."Rebiu 11:27, 2 April 2007 (EDT)