Failure of Relativism

Known unknowns and unknown unknowns!

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1753
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Failure of Relativism

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:43 pm

All meaning is subject to the context in which the statement is made...this is a constant statement everyone understands.

Impenitent
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Impenitent » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:43 pm
All meaning is subject to the context in which the statement is made...this is a constant statement everyone understands.
all meaning is subject to the interpretation of the receiver of the idea

-Imp

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1753
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:19 pm

Impenitent wrote:
Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:09 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:43 pm
All meaning is subject to the context in which the statement is made...this is a constant statement everyone understands.
all meaning is subject to the interpretation of the receiver of the idea

-Imp
That is the common interpretation by everyone.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:29 am

Double-posted
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:30 am

All meanings and things are interdependent with the human conditions [i.e. relative] as opposed to Philosophical Realism.

If it not relative then we have independent reality, i.e.
In philosophical ontology, [philosophical] realism about a given object is the view that this object exists in reality independently of our conceptual scheme. In philosophical terms, these objects are ontologically independent of someone's conceptual scheme, perceptions, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc.
It is impossible to have absolute independence of reality when we [the subjects] are parts and parcel of reality, i.e. inevitably related and relative.

Relativism is not a failure, it is the only reality.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:23 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:30 am

Relativism is not a failure, it is the only reality.
Who knows that?

.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1753
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Aug 09, 2018 6:30 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:30 am
All meanings and things are interdependent with the human conditions [i.e. relative] as opposed to Philosophical Realism.

If it not relative then we have independent reality, i.e.
In philosophical ontology, [philosophical] realism about a given object is the view that this object exists in reality independently of our conceptual scheme. In philosophical terms, these objects are ontologically independent of someone's conceptual scheme, perceptions, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc.
It is impossible to have absolute independence of reality when we [the subjects] are parts and parcel of reality, i.e. inevitably related and relative.

Relativism is not a failure, it is the only reality.



1) That is a constant statement observing change as a constant, hence change provides the nature of all limits which give structure to reality.

2) That is a relative statement, as it will not only change through time (under expanding definition) but inevitably cancels itself out because of this continual change.

3) This statement is only an axiom, self-evident truth, hence contains a degree of randomoness in it as the "self" is not truly or fully defined.

4) As a self-evident truth, being deficient in the respect it contains randomness, it exists merely as an approximation of a universal unified truth; hence is observed through time as continually changing. As actualized it is both composed of and composed further axioms as the means through which these axioms exist; however is not necessarily truth in the respect it exists if and only if there is potential change because of its finite nature.

5) As both potentially changing, and containing a degree of randomness in the respect it is approximative of a more unified truth, this axiom exists as possibilistic in the respect it has no-limits...hence it is possibly truth but no true in itself.

6) This axiom as meaning to you, and maybe other's, but this meaning is merely a negative boundary which forms further actual boundaries. For example: This statement proves to other's that constant truth exists, as this negative statement cancels itself out leaving a positive statement.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:46 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:23 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:30 am

Relativism is not a failure, it is the only reality.
Who knows that?
Whoever or Whatever the answer, it is relative to you, me and others.

Tell me, where can an answer to the above come from other than from yours, mine or the brains of other humans?
So ultimately all there is condition and relative to the human conditions.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:49 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 6:30 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:30 am
All meanings and things are interdependent with the human conditions [i.e. relative] as opposed to Philosophical Realism.

If it not relative then we have independent reality, i.e.
In philosophical ontology, [philosophical] realism about a given object is the view that this object exists in reality independently of our conceptual scheme. In philosophical terms, these objects are ontologically independent of someone's conceptual scheme, perceptions, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc.
It is impossible to have absolute independence of reality when we [the subjects] are parts and parcel of reality, i.e. inevitably related and relative.

Relativism is not a failure, it is the only reality.



1) That is a constant statement observing change as a constant, hence change provides the nature of all limits which give structure to reality.

2) That is a relative statement, as it will not only change through time (under expanding definition) but inevitably cancels itself out because of this continual change.

3) This statement is only an axiom, self-evident truth, hence contains a degree of randomoness in it as the "self" is not truly or fully defined.

4) As a self-evident truth, being deficient in the respect it contains randomness, it exists merely as an approximation of a universal unified truth; hence is observed through time as continually changing. As actualized it is both composed of and composed further axioms as the means through which these axioms exist; however is not necessarily truth in the respect it exists if and only if there is potential change because of its finite nature.

5) As both potentially changing, and containing a degree of randomness in the respect it is approximative of a more unified truth, this axiom exists as possibilistic in the respect it has no-limits...hence it is possibly truth but no true in itself.

6) This axiom as meaning to you, and maybe other's, but this meaning is merely a negative boundary which forms further actual boundaries. For example: This statement proves to other's that constant truth exists, as this negative statement cancels itself out leaving a positive statement.
Cannot grasp your point.

You should at least assert at the end of your post whether

Relativism is a failure or not.
Make sure this conclusion follows clearly from your premises.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:12 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:46 am
Dontaskme wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:23 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:30 am

Relativism is not a failure, it is the only reality.
Who knows that?
Whoever or Whatever the answer, it is relative to you, me and others.

Tell me, where can an answer to the above come from other than from yours, mine or the brains of other humans?
So ultimately all there is condition and relative to the human conditions.
Reality does not ask questions, the assumption that relativism is the only reality is a knowledge known. Do you not see that it is a fiction. Since knowledge comes from a brain ..a brain that is just a lump of meat...how does meat ask and answer questions?

What is the meat in relation to?

You can't just make a statement like Relativism is the only reality ...what is relative to what? ....you are not being clear. How does a lump of matter know knowledge?

.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1753
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:30 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:49 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 6:30 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:30 am
All meanings and things are interdependent with the human conditions [i.e. relative] as opposed to Philosophical Realism.

If it not relative then we have independent reality, i.e.



It is impossible to have absolute independence of reality when we [the subjects] are parts and parcel of reality, i.e. inevitably related and relative.

Relativism is not a failure, it is the only reality.



1) That is a constant statement observing change as a constant, hence change provides the nature of all limits which give structure to reality.

2) That is a relative statement, as it will not only change through time (under expanding definition) but inevitably cancels itself out because of this continual change.

3) This statement is only an axiom, self-evident truth, hence contains a degree of randomoness in it as the "self" is not truly or fully defined.

4) As a self-evident truth, being deficient in the respect it contains randomness, it exists merely as an approximation of a universal unified truth; hence is observed through time as continually changing. As actualized it is both composed of and composed further axioms as the means through which these axioms exist; however is not necessarily truth in the respect it exists if and only if there is potential change because of its finite nature.

5) As both potentially changing, and containing a degree of randomness in the respect it is approximative of a more unified truth, this axiom exists as possibilistic in the respect it has no-limits...hence it is possibly truth but no true in itself.

6) This axiom as meaning to you, and maybe other's, but this meaning is merely a negative boundary which forms further actual boundaries. For example: This statement proves to other's that constant truth exists, as this negative statement cancels itself out leaving a positive statement.
Cannot grasp your point.

You should at least assert at the end of your post whether

Relativism is a failure or not.
Make sure this conclusion follows clearly from your premises.
Relativism is an approximation of absolute truth and is fundamentally a deficiency in the unified nature of reality by observing it in parts which move through relation.

The statement you claim, where everything is "relative", is a constant statement as it cannot change...hence either relativity contradicts itself, it acts as a negative limit to the absolute (proving only the absolute exists) or both.

If the statement contradicts itself, we are left with the absolute.

If the statement is a negative limit, it can only be observed through absolute truths (such as the statement "everything is relative") as a negation of them. For example if I say "x" does not exist, this is a relative statement as "x" must "exist" if it is to be negated, but considering "x" must exist if it is being negated it must not exist in relation to "y" or "z".

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:35 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:12 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:46 am
Dontaskme wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:23 pm

Who knows that?
Whoever or Whatever the answer, it is relative to you, me and others.

Tell me, where can an answer to the above come from other than from yours, mine or the brains of other humans?
So ultimately all there is condition and relative to the human conditions.
Reality does not ask questions, the assumption that relativism is the only reality is a knowledge known. Do you not see that it is a fiction. Since knowledge comes from a brain ..a brain that is just a lump of meat...how does meat ask and answer questions?


What is the meat in relation to?
I mentioned brain but that is only a part of the whole of the human conditions which is the whole human being extending to its environment.
Whatever X, it is related to the human conditions [brain, mind, body, "I Think" etc.] not an independent 'I AM" which some claim survives physical death.
You can't just make a statement like Relativism is the only reality ...what is relative to what? ....you are not being clear. How does a lump of matter know knowledge?
Why not?

"Relativism is the only reality " is a fundamental fact and so obvious.

You may want* to think there is more than the above because it is seemingly 'logical' [based on crude pure primal reason] BUT you in fact is only speculating without facts and on mere wishful thinking.
* that wanting is driven by a psychological motive.

"Relativism is the only reality"
If you think otherwise, just don't wish but bring sound justified proofs.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:46 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:30 pm
Relativism is an approximation of absolute truth and is fundamentally a deficiency in the unified nature of reality by observing it in parts which move through relation.

The statement you claim, where everything is "relative", is a constant statement as it cannot change...hence either relativity contradicts itself, it acts as a negative limit to the absolute (proving only the absolute exists) or both.

If the statement contradicts itself, we are left with the absolute.

If the statement is a negative limit, it can only be observed through absolute truths (such as the statement "everything is relative") as a negation of them. For example if I say "x" does not exist, this is a relative statement as "x" must "exist" if it is to be negated, but considering "x" must exist if it is being negated it must not exist in relation to "y" or "z".
Note my point in my above post,

"Relativism is the only reality " is a fundamental fact and so obvious, i.e.
whatever the X, it is relative to the human conditions and its environment [which is also relative to the human conditions].

There is no absolute thing that can exists independent of the human conditions.


You may want* to think there is more than the above [i.e. an absolute] because it is seemingly 'logical' [based on crude pure primal reason] BUT you in fact is only speculating without facts and on mere wishful thinking.
* that wanting is driven by a psychological motive.

The philosophical issue is contested between the non-relativist Philosophical Realists [below] and the Philosophical anti-realists [various schools].
Wiki wrote:In philosophical ontology, realism about a given object is the view that this object exists in reality independently of our conceptual scheme. In philosophical terms, these objects are ontologically independent of someone's conceptual scheme, perceptions, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc.

Realism can be applied to many philosophically interesting objects and phenomena: other minds, the past or the future, universals, mathematical entities (such as natural numbers), moral categories, the physical world, and thought.

Realism can also be a view about the nature of reality in general, where it claims that the world exists independent of the mind, as opposed to anti-realist views (like some forms of skepticism and solipsism, which deny the existence of a mind-independent world). Philosophers who profess realism often claim that truth consists in a correspondence between cognitive representations and reality.[1]

Realists tend to believe that whatever we believe now is only an approximation of reality but that the accuracy and fullness of understanding can be improved.[2] In some contexts, realism is contrasted with idealism. Today it is more usually contrasted with anti-realism, for example in the philosophy of science.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Dontaskme » Sat Aug 11, 2018 8:09 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:35 am
I mentioned brain but that is only a part of the whole of the human conditions which is the whole human being extending to its environment.
Whatever X, it is related to the human conditions [brain, mind, body, "I Think" etc.] not an independent 'I AM" which some claim survives physical death.
No thing ever died. That which lives never dies, and that which dies never lived. There is nothing in life that is everything herenow in relation with anything else. There is only everything here now. Nowhere.

"Relativism is/n't the only reality"

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Failure of Relativism

Post by Dontaskme » Sat Aug 11, 2018 8:16 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:35 am

"Relativism is the only reality"
If you think otherwise, just don't wish but bring sound justified proofs.

To make an assumption such as "Relativism is the only reality" ..who also have to see that the opposite is also true. Absolutism is the only reality.

These are opposite thoughts known.

Who knows these thoughts known?

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:35 am
If you think otherwise, just don't wish but bring sound justified proofs.
We've been over this so many times, proof is this immediate alive presence right here right now. That knows no birth or death except as conceptual thought, an illusion.


.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests