Staredit Network

I'm wondering how many of us believe in the theory that truth is relative? How many of those actually know what it is?

Is saying the USA is in the upper hemisphere a fact? To you perhaps, but if you flip your maps vertically (I assume you have Antarctica on the bottom before) the situation changes. Is viewing it this way any more wrong that viewing a map the opposite way?

Why were we taught that Antarctica was supposed to be on the bottom of most maps? Is there a reason why most of the advanced civilizations are usually located on the top of maps? Someone, somewhere, someday decided it, most likely someone who had power in money such as kings or nobles and suddenly that's the standard for the rest of us.

But since a map that is considered upside down by our society still shows us the same thing, it can be inferred that direction is not a fact, but rather where we are located in relationship to it.

With that said, one could question what the rest of the world considers facts. You may think water is good. Is water really good? What really is good? Good would be a label that you have decided to use if you prefer it. Or you could say water is good because you will die without it. Water being good is just an opinion, but the next statement isn't just a fact. Dying because of a lack of water only applies to living beings on this earth. It doesn't apply to everything because not everything is alive and not everything is on earth.

That's why I believe in the statement, "There is no good, nor bad, there only is" Good and bad not facts. They only exist in comparisons. If everyone had the same traits, good and bad wouldn't exist. Therefore, in order for something to be good, something else must be considered bad, in addition to what standard both objects are being compared to.

So who decides what standards should be used? Why is it so engraved in our brains, yet it is something we haven't decided for ourselves? Could it be the media, society or culture?

These are just thoughts I had floating in my head right now. If anyone would like to challenge me or comment, I'd appreciate it.

Everything we perceive is subjective, which means it will differ due to individual influences and be similar due to conformity.



I believe this is very true and is in context with your 'good' and 'bad'. One could not exist without the other.

What I think is that we can observe is considered a fact. Like you can observe the colour of this text as being white - therefore a fact. Opinion is making assumptions and judgements on what you cannot observe, subjective to a certain individual - kind of like an inference. Such as "the white colour of this text hurts my eyes". So one could say "There are quite a bit of petrol in my tank", but one with the same tank on a long trip would comment on the limitedness of petrol in his tank. However, a fact such as something you could (perhaps mathmatically) observe would be "There are 30 litres of petrol left in my tank". Although you could say that the 'scale' could be inaccurate and therefore it could differ on another 'scale' but what the scale told us was definite everytime according to it, it won't change. Right and wrong is indefinite, therefore those could not be an facts.

I'll leave it at that for now, I'll really have to dig up some information before I blabber too much on what I am not too experienced in myself.

Concerning the globe and its directions:
The north and south pole are actually based on the points were a compass will spin in circles on either end of the Earth, due to the fact that every direction is now North or South. Do NOT say it could have been magnetic disruption because these locations were tested several times, and it was discovered that from you relative location on Earth, since the Earth curves, compasses may point a bit off, anywhere to 20 degrees, from true North or South.

But concerning good and bad, yes. Those are entirely matters of opinion. Here down in the southwest, everybody loves chili. Chili, chili, chili. I hate it.
They think it's good
I think it's bad

Pain and Pleasure are matters of opinion as well. Some people enjoy watching football over playing it, or writing above reading, and always vice versa. Pain, too, is a matter of opinion. Digging your teeth into your own arm, deep enough to leave marks for several hours and occasionally bleed, may sound painful to some. Oh, but I find that very pleasing. Yes, I may be insane or in need of serious help, but the point is that it can be received differently by different people.

Don't call the mental institute. Please.

Are you a masochist?

Everything in the world is a perception. That is why people have different opionions on things is because they have percieved it differently.

Example. Let's take Rexy or Kame, the only two young ladies of the site. Some might say that Rexy is very sexy (Which she is ) and others may say she is not. Perception. Some may say that Kame is sexy (Which she is ) and others may say she is not. Again, Perception.

Basicly, what i'm trying to say is. There is no possible way to make people believe one thing, and to believe another (Enless they are very subjective. Which most the world is ) because they percieve it differently then another.

Another example. Someone is a Christian. Another is an Athiest. The Christian believes in God because they percieve him to be real, because there is "proof" that he does. The Athiest does not believe in god because he percieves there is no "proof".

So yeah. Maybe i'm wrong, maybe i'm right. But this is what I believe. You cannot changes peoples opinions or beliefs because they percieve it to be that way, and you cannot change perception (In my eyes. Enless, like I have stated earlier, they are very subjective)

To say communicate you have to make some assumptions and guidelines and a premise that other people will agree on.



Direction as a fact or not a fact doesn't even make sense. Direction is relative, and that is a fact. And that means it can change.



It doesn't matter what the hell you are viewing it as. It only matters that if you are going to share your thoughts with others they know what you are talking about.

When you state facts such as the USA in the upper hemisphere you are assuming that you are holding the map in the certain position. Holding it in a different position doesn't make it not a fact.



The main problem is that you are being way to general with your statements. Water is "good" can be interpretted MANY different ways which leads to the problems you are talking about.

And also, here is a good time where not assuming things like when people say "you will die without water" and thinking "but that only applies to living things" makes you sound like an idiot.

Language doesn't change what exists, it is just used to describe it. However if you are talking to someone, they must also know the language and the assumptions you are making.



People as a whole decide what standards should be used, otherwise there would be chaos. If I thought up was up but to someone else up was down we couldn't understand eachother.

Oh and I recently read a book about the human genome called "Genome" for my bio class, and one chapter had to do with talking about an innate instinct for language. Language IS engraved in our brain.



Also comparing the fact that you can say one thing is good and one thing is bad doesn't relate to saying the USA is in the upper hemisphere. Saying the USA is in the upper hemisphere IS objective, but you have to assume certain things. However saying something is good and something is bad, is subjective and depends on the person's view, even if they are making the same assumptions. That's how I view it.

All things can have different views if you look at them with different assumptions, this includes some "facts"
However some things can also have different views even if you look at them with the same assumption, this is what opinions are. It isn't an opinion if like I say the USA is in the upper hemisphere because I look at the map X way, but he says the USA isn't in the upper hemisphere because he looks at the map in Y way.

Note: I'm not finding the right words right now, can't explain it too clearly right now, not thinking clear.

Err, in this case the USA being in the north hemisphere and the difference between good and bad do relate in this case because they are both perceptions. Truth can be a matter of perception or fact (or perhaps stupidity).

We all know the earth is round, but for someone who is never told this it would all seem very flat (or in stupidity's case perhaps square). So it all depends on your perception of what truth is. Is truth what people say to be true or is it a fact (please, oh please don't say you will take stupidity).

As to the matter of the difference between good and evil (which is off topic but interesting). Good and evil are actual defined, I believe, by instincts (especially in the case of good and evil in most religions). All the things that are "good" help contribute to the survival of 1 person, several people, a community, and it keeps getting larger. Things that are "bad" of course are the exact opposite.

With the north and south explination. You guys are taking it all wrong, you are associating north with up (or top) and south with down (or bottom). North and south have nothing in common with those. If you flipped a map upside down the north part would be on the bottom of the map, and the south part would be on the top, but there would be no difference except you obviously don't know how to read a map properly. In space there is no up, down, left, right, backwards, forwards, etc.. North and south are names given to designated spots on the earth.

I think that something that contributes to the survival of 1 person might not contribute to the survival of the community and vice versa.



Or truth could be the opposite of a lie.

By saying something is large or small, we are obviously comparing it to what we are used to in our society. When something tastes good, it is probably because something else tastes worse, right?

While nothing is pretty, we consider them, based on our experiences to be more favorable than other faces.

There really is no good or bad, but rather perception.

It's not a fact that what you type on is a keyboard. It's not a fact that what you are looking at now is a monitor. Words that are used to label something are again, commonly accepted views. In other words, our hand is a hand to us. In Korean, it's sone. To animals, it won't be a hand or a sone, but something unnamed.

It goes along the lines of, "If a tree falls down and noone is there to hear it, it makes no sound". My existential teacher said it's because we give what is happening meaning. We could hear something, but labeling it sound isn't a fact.

If someone knows more about this or has other ideas, I'd appreciate it.

To sum it up, it all has to do with concrete and abstract concepts, some things are tangible and some things are intangible.

Refer to what the great Mr.Kirbycode774 has to say about concrete and abstract things and language. Specifically post 38 in the link below:
http://www.staredit.net/index.php?showtopic=11415&st=0

Now if you look at it closely, truth only changes with different points of views because the points of views are different! Therefore the truth isn't changing, it's just a different interpretation based on a different point of view. A truth based on one point of view isn't wrong just because there is ANOTHER truth based on another point of view. Both are based off of different assumptions and a different premise.

So yes truth is relative, but the same truth doesn't change, there is only merely ANOTHER truth based off of a different point of view. One truth told by one person with one POV doesn't change if another person has a different point of view. They have their own different truth. The two truths represent different things.

Now the only other thing I disagree with you on is how you say it isn't a fact that I am using a keyboard, because other people have different words for them. As Kirby said in that other topic, language is a substitute for concrete things.

There are no concrete things. It's not a keyboard, a thing or an entity. It's just what it is. We refer to the label of the thing when we talk about it. A concrete thing is what you label it, but it's not a fact that it IS a concrete thing.

In other words, there are no facts as to what is what, but rather, someone, or some people agreed that a thing should be labeled, which is what my paragraph is built on. It's not a fact, it's just commonly accepted.

Your life isn't a lie it is a fact

No, no.
Since we actually perceive warped truths from our senses, our lives could be complete fantasy.

Just what we need. Make arguments to be even MORE abstract. What are you guys trying to do? Get a bull dozer and just demolish all concrete things? Congratulations, you've questioned the basic foundation of every single human opinion.

I mean, no one's opinion is better than the next guy's. We must respect all opinions. No one is right, and no one is wrong, because everything is pov. God damn, even socrates wasn't even that socrates.

If you can't even assume basic things then you can't even have a discussion. Speaking might as well be useless because these words don't exist in a tangible form right?

Again i'm going to say.

Perception.

For those of you who don't know the meaning of this word, Perception, I will explain it.

It is how you take a situation, and make it so YOU understand it.

Very few things are not concrete; things that aren't are generally trivial.

As an aside, would you claim your assertion that 'nothing is actually true' is not true?

It's not just perception, it's what the basis of languages are in general. Also, languages allow for different interpretations. ESPECIALLY, intangible things. You can't physically touch or feel what the word "love" or "hope" is, but you can define it using words, but there are many ways to define them.

And I made a point before that the truth one person makes based on his perception, isn't CHANGED, by another person's truth with a different perception. I'm suggesting that they are two seperate truths derived from different perceptions.

And to fully understand more, read the article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar_paradox

I think the A discussion of the liar paradox is a good place to start reading.