Hey Tiger88

[tiger88 934]

I do have time for a side bar along the way, humor me please.

Pick one:

1. Whether someone is an idiot or not for any particular thing is never a relative truth and is always an absolute truth.

2. It is sometimes a relative truth and sometimes an absolute truth.

[TitanTiger 20,483]

I do have time for a side bar along the way, humor me please.

Pick one:

1. Whether someone is an idiot or not for any particular thing is never a relative truth and is always an absolute truth.

2. It is sometimes a relative truth and sometimes an absolute truth.

Well, first let me once again clarify what I've said. I've softened my stance from calling a person who starts smoking an idiot to calling the particular decision to smoke a stupid decision. I guess for someone to really be an idiot, they would have to do more than make one dumb choice.

Anyway, on to your question.

I guess I'd lean toward the latter, if only because I already conceded that relative truth exists in some situations (like matters of taste). I mean, I don't equate liking to eat broccoli with deciding to smoke, or shoot up heroin, or snort coke, or kill people.

[tiger88 934]

I do have time for a side bar along the way, humor me please.

Pick one:

1. Whether someone is an idiot or not for any particular thing is never a relative truth and is always an absolute truth.

2. It is sometimes a relative truth and sometimes an absolute truth.

Well, first let me once again clarify what I've said. I've softened my stance from calling a person who starts smoking an idiot to calling the particular decision to smoke a stupid decision. I guess for someone to really be an idiot, they would have to do more than make one dumb choice.

Anyway, on to your question.

I guess I'd lean toward the latter, if only because I already conceded that relative truth exists in some situations (like matters of taste). I mean, I don't equate liking to eat broccoli with deciding to smoke, or shoot up heroin, or snort coke, or kill people.

I'm not sure you followed what I was asking. The choices have nothing to do about eating broccoli, etc. They are about calling someone an idiot. We'll now use stupid, since you "softened" it up.

If you stick with #2 you would be saying that you believe the following:

Whether or not someone is stupid for doing any particular thing is sometimes a relative truth and sometimes an absolute truth.(I accidentally omitted the word doing from the first post and am inserting it here).

Is this ok or would you rather select #1 now that we have narrowed it down to declaring someone stupid for doing something?(#1 would now read, Whether or not someone is stupid for doing any particular thing is never a relative truth and always an absolute truth?)

[tiger88 934]

Titan,

After some thought I suppose that I made a mistake in using absolute terms to make my statements because absolutes are rarely true.

I suppose it might be possible that someone could be arguing without a need to be agreed with, I just think that if it is possible it would be an extremely rare event to say the least. If that did happen then I suppose the ego wouldn't be involved either. If this did take place I think that discussion would be a better word for what was going on than argument, but who really gives a flip? I'm pretty sure you don't agree with the degree of my concession, and if thats the case I'm ok with that.

Thanks for the debate, but I'm done with it for now. If you feel as though I have left something unfairly unanswered just ask me again and I'll respond.

[TitanTiger 20,483]

I did intend on answering your last post before this one. But I was confused by the wording and didn't have time at the moment to break it down. I was about to ask you for some clarification when I saw your last post. I'm cool with dropping it for now. If you ever decide you want to take it up again, I'd be happy to do so.

I did have one question from the discussion that I did want answered, if you don't mind though:

Do you believe in absolute truth? I mean that primarily in regard to absolute standards, especially as it pertains to right/wrong, good/evil, etc. Moral absolutes.

[tiger88 934]

I did intend on answering your last post before this one. But I was confused by the wording and didn't have time at the moment to break it down. I was about to ask you for some clarification when I saw your last post. I'm cool with dropping it for now. If you ever decide you want to take it up again, I'd be happy to do so.

I did have one question from the discussion that I did want answered, if you don't mind though:

Do you believe in absolute truth? I mean that primarily in regard to absolute standards, especially as it pertains to right/wrong, good/evil, etc. Moral absolutes.

Yes, I do believe in absolute truths. I don't claim to have any answers just opinion and what I believe in. Like I mentioned my philosophies are in flux right now, but at the same time I have a very good idea of where they are headed. One thing that I pretty firmly believe in is the passing judgement thing. No matter how bad I might think something is that someone has done I am trying to get better at not passing judgement on them. They are a product of God just as we are, somewhere along the line they just went in a bad direction, some more than others. Who knows, maybe even a serial killer could one day receive salvation, but I don't think it is very likely.

Sorry if my last couple of posts were a little off. I am usually a little hectic at work and have tried not to answer this thread while working because my mind is often occupied with other things.