Yeah, that will always be true. But we still need a context in which something thought to be true for all people – the laws of nature, say – are in fact demonstrated [to the best of one’s ability] to be true for all people.
Relationships in the either/or world are often demonstrated to be true for all of us through such things as actual technology or engineering feats. Or through the tools available to scientists employing the scientific method.
It’s just that when such demonstrations are attempted regarding relationships in the is/ought world, or relationships involving such interactions as in the topic being discussed on this thread, there is no technology or engineering feats [yet] able to pin it down such that most rational people are obligated to agree.
Then this part…
Over and over and over again, I point out that until it is determined that the folks here on planet Earth have the capacty to grasp an understanding of existence itself, none of us are able to pin down finally the most comprehensive manner in which to understand the relationship between the either/or world, the is/ought and the something/nothing connundrum as this is applicable to what we call “the human condition”.
Until then the scientists and the philosophers and the theists are all in the same boat.
I basically agree. Sans an understanding of existence itself, we can never really be absolutely certain of anything that we claim is true. We can only come closer to a context in which more rather than less agree that some things certainly appear to be truer than other things.
I can claim that it is true objectively that Don Trump is president of the United States. Unless, perhaps, between the time I make this claim and the time you react to it, Don Trump has died from a heart attack.
And I can claim that it is true that Don Trump is a great president. And I can claim that it is true that Don Trump thinks and feels and says and does things solely in sync with the immutable laws of matter in a determined universe. etc.
But how would these sorts of things be demonstrated such that rational mem and women are obligated to share the belief?