Imagine the number 100.
How many ways can we reach exactly 100?
50+50 = 100.
25x4 = 100.
10x10 = 100.
Etc.
This is a principle of life.
We can find the same truth,
via different methods.
The methods can be many,
but the truth is accessible in the end.
This for me is a reason for hope.
We can reach the same goals via many different methods.
Many paths an be found towards an oasis.
No one path.
The oasis is real…if it is not a chimera.
Some oasis exist only ni the minds of men - the heat and their thirst makes them see things shimmering in the distance.
A clear eye discerns what is real and what is not.
Oasis exist…full of all kinds of fruits.
Value-judgements are a product of the travellers strengths/weaknesses, the level of his need, the estimated distance to the oasis, and his particular needs determining his tastes.
Triangulations.
All vlaue-judgments are triangulations.
Life is all about the journey. The destination is always death.
“No one gets out of here alive.”
Lots of times in my life I had a destination goal to achieve, and in the process of trying to achieve that goal I had a wonderful journey, and yet the goal was never achieved. The journey more than made up for the unsuccessful goal. It’s the journey that matters.
The key to understanding 1 x100 =100 is coded in the meaning of the number system. Life is not like that…
Consider this.
10 +10 =100
11 + 11 = 110
These statements are also true.
The difference is that the rules are no decimal but binary.
Life and reality has a possible infinite number of difference rules and meanings.
This sort of thinking is everywhere. All the way up to ecumenism: many Christian denominations, one Christian God. Or those who apply this to religion itself: many different faiths, one God.
And it’s not for nothing that this…
"Imagine the number 100.
How many ways can we reach exactly 100?
50+50 = 100.
25x4 = 100.
10x10 = 100."
…is the example used here. Multiple choice and mathematics.
Okay, how about multiple choice and morality?
How about all of the religious and secular “methods” employed when the discussion shifts from arithmetic to…race, gender, abortion, gun control, sexuality, capitalism, just war, capital punishment, the role of government and on and on and on and on.
One true path, many methods to it then?
Nope. Here we often encounter those who insist that it is their own truth and their own method or you are a moron or a retard. Or a cunt.
And then those who take it even further. It is their own One True Path on this side of the grave or you will burn in Hell for all of eternity.
And because there is disagreement, the agreement is nullified?
My point stands.
Your counter argument doesn’t count.
Your argument seems to be.
SInce 10 x 10 =100, and 25 x 4 also equals 100 then we can find all the answers to everything.
you also say:
This is a principle of life., but it is not. It’s just an artefact of a human devise and has no meaning outside the very limited decimal mathematics.
What make you think we can have the same goals?
What do they even look like.
The fact is that goals can come BEFORE solutions, not AFTER as a result of some calculation.
What disagreement? What agreement? Given what context in which different methods used by those all up and down the moral and political spectrum can be used to arrive at the truth…the equivalent of different methods in mathematics adding up to 100?
There is disagreement about what race is, gender, abortion, gun control, etc.
This doesn’t nullify that there is also, at times, agreement.
Just because people are able to disagree on things,
doesn’t mean that truth automatically becomes impossible.
Your arguments are this:
We disagree on things.
People each develop differently through the years.
Therefor : there is no truth.
You talk about variations of this core process.
You are in a loop.
You think you are thinking.
That’s not the point. There are those moral objectivists among us who treat “race, gender, abortion, gun control, sexuality, capitalism, just war, capital punishment, the role of government and on and on and on and on” as though, like mathematics, there is a final answer. And their own “multiple choice” agenda here is more in the vicinity of this:
Choose one:
1] my answer
2] my truth
3] my resolution
4] my method
And if there were final truths in regard to these issues, how come after thousands of years so far, philosophers, among others, have not been able to pin them down? Other than among the “my way or the highway” authoritarians who insist that, God or No God, if you are “one of us” you do have access to the truth.
First of all, I have never argued that there is no truth, only that here and now no one has been able to demonstrate to me that there is the “wisest” resolution to the issues above. And that if someone had found the One True Path to them, it would be, among other things, the talk of the philosophy world.
On the other hand, if anyone here can, please link us to the definitive argument that does resolve any of these age-old moral and political conflagrations. Instead, the objectivists among us will link us to cliques/claques like KT or the Atlas Society…or the home pages of one or another of these political ideologies re wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p … ideologies
Okay, note an issue in which there are conflicting value judgments. And we can discuss our respective moral philosophies. You focusing in on how we can all find the same truth here using different methods…just as mathematicians do in getting to 100.
Me focusing in on how our individual value judgments are derived existentially as the embodiment of dasein…and how in a No God world there does not appear to be a method able to establish deontological moral obligations.
Unless of course you can demonstrate to us that there is a near mathematical method we can use to establish the existence of God Himself.
In any event, as the exchange unfolds, you can note particular instances of me just “thinking that I am thinking”.
Words/Concepts
A proper map of a geography gives you places and distances, elevations and terrain.
It doesn’t tell you where to go, or what route to take, but only where there are places to go.
Philosophy is map making.
Fantasy maps represent no real geography, but an imaginary world, with imaginary places, populated by imagine beings
Negating the fantasy map, and along with it the map of a geography, does not rid you of the geography, only of the map.
Value-Judgments are a triangulation of the traveler, placing himself on the map - representing a place in the real world.
From there he traces a path toward a destination - objective - in the real world, existing ni a shared world…
It does not tell you how to get there, or to go anywhere…it only represents distances, elevations, terrain, for those who wish to go there.
Evaluations of self, objective and the effort/distance required to get there…is what a vlaue-judgment is.
Abortion:
What is the ideal an individual is striving for?
That determines the value, the morality, of the act, relative to the environment - social ideals, goals, objectives, collective welfare.
individual and collective interests clash here…the collective offers shelter but also imposes rules as payment.
These rules are unspoken…are innate - evolved behaviours; gradually becoming encoded and amended by men…not invented out of nothing and nowhere.
No god…necessary.
No conspiracy.
Natural selection, extending as social selection.
There is only subjective values to you.
No objectively true values / morals / ethics.