The abominable fact

You may have the idea that there is an indeterminate, or practically measureless, list of facts and truths about the world. This idea, which leaves God without a world that he can present, has brought to despair all ages of humankind. To be taught that the truth of the world can only be portrayed in an endless list of facts to be learned is abominable. Worse yet, there are wily others who, compounding the impossibility of knowing all facts, will pretend to be master over this doctrine, and say that these endless facts are after all illusory: illusory yet necessary, for they act as references for yet ANOTHER endless list of facts that we cannot know anything about! This wicked philosophy, as it is typically flouted by Plato, Kant and modern materialists, mirrors and serves the first abomination.

Well I shall tell you this o brethren. That there is no ‘fact in the world’ except that we make one; that a world is designed, made, shaped, pummeled and tortured by infernal machines in our employ, that measure this life.


Well, the thesis of your comment above is that relativism is true because facts would not be able to be measured…

Your conclusion…

Your argument is:

  1. There would be an infinite amount of facts (which is false/deceptive [illusory])

My argument is that the law of non-contradiciton does not allow anyone to make the statement “there is no absolute truth”…Relativism is irrefutably contradictory on the premise that:

truth = fact

  1. “There is no absolute truth” would be an absolute truth.

  2. You would be as smart as an animal would be because man would not be the measure of truth. Everyone would have the same amount of truth whether animal or human.

  3. You would not have to learn or read books because you already have all truth because you make truth.

  4. Also, if there is no absolute truth, then I can refute you by saying that there is absolute truth and you could not argue back to me that there was because I would be the one that makes the truth in my world, and you do not.

  5. As a matter of fact, why wuold you be posting this view if you did not see this as absolute. You cannot argue with anyone who refutes you because technically they make their own truth. You see, even you believe there is absolute truth, proved by your actions of posting your veiw as “truth”.

You see, there isn’t even a connecting between the two statements “there is absolute truth” and “truth can be measured” as shown here below…

What I am trying to say is that truth is quantitative and is not infinite, otherwise nothing new could ever happen. I would not be able to post this message if there was an infinite amount of fact out there, because the facts preceding the fact that I am typing would be infinite and I would never get to the point in time where the fact that I typed this message occured.

So there you have it. There is absolute truth. There is no such thing as making your own truth. Truth can be measured (as you have said previously that you disagree that it cannot be [I agree with you]). Also there is nothing you can do to argue your point because in doing so you would be refuting yourself in saying that your argument is true and mine is not when you yourself said “we make up our own truth”.

Thank-you and have a nice day

-The Brain :smiley:

PS- Let me know what you think about this reasoning. I’m just not interested in getting my point across, I just want to make sure if I’m correct in my assumptions. Sorry if at any time I mis-understood what you were trying to say or took what you said out of it’s context. If I did, just let me know and I’ll say how much of an idiot I am. LOL. k? God bless and happy thinking! Also, if you don’t understand a concept that I posted just let me know and I’ll try to put it in simpler terms and explain it better. There’s no bad student that wants to learn; there’s just a bad teacher that doesnt want to teach.

Although i do not necessarily agree with the original statement this argument is wrong (or more precisely, wrongly applied)

  1. “There is no absolute truth” would be an absolute truth.

While the statement “There is no absolute truth” is about the world, it is not of the world, and so is not subject to the laws it lays down. A fuller rendition might be:
“Where it concerns real things, there is no absolute truth”.
The statement is an abstract construction which can indeed be absolute even if everything to which it refers is vague. Like a mathematical principle, for example, there are no perfect circles, yet we calculate them all the time.


Your points were well considered, some I have come across before. The main thing that came over here, as it has elsewhere, is the idea that truth stands alone without a framework, for this is what is meant by absolute truth. I was not concerned with absolute truth nor with relativism, although they can be considered with the argument I presented. I always thought ‘absolute truth’ to be emotionally or spiritually invocational and as such does not sit well with the ways in which truth and falsity are used naturally and logically.