Absolute Truth

Originally posted by JS357

The idea is not that happiness is simply what we all run around trying to get, clearly some are working on career satisfaction, some on family, some on personal salvation, some on good works, some on a mix of these things, but it is the state of being that achievement of our goal produces in us, to the degree those goals are neared or achieved.

Aristotle tie ...[text shortened]... s, Aristotle meant the act of achieving balance and moderation.

unquote

It goes on from there.

"Aristotle thought that the practice of virtues would equate to happiness.... "

Copy that.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"Aristotle thought that the practice of virtues would equate to happiness.... "

Copy that.

Problem is,what is a virtue?

Originally posted by OdBod
Problem is,what is a virtue?

Do you believe that truth is always relative? If not, can you name any categories of truths that are absolute? For example, if one says, "You shall surely die," is he speaking a relative truth or an absolute truth?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Do you believe that truth is always relative? If not, can you name any categories of truths that are absolute? For example, if one says, "You shall surely die," is he speaking a relative truth or an absolute truth?

What the heck is a "relative" truth and what is an "absolute" truth? If we say that a 'truth' is some proposition that corresponds to actual facts, then what are you suggesting confers the relative-ness or the absolute-ness? Is it some property of the proposition; some property of the facts; some nature of the relation between the two? I don't get the terminology in this thread.

Originally posted by Kepler
OK, so I guess we start here?

If our purpose is to live a happy life then how you achieve that happiness is irrelevant.

Your reply was:

What leads you to believe that "our purpose is to live a happy life"?

What leads you to believe that "how you achieve that happiness is irrelevant"?

In answer to the first, I said "If our purpose..." so I don't ...[text shortened]... ans would lead to unhappiness thus preventing the achievement of the purpose.

Better?

Evil-lutionists believe there is no purpose and what is called information code in DNA is not evidence of intelligence, but just an illusion of intelligence and perhaps intelligence and the entire universe is an illusion and I did not type information to post on the Spirituality Forum. Who knows the absolute truth? 😏

Originally posted by LemonJello
What the heck is a "relative" truth and what is an "absolute" truth? If we say that a 'truth' is some proposition that corresponds to actual facts, then what are you suggesting confers the relative-ness or the absolute-ness? Is it some property of the proposition; some property of the facts; some nature of the relation between the two? I don't get the terminology in this thread.

That is because you are ignorant. 😏

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"Aristotle thought that the practice of virtues would equate to happiness.... "

Copy that.

Aristotle also thought that the earth could not move because we would all fall off. Apparently he thought it was obvious due to something called common sense. Hmmm, where have I seen that before?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]In answer to the first, I said "If our purpose..." so I don't necessarily believe that is our purpose. It's as good a purpose as any if we must have a purpose beyond ensuring the survival of a portion of our genetic material.

Not sure what you're trying to say here. What do you "necessarily believe" is our purpose? Actually let's get away from t ...[text shortened]... it isn't. Which is it? Do you believe that the "happiness" of others is relevant?[/b]

The ultimate goal? For who or what? And is a goal, ultimate or otherwise, the same as a purpose?

I think the trouble with something like an ultimate goal is you that you may well change your mind at some point. At least I have. When I was in my teens my ultimate goal was sex, lots of it. Then it became owning a really fast car and now I'd be happy if someone would prove the Riemann hypothesis before I drop dead. Besides that, my ultimate goal is the same as any other living critter, to ensure the survival of my genetic material into another generation. Ah, done that already.

If my goal/purpose were to live a happy life (see above for what it actually might be) then the happiness of others might well be relevant since making some people unhappy could result in unhappiness for me. I still don't see the means for achieving a happy life as relevant to the goal of living a happy life. Suppose for a moment that my purpose/goal/call it what you will is to see the Riemann hypothesis proved. Should I object if he/she who proves it does so without using Lie algebras? I don't see that the method used is at all relevant if the proof is valid. If, yes, if, my purpose/goal is to live a happy life then how I get to that state is irrelevant once I am there.

I I wonder if I do have a purpose other than preserving my DNA? I somehow feel that my teenage "ultimate goal" had something to do with that purpose.

Originally posted by Kepler
The ultimate goal? For who or what? And is a goal, ultimate or otherwise, the same as a purpose?

I think the trouble with something like an ultimate goal is you that you may well change your mind at some point. At least I have. When I was in my teens my ultimate goal was sex, lots of it. Then it became owning a really fast car and now I'd be happy if someo DNA? I somehow feel that my teenage "ultimate goal" had something to do with that purpose.

Hmmm...let's try this a different way.

Let's take an individual who believes that his purpose is to "live a happy life". But he believes it necessary to have sex with children in order to do so. Does his means of achieving "happiness" matter? Or is it irrelevant?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Hmmm...let's try this a different way.

Let's take an individual who believes that his purpose is to "live a happy life". But he believes it necessary to have sex with children in order to do so. Does his means of achieving "happiness" matter? Or is it irrelevant?

Back to purpose? If his purpose is to live a happy life through child sex one might surmise that means are irrelevant as he is simply fulfilling his purpose. I would suppose that we would all have the same purpose so child sex would be the norm. This suggests, to me at least, that happiness via child sex is not the purpose of human beings.

Goals, ultimate or otherwise are different though, we generally have differing goals. One person's means to achieving their goal could affect another person and might therefore matter to either or both. If the goal is happiness via child sex then our man is going to be going against the wishes of a great majority of other humans which could have unpleasant consequences for him.

I think we have a difficulty with words here and maybe how we each interpret them. To me, a purpose is something innate in the thing. So a screwdriver's purpose is to screw and unscrew screws. Goals are usually changeable and individual to the thing. Our screwdriver, if sentient, might have the goal of being an astronaut but that would not change the screwdriver's purpose. My goal is to see the Riemann hypothesis proved and understand the proof but my purpose is presumably the same as other humans, passing on our DNA to a future generation.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Do you believe that truth is always relative? If not, can you name any categories of truths that are absolute? For example, if one says, "You shall surely die," is he speaking a relative truth or an absolute truth?

I think there is no absolute truth. In response to your example "You shall surely die", as an atheist I can answer that my biochemical structure is reconfigured at the point known as "death". My building blocks do not disappear,and given infinite time ,even the smallest chance becomes a certainty ,therefore another me will evolve. Thus from my point of view "You shall surely die" is not an absolute truth.

Originally posted by Kepler
Back to purpose? If his purpose is to live a happy life through child sex one might surmise that means are irrelevant as he is simply fulfilling his purpose. I would suppose that we would all have the same purpose so child sex would be the norm. This suggests, to me at least, that happiness via child sex is not the purpose of human beings.

Goals, ultimate ...[text shortened]... my purpose is presumably the same as other humans, passing on our DNA to a future generation.

These were my original questions for you and your original responses:

ToO: What leads you to believe that "our purpose is to live a happy life"?
K: It's the best and most likely purpose I can come up with.

ToO: What leads you to believe that "how you achieve that happiness is irrelevant"?
K: If that is the purpose then how it is achieved seems irrelevant. Feel free to disagree, I am happy to allow you whatever purpose makes you happy.

Do you think your latest post is congruous with your original answers to my original questions?

Why does it seem that you are not "happy to allow...whatever purpose makes [him] happy" in the case of the individual in question?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
[b]Absolute Truth

Here before we were born and still here after we're gone.

Our individual challenge in this fleeting life is to apprehend it.

Please discuss.

Edit: RHP Spirituality Forum Thread 8,000.[/b]

GB, would you care to explain what the qualifier 'absolute' is supposed to impart in the context of this thread? What is an 'absolute' truth and how does it differ from other truths? What exactly confers the absolute-ness?

I was hoping RJ would enlighten me, but he is apparently too busy douching to be bothered.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Seems like an impossible task for such an imperfect being as we humans.

Some chase it away by claiming we already have it.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You made the following statement:

Aristotle said that happiness is the one thing we seek for itself and not in order to get some other thing.

I responded with the following:

It's only true for those who see "happiness" as the ultimate goal.

You don't seem to have addressed this with your post.


[b]The idea is n t. Even those who seek "personal salvation" are ultimately seeking "happiness".

"It's only true for those who see "happiness" as the ultimate goal."

OK that's fair. I am presenting a view. The view is that everyone does seek happiness as the "ultimate goal" if you want to use that term, so while there may be people who do not see happiness as the ultimate goal, it is still their ultimate goal. However it is not ultimate in one sense, it is not a goal that if one achieves, then one is permanently happy and seeks no more, at least, not while we are humans because seeking happiness is intrinsic to being human. So it would be better to discuss whether there is no one who does not seek happiness as an end in itself. Nothing is sought as an end in itself, except happiness, and other things are sought as a way to happiness.


"Even those who seek "personal salvation" are ultimately seeking "happiness"."

Yes but that's the kind of seeking that imagines that the seeking will end with the achievement of personal salvation and the commencement of unending happiness, at least in the traditional western meaning of personal salvation. In the eastern sense, the seeking will end when the seeker achieves a state of not seeking and the end of samsara. In both cases, these people are seeking to escape something that is essential to being human.