Subject:
|
Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 May 2005 14:05:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1161 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
| |
No, thanks. If there is an absolute truth, we have no way to ascertain it
short of direct, personal revelation for each of us individually. Short of
that, we’re just as well off to assume that it doesn’t exist, since we can’t
know it anyway.
|
Who is to say that this isn’t the case? I would say that the process would
go like this:
- Person A gets a revelation (in some manner)
- Person A shares that revelation with person B
- Person B recognizes (in some manner) for him/herself the Truth in the shared revelation, thus creating a revelation to Person B
|
But that doesn’t really get us anywhere. At most, Person B can say “I’ve
thought it over, and I think you’re correct about X. Of course, I have no way
to verify that X was communicated to you via revelation, but I still like it.”
So X, whether a revelation for Person A or not, remains only hearsay for Person
B, even if it’s a solid-sounding piece of hearsay. I suppose that you could
posit that Person A has acquired the miraculous power of revelation, but that’s
an unfounded assumption based on an unfounded assumption, so I’m not willing to
include it as a possibility.
One might say that that’s okay, as long as Person B realizes/accepts the
“truth,” but that’s the same as saying that the revelation wasn’t necessary in
the first place (since Person A could likewise have realized that same “truth”
without revelation.) And if we eliminate the necessity of the revelation from
the equation, then its presence can’t be assumed without corroboration
beyond the testimony of Person A.
Since we have by this point demonstrated that Person B can realize the “truth”
without revelation, and since we have not demonstrated the existence of the
supposed “revealer” of the revelation, then it is more reasonable to conclude
that Person A also realized the “truth” on his own but asserted (either
fraudulently or sincerely) that he’d arrived at this “truth” only after
revelation.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
| (...) "I am speaking about Creation." (...) I was referring to our conscience. The knowledge deep down of right and wrong. (...) I'm citing a book whose title eludes me. I'll see if I can find it. In the mean time, I'll accept merely 1 million out (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
46 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
