|
Watch NOLAwitch foam at the mouth! | by toxin | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
This is an example of the way the moron in the | by NOLAWitch | 2004-09-22 09:51:44 |
|
was that Jackson or Moore? (n/t) | by shepmagoo | 2004-09-22 10:34:43 |
|
Can you show proof Moore is deluded? | by Naruki | 2004-09-22 10:42:02 |
|
Its not all about major facts though | by shepmagoo | 2004-09-22 11:17:46 |
|
It's a little more than that. | by Illiad | 2004-09-22 11:25:32 |
|
I do wish Someone | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 11:29:44 |
|
The Truth? You want the Truth? | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 12:19:52 |
| Not true. |
by Naruki |
2004-09-22 12:48:47 |
There _is_ something called the truth. It's also called "what really happened", or "reality" for short.
What you are describing as "the truth from one's viewpoint" is also called "perceived truth".
Just because everyone may have slightly incorrect perceptions does _not_ mean the truth doesn't exist. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
If the truth, or 'reality' as you call it, | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 12:54:02 |
|
What does being relevant have to do with it? | by Matthewdba | 2004-09-22 12:57:56 |
|
correction | by Matthewdba | 2004-09-22 13:02:32 |
|
Can an unknown truth be called true? | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 13:29:31 |
|
Of course it can. | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 13:41:34 |
|
Except, of course, in Copenhagen | by HadEnuf | 2004-09-22 13:48:41 |
|
But what happens when | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 14:26:42 |
|
Then the two statements: | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:41:32 |
|
It doesn't. | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 15:24:05 |
|
These philosophical differences _are_ important. | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:01:41 |
|
I never said that you could rely on Everybody | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 14:31:40 |
|
I think we have already established that | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:50:05 |
|
Just because we cannot know the entirety | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 15:05:05 |
|
In addition to Matthewdba's comments... | by Naruki | 2004-09-22 13:26:46 |
|
In order to perceive the truth, the whole truth | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 13:47:02 |
|
You are doing the impossible! | by Naruki | 2004-09-22 13:53:36 |
|
That wasn't what I said, though. | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:14:10 |
|
I see your mistake, now. Sorry I overlooked it | by Naruki | 2004-09-22 14:23:25 |
|
What it means is, that | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:26:05 |
|
In certain limited situation, perhaps. | by Naruki | 2004-09-22 14:29:17 |
|
How do you determine which category | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:43:36 |
|
Heisenberg? | by HadEnuf | 2004-09-22 13:54:53 |
|
I disagree. | by Naruki | 2004-09-22 14:06:39 |
|
That is _so_ limited a view of the truth. | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:22:41 |
|
You are _so_ equivocating. | by Naruki | 2004-09-22 14:26:51 |
|
What I don't understand is why you insist | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:39:15 |
|
What has any of that to do with | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 14:45:14 |
|
The fact that there is an answer that is | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 14:57:46 |
|
Some truths are relative, yes, but others | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 15:22:55 |
|
Different observers *can* see a pin up or down | by HadEnuf | 2004-09-22 15:32:28 |
|
Let's try a different example. | by cencithomas | 2004-09-22 16:45:59 |
|
Ah, but until the pins stop moving . .. | by HadEnuf | 2004-09-22 14:57:34 |
|
What does anyone Knowing it | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 14:38:24 |
|
In the Copenhagen interpretation, everything | by HadEnuf | 2004-09-22 14:59:30 |
|
Is that the "collapsing probability wave" theory? | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 15:07:00 |
|
Yep, that'd be it. | by HadEnuf | 2004-09-22 15:28:40 |
|
Thanks for jumping in. | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 15:45:43 |
|
What does something being true for you | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 15:00:33 |
|
Viewpoint only matters | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 15:32:59 |
|
I believe he qualified that in his final... | by bytemedammit | 2004-09-22 12:55:42 |
|
/s\on\one (n/t) | by bytemedammit | 2004-09-22 12:56:37 |
|
Then he did it backward. | by BloodyViking | 2004-09-22 13:16:58 |
|
How do you separate one from the other? (n/t) | by LurkerMo | 2004-09-22 13:48:51 |