You're making an awful big deal out of this. Again did you read what I have posted? I said personal truth is EXACTLY opinion. We each see Reality, but we are all biased and view the world differently. I clearly should have used another word besides personal truth as your opinion of it is very different from mine, again showing that we view the words we use to communicate differently.Jac3510 wrote:I was responding to your argument that you didn't need evidence for your ideas about the universe, because it was your own personal truth. You then went on to argue that you can't know things objectively, hence my point.qqMOARpewpew wrote:Well if you had read my posts I did already say that I believe absolute truth exists. I was also saying, I'm not perfect, my perception of the world IS flawed, I simply don't claim that what I believe IS THE absolute truth. Parts of it could be, maybe I know the secret to the universe, I bet you'd agree with me that that is doubtful.
Our clearly different perspective on the two words 'personal truth' basically proved to me my point about person truths, i thought i was silly too.
Now, first, I assume you are backing off your claim that you can't know things objectively. That is good, because it is evident that you can. Second, I hope you can see that "personal truth" is a self-contradiction. Something is either true or it isn't. If we can have "personal truth" then, to go back to my over-the-top illustration, I can take everything you say in an absurd manner and that could be my "personal truth." I would apparently need no more evidence that it is really true than you do for your multiverse. Of course, you would object to that, which is precisely why I am pointing all this out to you. If you have no evidence for your "personal truth" with reference to the multiverse, then you have nothing but blind faith. I, for one, am not a fan of blind faith . . . if we can believe that, why not believe that there is a giant, invisible spaghetti monster orbiting the earth that brings presents to all the kiddies on Christmas? Don't bother with evidence. Personal truth, right?
So, as TC pointed out, this is all rather silly. Would you like to have an actual discussion about WHY we should believe what we do--be it in God or not, creation or evolution, Christianity or any other religion, etc.--or would you rather just ignore reality and insist on "personal truth" and all the while be inconsistent when in that you expect people to take your statements, not as "personal truth," but as real truth?
Take my beliefs and you can believe that I believe they are absolute truths, but I am telling you they are just how I feel. I also believe all the absolute truths you believe are your opinions and aren't necessarily reality.
What evidence do you have (ie evidence that you can show) of your beliefs (im going to assume you believe in god, in souls, in an afterlife)? Since apparently we need evidence in order to believe things, even if we don't claim them to be an ultimate truth.