|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 27, 2017 14:09:28 GMT
If people want to have crazy irrational ideas like religion then certainly they are allowed to. Nobody is talking about throwing them in jail.
However if your definition of intolerance is that nobody is allowed to question these ideas, then I honestly don't know why you expect anything sympathy, or would even want to live in a society where we can't question ideas. If your ideas are valid, they'll stand on their own merits. If they don't, then there is no reason they should persist. Stop being offended and welcome being questioned. It's a process of learning and there is no reason to be afraid of that. |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Mar 27, 2017 14:23:17 GMT
If people want to have crazy irrational ideas like religion then certainly they are allowed to. Nobody is talking about throwing them in jail.
However if your definition of intolerance is that nobody is allowed to question these ideas, then I honestly don't know why you expect anything sympathy, or would even want to live in a society where we can't question ideas. If your ideas are valid, they'll stand on their own merits. If they don't, then there is no reason they should persist. Stop being offended and welcome being questioned. It's a process of learning and there is no reason to be afraid of that. In a secular society, everybody is allowed to question religion. However, the adherents don't have to answer. Religious people believe that their belief is valid to them. Therefore, to them, the belief stands on its own merits. You seem to assume that if a belief is valid for someone, it has to be valid for other people as well. This is not the case. Truth is relative. Just like 2+2 is not always 4. |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 27, 2017 14:31:08 GMT
Then the truth of your remark is only relative.
|
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Mar 27, 2017 14:40:59 GMT
Then the truth of your remark is only relative. Correct. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 27, 2017 14:56:36 GMT
Then the truth of your remark is only relative. Wow. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 27, 2017 15:10:12 GMT
However if your definition of intolerance is that nobody is allowed to question these ideas, then I honestly don't know why you expect anything sympathy, or would even want to live in a society where we can't question ideas.
No normal person thinks this is the definition of intolerance.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 27, 2017 15:16:45 GMT
Then the truth of your remark is only relative. Correct. So would you consider mathematical proofs relative or absolute? |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Mar 27, 2017 16:38:46 GMT
So would you consider mathematical proofs relative or absolute? Absolute within a relative framework. 2+2=4 is an absolute truth within classical arithmetics; but classical arithmetics are relative to other logical systems. |
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Mar 27, 2017 18:31:53 GMT
If people want to have crazy irrational ideas like religion then certainly they are allowed to. Nobody is talking about throwing them in jail.
However if your definition of intolerance is that nobody is allowed to question these ideas, then I honestly don't know why you expect anything sympathy, or would even want to live in a society where we can't question ideas. If your ideas are valid, they'll stand on their own merits. If they don't, then there is no reason they should persist. Stop being offended and welcome being questioned. It's a process of learning and there is no reason to be afraid of that. apparently if those ideas come dangling from a blood caked cross then any thing is pawnable as truth almighty. |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 28, 2017 9:34:13 GMT
So would you consider mathematical proofs relative or absolute? Absolute within a relative framework. 2+2=4 is an absolute truth within classical arithmetics; but classical arithmetics are relative to other logical systems. And are these in themselves absolute or relative statements? |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Mar 28, 2017 10:36:00 GMT
Absolute within a relative framework. 2+2=4 is an absolute truth within classical arithmetics; but classical arithmetics are relative to other logical systems. And are these in themselves absolute or relative statements? Does it matter? |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 28, 2017 10:40:29 GMT
And are these in themselves absolute or relative statements? Does it matter? It does if one is arguing from the significance from one of them. |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Mar 28, 2017 11:38:27 GMT
And are these in themselves absolute or relative statements? Does it matter? It does if one is arguing from the significance from one of them. "In itself", a statement is absolute, but also meaningless in my opinion. It only receives meaning if we put it in relation to something; like the language used, the logical framework used... Therefore, it doesn't really matter if a statement is absolute in itself, since in itself, a statement means nothing. Other (rational) agents may assign meaning to a statement, but this meaning is relative to the agents. Just my 2 cents. |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 28, 2017 11:48:03 GMT
So your statement here is just relative?
|
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Mar 28, 2017 11:51:02 GMT
So your statement here is just relative? Of course it is. Have I said otherwise? |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 28, 2017 11:52:46 GMT
So your statement here is just relative? Of course it is. Have I said otherwise? Well even if you had done, it would only be relative anyway. |
|
