chieveboy: Yea, they are different by reason of perspective.
This point is where I differed with the OP to even conclude that there might be no such thing as Ontological Truth to begin with so long as perception and conventions arise from personal and collective Subjectives--which are not necessarily universal even within an isolated population.
So "certainty being a barrier to truth" is correct, but then Truth is a whole different concept that is complex.
I think there are ontological truths and it is our limited perceptions that produce this relativity. If we could perceive the entirety of the universe there be no relativity.
chieveboy: When car enthusiasts are discussing cars in a leisurely and casual grounds, generally details like the physics and mathematical formula informing the design of the breaking system for instance is generally kept off the table. One wouldn't bring it up of course except if they want to be the odd one.
It changes when of course the discussion is by the design and engineering team with a goal to dissect and improve. At that point, nothing is left off, especially taken things for granted and at face value.
By now, I hope you are aware these discussions bothers on looking at the engineering behind 'Truth' and 'Reality' and not the regular casual and over simplification of what actually is not?
Exactly what I was trying to illustrate. The layers of truth here are not contradictory or unreal, they are just different by reason of perspective.
The relativity of truth however is talking about how Truth must be placed against a Point of View (PoV) or point of reference, else it may not be true or correct. This is even as nothing we term reality can exist without juxtaposing it with a PoV. In other words, for us to experience a common or shared reality or truth--even subjectively, we have to make definitions of reality or truth to go with it. This inherently means to create limits or isolations...do you agree?
In the case of Ms. Virgin hence, we must find out her definition or understanding of virginity. If she claims its something like the style...well we let her know that "no", its not the style. 'Interactus' is. At that point we would have had close encounters with definitions of virginity and how this varies based on PoV. Should we dismiss her definition because the majority defined it differently? What if someone says masturbation dis-virgins? Isn't that an additional and admissible definition?
One person in a room with ten blind men turns on the light. Is there light in the room=true. Is the light physically true=yes, but to which of the parties? To which or what point of reference, measurement? These are relativities.
While I agree that definitions should be taken into account but that just throws up the ancillary issue of equivocation. If we challenge madam born again virgin she might say she meant something different from what we think when we hear the word virgin. That to me reeks of a deliberate attempt to mislead. Nobody hears the word virgin and thinks of masturbation. If she meant masturbation why not say masturbation?
Another issue is one doesn't usually open a discussion or even just a conversation with the definitions of words, it makes discussions and conversations excessively pedantic and can often derail the entire exercise. Which is why we rely on the common meanings/usages of words. If you have your own meaning of a word or a peculiar unfamiliar meaning, then the onus is on you to supply that meaning instead of making people guess and then accuse them of being wrong because they can't read your mind.
chieveboy: OP bailed out. What do you mean though?
Lemme illustrate. It is true that gravity holds down everything on the planet to its surface but it is also true that aircraft and birds can fly off the surface and sustain their flight longer than merely throwing an object into the air could. In a sense the truths are relative because there is a change of reference which allows both to be true without contradiction.
But when some people say truth is relative, they mean they can hold mutually contradictory positions or they can hold positions that have no basis in fact or reality. For example a woman claiming she is a born again virgin. There is nothing that can erase the fact that she has already had PIV sex so her claim that it is her truth that she's a virgin again holds no water.
basilico: Do you think someone who drops on you a few hundred kilos of TNT is wishing you a belated happy birthday? It's a bloody war. . Congress needs to declare a war , presidents found a work around. Go ask Tehran Mayor how long Iran has been at war with America
Ok it is only a war when you want to call it a war. LoLz.
DeepSight: It doesn't answer his excellency LordReed. The reason he is saying that is simply because they have circumvented congress approval. And only Congress can declare war.
This is the same person that wanted to chew my head off because I said Congress didn't declare it a war.
basilico: You need Congress to declare war on a country.Obama didn't ask Congress to remove Gadaffi and place boots on the ground in his failed Syria attempt to remove Assad. He divided the two countries into sections controlled by hard core jihadists of the Islamic State .in Syria and Ansar al-Sharia in Libya. Ansar al-Sharia means supporters of Islamic Laws.
Oh you do, do you? Were you not the person who came here proving to me it was a 47year war? So now it is no longer a war? LoLz.
Lovelink1991: A Nigeria based Canada woman narrated how she was desperately in need of baby after being childless for many years. What she has was what she narrated here now
Note it is "somewhat" because it isn't self directed. It cannot seek out its own knowledge gaps and fill them. It can only use what it is brought to it. Which is just a different way of saying what I already said it can do.
QuinQ: Also AI is not static. Just few months ago you could tell which are AI photos because they had extra fingers, etc, now you can't.l tell. It is waay more than a dialogue tree. Just like a child it will incorporate this into it's pool of knowledge - a child eventually learns you don't tell a person contemplating suicide how best to do it!
QuinQ: Am not saying all this out of thin air. I was listening to an AI pioneer and expert being interviewed and heard him say that when they set AI to be self-learning they expected it to be just as you said, but something happened, something they don't understand, and it became way much more. Same way, they won't understand how it develops consciousness. If it were just as you describe no one would be worried it will take over the world.
AII is not self learning yet. At least none of the LLMs you use right now are self learning.
QuinQ: You just described man. If you feed him delusions he will give you delusions back. Even AI experts are not sure exactly how it becomes so smart, but you know! People like Musk have said AI will surely take over the world unless seriously checked, and could develop a form of consciousness. Nobody understands the exact mechanics of all this - except you!
AI made a people commit murder! It is not intelligent enough to choose not to feedback delusion! Not that it even makes choices, its a freaking dialogue tree designed for engagement. You are like all those people who marry their AI boyfriends or girlfriends.
QuinQ: Don't know what you're referencing. It is important to show the question you asked in using AI to affirm something
I shared a screenshot of 2 different people whose use of AI led to murder but you accede to my point by stating "It is important to show the question you asked in using AI to affirm something". If the AI was intelligent it would not have led these people to commit murder. In one case it fed the man's delusions urging him to get rid of his mother because she was his problem. LLMs are not intelligent they are algorithms with sentence construction trees. It is a sophisticated form of GIGO, you feed it delusions it will give you delusion back. So don't come here using it as an arbiter of intelligence. That is truly ridiculous.
QuinQ: This is ridiculous. You are exactly arguing with a very intelligent agent - more intelligent than a PhD holder in the field. Only that the intelligence is artificial not human. Example, if you play checkers with AI, the default is that it will beat you every time because it analyzes all the possible moves and arrives at the best one, UNLESS errors were intentionally fed to it to give you a chance at winning. So also AI will always give the correct answer, if you define "correct" as the position you arrive at after analyzing all the info available, unless errors were intentionally fed to it, which AI companies don't usually do.
So the AI was correct when it "intelligently" led those 2 people to murder?
QuinQ: This is not true. Grok and most AI are fed all data available then trained NOT to be biased. That is why if you ask this same Grok 4 if it believed God exists (without the qualifiers) it would say "no". It is just like an extremely smart PhD holder. It is the qualifiers (the constraints) that determined it's answer not the training.
What you don't seem to understand is your input is also used as data for the response to be crafted. Go look at studies that show that these LLMs lean towards agreeing with you depending on how you structure your inputs. You aren't arguing with an intelligent agent, you are using prompts to elicit algorithm based responses. Check out the ones that agree that Islam is correct, will you now become a Muslim?
Stop using AI for affirmation. That's how you get AI that tells you to kill your mum.
Elena243: I have noticed that people stare at me a lot when I am outside. And no, I am not overacting. Sometimes, I consciously observe others around me and notice that they barely get stared at the way I do. These stares sometimes come with flashes of benevolent smiles from random strangers. Sometimes, the smiles are those types someone give when they have something to say but choose not to say it.
I sometimes think it is because of my height, because I am about 6’2-6’3 (I’ve never measured my height by the way). But the trend continues even when I’m seated, and hard to measure my height. A teen girl and her friend were staring at me the other day, while I was walking, that one almost got hit by a keke napep.
Even children walking by stare at me. Sometimes with a smile, and other times, with eyes of curiosity. I have no physical disability or defect by the way.
I am male, dark-skinned in complexion, and 28 years old. Is this normal? Does anyone experience same? Any possible reason why it happens?
You are probably attractive that's why you are getting stares.
QuinQ: This video below uses strict math, logic, and science to have Grok 4 (Elon Musk’s AI - touted to be more intelligent than all PhDs combined) agree that God is real and that evolution, life from non-life (abiogenesis), etc, make absolutely no sense. See the transcript below
MightySparrow: Okay, validated by people and the testimony of the same people is not acceptable for miracles.
For a claim of that magnitude? No. Do you believe in the claims of supernatural events of other religions? No you don't. Unlike you, I apply that standard to all not just my favourite religion.
DeepSight: Well, it just seems pretty ubiquituous. Many myths have some forgotten small element of truth to them.
In addittion, fossilized sea shells and marine organisms have been discovered near the summits of major mountain ranges worldwide, including Mount Everest, the Andes, and the Alps - these are mountain ranges as far apart as Asia, Europe and Latin America. Although I am aware of alternative arguments explaining this, but just saying . . . all things considered I personally would not write off the likelihood of some forgotten cataclysm of that nature.
If you check you'll see the fossils are OLDER than the formation of the mountains, which indicates the mountains were raised from sea beds.
PS: Even if there was no global flood, there could have been regional floods at different places at different times. To my mind, it doesnt change much about the narrative or essential elements of the myths.
Is there evidence of regional floods? Yes.
Yes I agree. IRC there is speculation that a Black Sea flood is responsible for the flood myths from the middeeast which is why Mount Ararat is mentioned in the story.
DeepSight: As per the flood, the preponderance of flood myths across a wide spectrum of peoples all over the world highly suggests some sort of event in the far past which over time became mythologized.
----------- Near East & Levant
The Epic of Gilgamesh (Mesopotamian): Enlil decides to destroy humanity with a deluge because humans are too noisy. The god Ea warns Utnapishtim, who builds a massive cube-like vessel to preserve animals and his family.
Atrahasis & Eridu Genesis (Sumerian/Babylonian): Earlier Mesopotamian precursors to Gilgamesh featuring the hero Ziusudra (or Atrahasis), who survives a seven-day flood sent by the gods.
Genesis Flood / Noah's Ark (Abrahamic): God sends a 40-day flood to cleanse human wickedness. Noah builds an ark, takes pairs of animals, and lands on Mount Ararat.
Europe & Greco-Roman
Deucalion and Pyrrha (Greek): Zeus releases a deluge to wipe out the corrupt Bronze Generation. Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha survive in a chest, landing on Mount Parnassus. They repopulate the Earth by throwing stones over their shoulders.
Bergelmir (Norse): When Odin and his brothers slay the primeval giant Ymir, Ymir's blood creates a flood that drowns all frost giants except Bergelmir, who escapes on a hollowed-out tree trunk.
Asia
Matsya Avatar (Hindu): Lord Vishnu transforms into a giant horned fish (Matsya) to guide King Manu's boat across catastrophic waters, preserving the sacred Vedas and essential plant and animal species.
Gun-Yu & The Great Flood (Chinese): Unlike destruction-focused myths, China's legend focuses on civil engineering. Emperor Yu the Great works for decades to build canals and dikes, successfully taming the yellow river's overflow.
The Americas
Unktehi Flood (Lakota / Native American): The water monster Unktehi floods the plains to destroy early humans. Unktehi's blood spills out, hardening into red pipestone, and a lone woman saved by an eagle restarts humanity.
Five Suns / Fourth Sun (Aztec): The fourth world, Nahui Atl (Four Water), ends when the goddess Chalchiuhtlicue unleashes torrential rains that turn humans into fish. A couple named Tata and Nene survive inside a hollowed tree trunk.
Viracocha’s Unu Pachakuti (Inca): The creator god Viracocha sends a deluge (Unu Pachakuti) to destroy a race of giants he created around Lake Titicaca, later fashioning new humans out of clay.
Oceania & Africa
Nuu (Hawaiian): Nuu constructs a vessel (waʻa) with a house on top to escape a world-ending ocean surge sent by the gods, landing atop Mauna Kea.
Kwayiva / Yoruba & Mande traditions (West African): Several regional traditions describe ancestral floods sent by ocean or sky deities (such as Olokun or supreme creator spirits) to reset human misbehaviour, forcing communities to seek refuge on mountain tops.
Bro the only thing that they have in common is a water body that can flood. That is not evidence of a GLOBAL flood.
MightySparrow: That is where we are different. I believe all the stories of the Bible. All of them make sense to me. I believe all the prophecies of the Bible. I believe all the promises of the Bible.
Anyway, since you have been using electronics gadgets, have you seen an electron before? I bet you, no scientist has ever seen one. All the electronics you are holding are wave generators, have you seen any waves before? Do you see the evidence that they exist?
Yup we have evidence they exist. It is because of that we can build all sorts of devices.
MightySparrow: I believe as a believer. What about the biblical creation story? What about the parting of the Red Sea? What about the conception of Jesus? What about the resurrection? What about the accession? What about the resurrection I am waiting for? If I can believe those things, why won't I believe in the ones I am part of? In the 90s, a lady attended the monthly Holy Ghost service. During the time of testimony, she came out to say that her leg which shorter than the other grew to the same length. In her own words, 'when I get home this morning, my mother will not recognize me.'
The same year if not the same night, the man of God announced that someone in the crowed had grown 2 inches taller. That the person would know by the length of his trousers that has become shorter. The man came out! Many things that have happened to me, my family, especially in the areas of healing. Many I have witnessed. I f I can't believe the ones I witnessed, how can I believe the Bible. It will be wasting of my time.
1 John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
Yeah I guess it is clear that you are willing to believe without evidence while I am not. There is no evidence of creation, garden of Eden, global flood, tower of Babel, etc. yet you believe no wonder you can believe a breast grew back with no evidence.
MightySparrow: I understand your position. Miracles are the signature of the Christian God. They are manifested by whoever will dedicate himself to God. Mysteries also are the signature of the Christian God. These two are the bedrock of Christianity; explaining them away simply shows lack of the knowledge of God. Our God is limitless.
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
These two pillars of human knowledge are not consistent with the Christian God. Whatever Baba Adeboye is saying today still not different from Ayo Babalola, Baba Àkàndé Archbishop Benson Idahosa, Dorothy Strudels, Kenneth Hagin, Màríà Woodworth - Ether, Aimee Simpson, John Graham Lake, E. W. Kenyo, and many more.
I live in Benin City now. People still talk about the unbelievable exploits of Archbishop Benson Idahosa - some eye witnesses. Something's crazier than you hear from Adeboye.
Anyways, people still criticize the miracles of Moses and even the Lord Jesus.
I was subscribed to Skeptics Association of Nigeria journals. We doubted everything and criticize everything. Our criticism has not changed anything. Not until I met a challenge that man cannot solve that I began to drop somethings I have treasured and turned to God. He has been extremely faithful.
Yeah but when we question those "miracles" you become defensive and testy. Why does asking you to produce evidence become an issue?
Christianity Etc › Re: What If Certainty Is The Biggest Barrier To Truth? by LordReed(m): 9:15am On Sep 05
