Objective Truth

[boagie]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fight the Power

You do not believe that any of our methods of perception, interpretation, and understanding could come from other non-biological sources. I certainly grant the biological roots of our actions, but certainly we have cultural factors as well.

Mr Fight the Power,

Just as we preceive the physical world and thus process it through our understanding, conditioned perhaps by whatever preconcieved beliefs we have about the world. These preconceived beliefs alter or colour our perceptions of the moment. The same thing could be said of our artifical environment of society. There is no other way to understand the environment in general but through our given biology. Cultural factors, would probably fall to greater influence from the preconceived beliefs we have acquired over time and thus act as conditioning variables. I am not sure if that answers to your question, or rather if I understood it properly.

[Resha Caner]

Originally Posted by boagie

Truth is biologically determined ...

OK, see, this sounds like an absolute statement to me. If truth is subjective, how can you make an absolute statement? If you can't, then you might be wrong in what you said, and the best you can do is "I don't know".

Anyway, this was interesting the first time. It added an interesting facet to the discussion. But now it sounds as if you're just repeating yourself without addressing the latest comments.

Most significantly, I don't agree with your assumptions. Man is not the measure of all things. And, to borrow from Mr. Fight the Power, you're assuming all perception must come from biology.

[boagie]

Resha Caner,

What does absolute mean in this context? I think you will agree that the subjective though dependent upon object is somewhat self-contained. Truth as being subjective, would you agree that the term true is a meaning? If it is a meaning then it belongs to a subject alone, the physcial world is without meaning.

Ok, of things measured, it is man who has done measuring, does it makes sense to you now? If you do not believe that all knowledge, and keep in mind, any knowledge whatsoever is of necessity meaning, and is derive through your biology. If you have another means of acquiring knowledge/meaning, please enlighten me.

[Mr. Fight the Power]

Originally Posted by Resha Caner

OK, see, this sounds like an absolute statement to me. If truth is subjective, how can you make an absolute statement? If you can't, then you might be wrong in what you said, and the best you can do is "I don't know".

Perhaps genetic fixation amongst humans has lead to universals of reason and perception that cause universal subjective experience at some level.

Something can be subjective, but still be held universally.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

No way to confirm that water consists of hydrogen and oxygen? Have you told chemists about this? And what if a chemist is not a biologist? I guess he is stuck.

I don't know about where you come from, but here in the great lakes area, water consists of Hydrogen, Oxygen, and Waste. Too bad we got to drink it because it is a great place to shet.

[Resha Caner]

I won't be able to address the remainder of your post until we get past this question.

Originally Posted by boagie

What does absolute mean in this context?

So, let me ask for clarification about your use of "biology". Do you mean that perception never involves anything but the physical?

[Fido]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fight the Power

Not without being circular.

We cannot deny that our modes of perception and understanding are influenced by our biology, and since these modes are virtually universal across the human race, we can do little to account for the biological factor, as it is an uncontrollable variable. We assume the truth of human perception and reason, but we do not confirm it.

Bush. Rather; we only have to know our reasonable level of certainty to state any truth. Do pigs fly? Only as far as you can throw them. So they can fly, right. We get fruit from the tree of knowledge by asking who it is for. What is the truth is always the wrong answer. For whom is truth? That depends. Each seeks only that portion that they need.
Look here Mftp; It is perceptions that are confirmable. We have always measured, and thought, and measured again. And what we can sense we can measure. It is not there where philosophy is floundering, but where moral reality leaves no sensation to be measured.

[boagie]

Resha Caner,

Yes, you are understanding quite clearly, how could one perceive anything but through their own biology. There is of course learning in the once removed context of say book learning, but, that would be relying upon the biology of another individual and not truely your experience. Your experience would be of the book, and you learn from the book through you biology but, you would have no confirmation as to the reality of theory until you experience it yourself. Perhaps this might help, all meaning is relational, meaning it is a judgement about the relation between subject and object. Its truth is not necessarily of the object, it is about the experience of the object in relation to your own biology, hot is only hot relative to your biology, all experience is biological experience.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fight the Power

Perhaps genetic fixation amongst humans has lead to universals of reason and perception that cause universal subjective experience at some level.

Something can be subjective, but still be held universally.

Mr Fight the Power,

Yes, we all have pretty much the same apparatus both for sensing and understanding, which makes for universality of value judgements.

[Mr. Fight the Power]

Originally Posted by Fido

Bush. Rather; we only have to know our reasonable level of certainty to state any truth. Do pigs fly? Only as far as you can throw them. So they can fly, right. We get fruit from the tree of knowledge by asking who it is for. What is the truth is always the wrong answer. For whom is truth? That depends. Each seeks only that portion that they need.
Look here Mftp; It is perceptions that are confirmable. We have always measured, and thought, and measured again. And what we can sense we can measure. It is not there where philosophy is floundering, but where moral reality leaves no sensation to be measured.

Certainly we can measure, but we cannot test our measurements. We cannot very well test our perceptions when those we might ask to do so possess the very same methods of perception, and there is no guarantee that this method of perception is accurate.