Kshartle wrote:I can't get past the logic that I have to exist in order to make the argument that I do or don't.
Well, I don't really know that that's the case, in a totally objective sense. Sounds like a tautology to me. Can you prove that?
Wikipedia wrote:Axioms define and delimit the realm of analysis; the relative truth of an axiom is taken for granted within the particular domain of analysis, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other relative truths. No explicit view regarding the absolute truth of axioms is ever taken in the context of modern mathematics, as such a thing is considered to be an irrelevant and impossible contradiction in terms.
You really can't deal with absolute truth at all via logic. Logic is useful, in its domain, but it can't tell us ANYTHING about absolute truth. To paraphrase Spock from Star Trek VI, "Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Kshartle, not the end".
Kshartle wrote:If you can teach me something I'm happy to learn it. It doesn't need to descend into personal insults towards me.
I don't think I've taken it down to that level here... If I have, I'm sorry.
It sounded like you were saying I just assume I'm right, intolerant of others opinions and am arrogant. I feel like I downright beg people for their opinions. To the extent I ask them to maybe offer some support for them.....well this is a discussion forum. I offer support when I make a claim, it's never just based on my assumption of being right.
Logic can't tell us anything about absolute truth? Again I'm baffled here. The statement "There is no such thing as absolute truth" is really "There is an absolute truth and it's that there is no such thing as absolute truth.....errrr....except this statement".
To me that's logic proving that absolute truth must exist. Again I can't think of any other axiom, premise or unprovable assumption that I must have faith-based belief in to prove any of that.
Now I'm not the smartest person in the world...but I'm decently smart, I'm sure you'd agree that you are. Between us we have yet to come up with any axioms, premises or unprovable assumptions that I must have faith-based belief in to prove any of that. How can you be so sure they exist or that we need them? And if we do in fact need them as you say.....isn't that also true and doesn't that prove that there must be some absolute truth?
Not trying to be mind-bending here, these are abstract concepts. I just would like to understand what you mean...perhaps with an example. I've provided a couple statements of logic-based beliefs and would like to see where faith is required.
And maybe get back to bitcoin. I think I've asked some good questions about them and I'd like to see if anyone has an answer. If a smart enough forum as this struggles with questions I came up with rather easily.....maybe the bitcoin value concept is shakier than some here think. Or maybe I'm dumb and everyone is too polite to point that out. Please point it out.