Quote:
Originally Posted by mr dave
my bad but you obviously got what i was saying. again though, how do you define the 'correct' answer?
why can't everything be nothing? how do you define existence?
i think the idea that one side has to be wrong so the other is right is one of the major failings of humans.
the easiest analogy i can think of is war. every single person who willingly fought in any war has always been on the same side - the one they believed was right. yet one side always goes down in the history books as having been 'wrong'. were they really wrong or is it just the easiest way of justifying the actions of the victor and their violently enforced view of what is 'right' into the collective psyche of the species?
|
Two different kinds of right and wrong. The former in the discussion is objective right and wrong, statements that are flasifiable. "God is real" is a statement where it can either be proven he does or doesn't exist. For instance 1+1=2. This is true. We can prove by physically putting one object next to another object and seeing there are two objects. The latter is subjective right and wrong/good and bad. Morals are intangibles and abstracts and are thus objectively immeasurable. You can deem them as being of quality, but not empirically true or false.