> > > Lester Zick wrote: > >> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 07:03:50 GMT, Nam Nguyen <firstname.lastname@example.org> >> wrote: >> >>> If we care to consider absolute truth, then there is no such >>> thing as an absolute truth. >> >> >> Well thanks for the input. Can we take your word for this? > > > I don't see why not, unless an absolute truth could be demonstrated > to exist! Would > > (1) (P => (P \/ Q)) > > constitute an absolute truth? Well, at this moment for some odd reason > "\/" to me means what "/\" means to a lot of people (and vice versa for > "/\")!. So (1) to me is not a truth; so it can not be an absolute > truth that *must be universally recognized without exception*! >
I hope though my response would *not* constitute that I'd like to engage into a philosophical arguing without end. I'd just like to point out that any argument that is based on "absolute" truth is a futile one. For what it's, imho, worth the foundation of logical reasoning has been built on relativity of truth and interpretation, not on an absoluteness!