Quote:
Originally posted by Suki
Consequently for all of society's members to have complete agreement on what subjectively interpreted truths are is a hard concept to defend.[/b]
|
Suki, you obviously have misread what I originally wrote to you, and you have generalized what I said on public agreement among accepted authorities in a respective field as necessary and sufficient to the acceptance of truth, and you have applied my statements to "all of society's members". That is not valid reasoning on your part, and if you reread what I wrote to you, and I do consider it as stating what I meant to state, then you may come to see that I did not mention anything about everyone in society recognizing the truth, but instead was quite specific about public agreement being among the authorities in the field.
Whatever the public as you entertain it to be says about absolute as opposed to its significant opposite of relative truth did not enter into my original discussion with you at all. What I did say! was that all contradictions must be resolved in order for us to reach the consolations that philosophy can give us. Again I am not speaking about all the members of society as you said, but am specifically referring to professionals who may or may not be authorities in their respective fields. However, to obtain the truth, all authorities in a respective field must be in public agreement about it. Understanding that, then I say to you who cares what all the other members of society, i.e., the so-called "public" say about it? In other words, if they find it to be fun or entertaining, or not, doesn't really matter at all.
Regards Boricua,
EddieR