Originally Posted by Achilles
Please let me know how you indend to support this claim. Since one cannot prove a negative, you may want to consider withdrawing it since it is not provable and therefore speculation on your part.
If it's a universal concept, then it doesn't require humanities construction. If it is universal, then all we can do is observe and label. Your arguments eats itself.
I find the last part of this difficult to accept. Are you telling me that if me and fifty of my closest friends all run down to the local movie theater, we're not going to able to agree on who starred in the film, what the basic plot points were, or even what lines of dialog were spoken?
Surely, I will agree that the movie may affect us all differently. Some of us may like it and others may dislike it, but I don't think who was in it, etc is up for discussion. It either starred Hollywood Actor X or it did not.
Nothing is true? Does this include your arguments above? If it does not, then you're arguing that your perspective is objective (which you just got finished arguing isn't possible for humans). If it is, then it would seem that your perspective is every bit as susceptible to being dead wrong as anyone elses.
1. All we ever do is speculate and throw evidence around. I can't prove my arguments hold water, but you also can't prove it doesn't. Not absolutely, anyway. :P
2. Exactly. So how can we say that just because our sciences, constructs used for "observing and labeling", are absolute? We can't find absolute truths if we don't have tools with likewise characteristics.
3. No, I'm saying that just because you have labels for everything, doesn't mean that what you see is the same. Labels are all well and good, but they're just physical constructs to put mental impulses into a transferable form. It's a simplification, not a basis for proving that it has to absolutely be the same if you all say the same thing.
4. Yup. I'm willing to accept that my argument has flaws. Just like yours.