View Single Post
Old 01-04-2009, 09:42 PM   #19
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adavardes View Post
So, if my argument holds that all arguments can be wrong, and that no truths absolutely exist insofar as we know, then it's to be dismissed, because it proves itself as possibly wrong?
If your argument holds that all arguments can be wrong, then this includes your argument that there are no absolute truths, which means they can exist, no matter how much you wish to protest.

Whether you realize it or not, you argument dictates that there must be absolute truths (your argument itself seeks to be one of them).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adavardes View Post
Because I believe I said earlier that mitigating evidence can often made an argument more objective and valid than others, just not to the complete extreme.
There are degrees of subjectivity. Not of objectivity. Per your earlier example with color, we can quibble of whether something is pink, or salmon, or melon, but either 2+2=4 or it does not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adavardes View Post
Philosophers couldn't prove what they were saying when they talked about what society should be constructed like, or how man thinks, but a lot of what they said is still accepted as truth.
I won't be joining you in the rabbit hole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adavardes View Post
You're throwing around the "burden of proof", but I fail to see why I should feel the need to prove my argument when the concept is just that: a concept, and it can be flawed.
There is no reason to do so, unless you wish your argument to be seriously considered. If you don't, then there is no reason to post anything further. You made your claim and indicated your desire to do nothing more to defend it. Done and done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adavardes View Post
Just like any other, and most certainly like your claims that there are universal truths humanity recognises. If you can prove me wrong to that effect, then the burden of proof is most definately on me, right?
The burden of proof is always on the party making a claim. I hope that helps to clear up any remaining confusion.

Thanks for your post.
Achilles is offline   you may: