Zone1 Morality is natural phenomenon.

[ding]

I see you as you are.

But you don't believe humans can be objective.

 

[ding]

And you have none.

If you say so.

 

[Blues Man]

I just told you. Anything which is true is the word of God as God is truth.

And the entire bible is the opinion of men you said so yourself. So you have no idea what you god actually said all you have is the opinion of the men who wrote the bible

 

[ding]

And the entire bible is the opinion of men you said so yourself. So you have no idea what you god actually said all you have is the opinion of the men who wrote the bible

Quote exactly what I said and then you will know what I said.

 

[Blues Man]

But you don't believe humans can be objective.

Wrong again donkey.

You are what you think. You have put countless examples of how you think right here on this board.

 

[Blues Man]

Quote exactly what I said and then you will know what I said.

Why you never post quotes when I ask

 

[ding]

Wrong again donkey.

You are what you think. You have put countless examples of how you think right here on this board.

That's not what you said before.

We can't discover any objective truth because we do not see what actually is. All of our perceptions are nothing but approximations of what the electrical signals that are carried to our brain via our sense organs mean.

 

[ding]

Why you never post quotes when I ask

I literally just quoted you in my last post. Would you like for me to quote what I said for you?

 

[Blues Man]

That's not what you said before.

What you think is not objective truth.

You have given countless examples of what you think here on this board.

 

[Blues Man]

I literally just quoted you in my last post. Would you like for me to quote what I said for you?

Did I ask for that quote?

No.

How many times have I asked you to quote me and you refused? I lost count

 

[ding]

What you think is not objective truth.

You have given countless examples of what you think here on this board.

I just posted your own words on the subject. See post # 327

 

[ding]

Did I ask for that quote?

No.

How many times have I asked you to quote me and you refused? I lost count

Here's what I said...

Fallible men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit which used their fallibility to write these accounts in certain ways for certain purposes known only to the infallible Holy Spirit.

 

[Blues Man]

I just posted your own words on the subject. See post # 327

And you are taking that out of context of the discussion it was part of.

I used the example that no 2 people perceive things in the same way.

You don't see the same tree I see. I know that it true because I have a slight degree of vision impairment in my left eye from an injury

So there is no way we can objectively agree that our individual perceptions are objectively exactly the same.

 

[ding]

And you are taking that out of context of the discussion it was part of.

I used the example that no 2 people perceive things in the same way.

You don't see the same tree I see. I know that it true because I have a slight degree of vision impairment in my left eye from an injury

So there is no way we can objectively agree that our individual perceptions are objectively exactly the same.

I didn't take anything out of context. You don't believe humans can be objective. You said, "We can't discover any objective truth because we do not see what actually is. All of our perceptions are nothing but approximations of what the electrical signals that are carried to our brain via our sense organs mean."

 

[Blues Man]

I didn't take anything out of context. You don't believe humans can be objective. You said, "We can't discover any objective truth because we do not see what actually is. All of our perceptions are nothing but approximations of what the electrical signals that are carried to our brain via our sense organs mean."

Yes the word SEE in that context actually meant seeing with our eyes.

IOW sensory perceptions

You do not SEE the same tree I do.

Dishonest you are.

 

[ding]

Yes the word SEE in that context actually meant seeing with our eyes.

IOW sensory perceptions

You do not SEE the same tree I do.

Dishonest you are.

What I see is the first sentence in your statement where you said, ""We can't discover any objective truth..."

 

[Blues Man]

What I see is the first sentence in your statement where you said, ""We can't discover any objective truth..."

Dishonest you are. You ignore the explanation given for that statement and you didn't even quote the entire sentence.

You cherry pick just like you cherry pick the morality out of the bible.

If I quoted you as saying "Men wrote the bible " which you said and then started claiming that means you don't believe in your god I would be as dishonest as you.

But I don't do that because I am not dishonest.

 

[ding]

Dishonest you are. You ignore the explanation given for that statement and you didn't even quote the entire sentence.

You cherry pick just like you cherry pick the morality out of the bible.

If I quoted you as saying "Men wrote the bible " which you said and then started claiming that means you don't believe in your god I would be as dishonest as you.

But I don't do that because I am not dishonest.

So you are saying you were wrong when you said, "We can't discover any objective truth...?"

It's not my fault that you keep making absolute statements. You didn't qualify that statement. In fact you went on to explain why you believe "We can't discover any objective truth..."

The words "can't" and "any" literally restrict you from implied exceptions so unless you explicitly state the exceptions - which you didn't - you are making an absolute statement. I'm not being dishonest. You are being dishonest. Admit your mistake and move on.

 

[Blues Man]

So you are saying you were wrong when you said, "We can't discover any objective truth...?"

It's not my fault that you keep making absolute statements. You didn't qualify that statement. In fact you went on to explain why you believe "We can't discover any objective truth..."

The words "can't" and "any" literally restrict you from implied exceptions so unless you explicitly state the exceptions - which you didn't - you are making an absolute statement. I'm not being dishonest. You are being dishonest. Admit your mistake and move on.

In the CONTEXT I framed the statement no I was not wring.

You are not taking the entire post in context.

I was obviously speaking who what humans perceive via their own sensory organs. You can realize that because I used the words perceive and sensory organs.

But you can't understand any more than 6 words out of the entire post and want to take that out context.

But I think maybe I'm giving you far too much credit in the intelligence department. and that your just another village idiot.

 

[ding]

In the CONTEXT I framed the statement no I was not wring.

You are not taking the entire post in context.

I was obviously speaking who what humans perceive via their own sensory organs. You can realize that because I used the words perceive and sensory organs.

But you can't understand any more than 6 words out of the entire post and want to take that out context.

But I think maybe I'm giving you far too much credit in the intelligence department. and that your just another village idiot.

Your stories have more holes than Swiss cheese.

We can't discover any objective truth because we do not see what actually is. All of our perceptions are nothing but approximations of what the electrical signals that are carried to our brain via our sense organs mean.

You can be stimulated quite easily to see hear taste smell and feel what is not there with just a little electric current delivered via a hair thin wire placed on various parts of the brain.

Your perception of what is your own body can be tricked quire easily and you can be made to believe a rubber hand is actually part of your body.

All these things contradict your assertion that we can via our senses and brains see the objective truth of "reality"