Harvey

  • *****
  • 23803 Posts
    • View Profile
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #15 on: June 13, 2007, 09:40:13 am »

Hey Cole,

I'm glad someone is picking up the ball. This site isn't "getting going" as fast as I thought it would.

Cole wrote: Well the eternaly true proposition "triangles have three sides" has always existed. Triangles have always existed.  It existed before human minds existed. Information presupposes intelligence.


I agree that logical and mathematical propositions always existed in terms of physical time, but every theorem is dependent on their axioms. So, analytically "prior" to the truth of the theorem, the axiom was true. Analytically "after" the theorem is the proof. Therefore, I think it is in some sense incorrect to say that "triangles have three sides" have always existed from an analytical perspective. The axioms of trig and other more primitive theorems are "prior" to this truth.

Cole wrote: "George Bush is president of the U.S. in the year 2007" is a true statement. It is true today, it will be true tomorrow, it will be true when you die, it will be true when I die, It will always be true. It will be true when everybody dies. It is eternally true. Information pressuposes intelligence. There must be an infinite intelligent mind.


But, was it true in 1405? I don't think it was true in the frame of reference of those living at the time. Nor will it be true in a future frame of reference to say, "George Bush is president..." after George Bush isn't president in that future since it will be more correct to say that "he was president in the year 2007."

1

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2007, 12:30:04 pm »
So everything you are saying is absolutely true. But it wasn't true until you said it. Propositions don't exist in physical time.  Triangles have three sides is an eternal truth. I don't create truth with my mind. Truth is discovered not created. God wasn't created by me. I was created by God.

Truth exists
Truth is eternal
Truth is mental

Truth exists in an eternal mind. God is truth.

2

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23803 Posts
    • View Profile
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #17 on: June 13, 2007, 01:11:15 pm »
Cole wrote: So everything you are saying is absolutely true. But it wasn't
true until you said it.


The proposition, "it was true that I said it" was not true until I said it. At some point prior, only God knows, it was true that I was going to say what it is that I actually said.

Cole wrote: Propositions don't exist in physical time.


Propositions may not exist in physical time, but they become true in physical time. If true propositions only are true outside of physical time, then free will does not exist. Free will requires for the agent to make the decision--and not some analytical fact of reality. Prior to that point, any future fact of what you decide--which is not drawn from that supposedly free decision--means that you do not have free will (and by free will I mean that you could have done other than what you were required by fate to do).

Cole wrote: Triangles have three sides is an eternal truth. I don't create truth with my mind. Truth is discovered not created. God wasn't created by me. I was created by God.


But, even eternal truths have a hierarchy to them. If you don't agree, then this would make a complex theorem as primitive as the axioms and atomic theorems that are needed to derive the complex theorem. This would be absurd since a non-derived theorem is not a theorem at all.

Cole wrote: Truth exists in an eternal mind. God is truth.


But, if all truth is primitive, then how can it exist in God's mind since all truth would not be any less primitive than God?

3

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #18 on: June 13, 2007, 01:26:01 pm »
To say truth doesn't exists is self contradictory
To say truth will one day die is to say it's true truth will one day die. If truth were to die it would be true that truth has died. To deny the eternality of truth is self- contradictory.
To say it's true "truth is not mental" shows that truth is mental.

Truth exists
Truth is eternal
Truth is mental

Truth exists in an eternal mind.

4

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #19 on: June 13, 2007, 02:00:13 pm »

If it's true that all truth is primitive then it will always be true. Showing that truth is eternal.


5

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23803 Posts
    • View Profile
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2007, 03:03:00 pm »
Cole wrote: To say truth doesn't exists is self contradictory


Which theory of truth are referring to?

Cole wrote: To deny the eternality of truth is self- contradictory.


Why? Truth refers to something (e). If a proposition P corresponds with e, then we say that the P obtains. That is, it is true. When one says that some facts of matter are true now but weren't true in the past, they aren't being self-contradictory since e wasn't in the same state as it is now--hence P wasn't true prior to e's current state.


6

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #21 on: June 13, 2007, 04:09:00 pm »
To say it is absolutely true that some facts of matter are true now but weren't in the past is an absolute truth claim. It will always be true. Showing that truth is eternal.

Saying there is no truth you are saying it's "true" there is no truth.

7

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23803 Posts
    • View Profile
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #22 on: June 13, 2007, 04:59:06 pm »
Cole wrote: To say it is absolutely true that some facts of matter are true now but weren't in the past is an absolute truth claim.


Q="It is absolutely true that some facts of matter are true now but weren't in the past"

What do you mean by saying that Q is an absolute truth claim? When I say something is a claim of truth, I mean (roughly) that a proposition P corresponds to state e, but I don't think that's what you mean. If so, then your statement would be:

A1) Proposition Q is an absolute claim of correspondence of Q to state e

But, in that case, what do you mean by a proposition being absolute? If something is absolute, then this refers to a state of affairs (e.g., state e). However, you are saying that Q is an absolute proposition (or claim), which makes me think that you are saying a proposition can be relative or absolute. I deny this as being meaningful. Had you said that proposition Q is either subjective or objective, then I would agree that these terms refer to propositions. Is that what you meant?

8

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #23 on: June 13, 2007, 09:37:03 pm »
Absolute truth stays the same. It doesn't change. All triangles have three sides is absolutely true. It's true today and it will be true tomorrow and it will be true 100 years from now. It will always be true. It's eternaly true. Since information pressuposes intelligence then there must be an infinite mind.

To say there is no such thing as absolute truth is to say it is absolutely true that there is no such thing is absolute truth.





9

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23803 Posts
    • View Profile
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #24 on: June 13, 2007, 10:39:09 pm »

Cole wrote: To say there is no such thing as absolute truth is to say it is absolutely true that there is no such thing is absolute truth.

Cole, I said that an "absolute proposition" is a meaningless statement. It's like saying that "proposition is green." Propositions don't have color, nor do they have any absolute positioning in space or time. So, please respond to this argument instead of just repeating what you already stated. Thanks!

10

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2007, 11:41:13 pm »

It's absolutely true that to state a proposition is absolutely true is meaningless.

It's absolutely true that an absolute proposition is meanigles.

Propositions exist in absolute time. (metaphysical time)

Or another dimension of time.

11

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #26 on: June 13, 2007, 11:59:02 pm »

I guess it doesn't make sense to say a proposition is Necessarily true or possibly true either. It would be like saying it was red.


12

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #27 on: June 14, 2007, 01:14:04 am »
Since absolute truths exist in absolute time (metaphysical time) then it's not meaningless to talk about always, forever, and eternal.

Absolute propositions are eternal. And they contain information. So they must exist in an Eternal Mind. God exists.

13

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23803 Posts
    • View Profile
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2007, 07:04:55 am »

Forget it.


14

Cole

  • Guest
Abstract objects and the aseity of God
« Reply #29 on: June 16, 2007, 07:17:24 pm »
The astronomer Dr. Hugh Ross founded a christian scientific apologetics ministry in the uninted states of america in the the year 1986.

This is a true statement. It was true yesterday and the day before that. It is true today and will be true tomorrow. It is an unchanging truth. It will always be true. The statement contains information. Information pressuposes intelligence. So, there has to be an unchanging eternal mind. And that is the truth and it will stay the truth. It will always be true.