Truth - How obvious does it need to be?

by Nickolas 55 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  sabastious

  What you're trying to argue about is not clear, sab. What I'm talking about is not rules telling you what you can believe and it certainly is not about censorship (except maybe a referenec to how the Watchtower censors information from getting to its membership). I'm talking about evidence leading to a conclusion of truth much like truth is determined in a court of law. I'm talking about the prepoderance of evidence in existence against the Watchtower and how difficult it is to come to any other conclusion that it is not what it says it is.

  And yet the Watchtower runs free to decieve millions. My point was, and I am sorry if I came across as argumentative, that "truth" cannot be dictated to a society without applying censorship. Also I was interested in your light definition of "Western Society." What is your personal definition of that term?

  -Sab
• 

  Nickolas

  The Watchtower runs free to deceive millions, yes, but it is not a secular society. The Watchtower doesn't seek evidence for truth, it seeks evidence that supports its doctrines and teachings, which is not at all the same. It will not, in fact, hear any evidence that contradicts its claims and forbids its membership from seeing it. That's not my point. My comparative point is that Western Society (and by that I mean those founded in Europe and the new world but the same thing could also be said about other developed, non-sectarian countries) weighs claims of truth on evidence.
• 

  PSacramento

  Truth tends to be subject unfortunately.

  I think we all agree that there is truth in that statement that ALL people should be treated correctly, with equla rights and such, BUT that notion is NOT shared the the WHOLE of the world, nor was it shared ALWAYS in our civilization ( western) and to even say that it is a "true statment" is meaningless but it is no more true than any other.
• 

  jay88

  If I may add, religion as we know it would be non-existent, if evidence is the foundation.
• 

  sabastious

  My comparative point is that Western Society (and by that I mean those founded in Europe and the new world but the same thing could also be said about other developed, non-sectarian countries) weighs claims of truth on evidence.

  Your hypothesis is highly merited, but one might argue that Western Society merely hides their illogical views far better than preceding societies, no?

  -Sab
• 

  PSacramento

  One can argue that there is nothing logical about equal rights or "decent treatment" for all.

  One can argue about the truth in "surival of the fittest".
• 

  sabastious

  One can argue about the truth in "surival of the fittest".

  Survival of the fittest guarantees survival, nothing more. With brains like ours, merely surviving is a whole lot of wasted space.

  -Sab
• 

  PSacramento

  Survival of the fittest guarentees survival, nothing more. With brains like ours, merely surviving is a whole lot of wasted space.

  But that's an opinion, not necessarily the truth ;)
• 

  sabastious

  But that's an opinion, not necessarily the truth ;)

  Just trudging on like everyone else ;)

  -Sab
• 

  PSacramento

  Regardless of how we feel about it, we have to admit that truth is subjective even speculative and even what I jus wrote is just that !