Why we debate religion: two completely different and frequently
confused types of truth.
There are two completely different types of truth.
The first is rational or objective or public truth, discussed
in philosophies of "truth" and logic.
The second is truth known only privately or subjectively
This is the kind of truth that police must rely on when a
dead body needs identifying. There is an immediate
certainty of identity that the surviving relative knows inside,
but only he can be sure of that.
This is also a part of the show-and-tell aspect of courtroom trials.
The jury must decide on the guilt of the defendant v partly
logiocally, but to a great extent from the show and tell of evidence.
Objective truth is shareable but not determined personally,
and may be debsatable by philsophers.
Subjective truth is not shareable because it is private and personal.
But to many (including me) it is the most certain form of truth,
A mother will always be certain that it is or is not her son lying on
the table in the morgue. And in another context, one cannot argue
on matters of taste.
This difference in forms of truth is where all of our religious debates
come from. Religious truth is only certain to a an individual
and cannot be shared.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at