
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
Gilbert Gerber rephrases his previous comment: It is sometimes necessary to state the obvious and to re-evaluate what we accept. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Whether we know the difference is another issue. The only point I will make for now is that our inability to distinguish between right and wrong doesn't nullify it's existence nor it's relevance". It is safe to add to the previous remark, in that life and death aren't the only constants in this world. I hold a similar view on the issue of "Truth". We have the ability to counter-argument and deconstruct all known arguments. Such notions leave us with a flux of information and chaos that distorts all known boundaries of believes. This contradiction and circular reference of arguments is in it self a constant. This constant is our inability to prove all ultimate truths. Which brings me back to my first point: "…our inability to distinguish between right and wrong doesn't nullify the existence nor it's relevance." The ultimate truth of all things is something much greater than us and our ability to prove it. Would the truth have pended on our ability to prove it, we would have been in trouble. This notion should only divert our focus, to how we live, rather than why we live. To be continued…
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |