westsider

I am interested in "truth", and am kind of looking for it. Here are some of my thoughts:

1) The truth should be objective, be it "good" or "bad".

因果, 差變好, 好變差, etc. They are not neccessary related to the truth. Why would believing the "truth" and acting in a certain way lead to the better? The truth might be a terrible thing after all. One cannot say "this must be the truth because it gives you something good."

2) The "truth" should be universial.

The "truth" should not be confined in 宗教, 科學, etc. Because if something is true, it should be accounted by any rational methods.

3) Mankind can only know/verify the "truth" up to a certain accuracy. Because human is errorprone.

4) Something could be random.

The "truth" might not be able to account for everything. One possible reason of something happening is... it happens. Why can't "randomness" be an answer?

westsider

Originally posted by bengrace50 at 2005-8-22 03:38 PM:

你知道中國內地現在的人點解無乜道德觀嗎？  就是十年文革將一切宗教、文化切底的破壞，所以人就算現在讀到好高學歷，但道德方面就差到極。 見到bb放在馬路邊都無人理、有人被水浸又要收錢才肯救人！  中國人...唉！

This example really shows that "道德" and "the truth" are mutually exclusive.

Think about it: "十年文革將一切宗教、文化切底的破壞", then "中國人無乜道德". This fact shows that "道德" is NOT universial. It is purely a result of "宗教、文化" and it depends on the upbringing of a person. This would not have happened if "道德" is part of "the truth".

Something that leads to better "道德" is not necessarily "the truth", and there is no reason of believing human nature is "good".

Also, a "宗教" should not be judged based on "道德".

[ Last edited by westsider on 2005-8-23 at 06:59 PM ]