[lbo-talk] science, objectivity, truth, taste and tolerance/Answer

[EverYoung Global Intellectual Enterprises]

Hi Ravi!
The only absolute truth is that no truth is absolute.
The Truth is Nature, Life, Time and Space--with all their processes that are 
dynamics manifest.
There are a few minor things that may be called the absolute truths: e.g. 
Napolean died on this or that date.
Theory of Relativity challenges the truth of the time and space too--but 
that is based upon the assumption that speed of light is constant. While 
speed itself is composed of the ingredients of time and space. Hence Theory 
of Relativity is itself a circular argument.
There are many interests-groups, cultures, classes, races, ideologies, 
notions, etc., existing side by side--astronomy and astrology being just a 
fraction out of that mess--out of that all many will be refuted and shall 
fall apart, others shall get modified, some may prevail for sometime till 
their time of falling apart arrives. Just as there are infants to very old 
people existing side by side in the world--some will die soon, some after a 
hundred years--the process of death and birth is ever on. Same is the case 
with the human concepts, including the concept of truth.
Once upon a time Christ was the Son of God. He is so no more.
Astronomy is indeed superior to astrology, because there is no Chandra Lok 
as claimed by Astrology, while the astronomy has enabled human being to go 
visit moon and mars itself. One is refuted now and nearly dead or reaching 
its death as the old man of a hundred years. Other is promising and young.
Child is delicate and potential. It grows to its youth while the old 
approaches his death. The promise of life and potential is the truth. 
Parminides to Ptolemy to the current people: all are links in the chain of 
life--just as you could not have come to this world unless all the links in 
the chain of life, your forefathers had been. They were as true then as you 
are now. Life is the Truth.
And it is valid only in a narrow context, narrow limit of time and space. 
Bush and Ladin are enemies but in a narrow context. Remove them from the 
context and place them in completely changed circumstances and they may be 
friends--just as Ladin was a hero for CIA previously.
Can you make any head or tail out of that? I hope you do.
Frederick Engels' "Dailectics of Nature" and Lenin's "Materialism and 
Emperio Criticism" may be of a great help to you in this regard. They have 
benefitted me a great deal.
Best wishes,

Ramesh Bhat
P.S. Tolerance and intollerence are relative. None is an absolute virtue. 
One may be of benefit in one condition and the other in the other one. 
Similar is the case with violence and non-violence. This is dialectics.

 ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ravi" <gadfly at exitleft.org>
To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 8:45 PM
Subject: [lbo-talk] science, objectivity, truth, taste and tolerance


> At around 1/10/06 1:16 pm, Michael Catolico wrote:
>> in the thread on Faulkner Jerry Monaco wrote:
>>
>>> [...]I have again come to the conclusion that there is no
>>> way we can argue over art -- we can explicate, praise, react, hope to
>>> reveal, and help to experience but rarely if ever convince someone out 
>>> of
>>> their own confirmed taste.
>>
>> it's fairly disheartening to me when  i read this kind of perspective -
>> particularly among progressives.  to me it's akin to  saying "ultimately
>> there's no arguing with folks over the validity of science. if you
>> choose to believe that astrology is superior to astronomy for explaining
>> the nature of the universe, so be it. truth is  really relative and a
>> matter of taste."
>>
>
> Since this is a statement or position that comes up predictably on LBO,
> I think I will start using my quota to make one post each day, asking
> this same question over and over, until someone answers it. I am not
> trying to be difficult or clever. Perhaps there is an answer which I
> have thus far not found. I think getting this nailed down should be one
> of the top priorities of any left/progressive/liberal programme.
>
> Now my question(s):
>
> Can you or someone:
>
> a) Define "truth"? In such a way that it can be used in common
>   reasoning? (this rules out, I think, such things as the deflationary
>   theory, while leaving intact correspondence theories... you may
>   consider this arguable, and I am willing to pursue that debate if
>   necessary -- in fact it seems to me scientism requires a sort of
>   deflationary approach/faith in science).
>
> b) Can you then show me that this truth is not relative but objective or
>   at least universal? Not in terms of particulars but in universal
>   scope?
>
> c) How do you define "superior"? Do you really think that astronomy is
>   superior to astrology (for explaining the nature of the universe) in
>   every sense? How do you expect to demonstrate that conclusively?
>
> d) What does superiority have to do with truth? Ptolemaic system of
>   planetary motion were probably superior to whatever it replaced. Does
>   that make it "true"? Is Reimann geometry true?
>
> e) What is meant by "validity" (of science)? Valid in what sense? In
>   representing "truth"? In being "superior"? Or just in the mundane
>   sense of being more reliable than a few other systems?
>
> f) Can you define "science"?
>
> g) When we abandon one system of explanation for another because the
>   latter is more parsimonious or more elegant (easier to work with,
>   etc), is this because the latter is more "true"? Or is it just a
>   matter of "taste? (a preference for parsimony, elegance, etc).
>
> Thank you for any light you can throw on this. My tone is not intended
> to be combative but at worst defensive (since I do believe that the
> tolerance that defines a [true] progressive is a good thing; and does
> not *necessarily* lead to the gas chambers as bogeyman arguments attempt
> to show).
>
> --ravi
>
> -- 
> Support something better than yourself: ;-)
> PeTA:       http://www.peta.org/
> GreenPeace: http://www.greenpeace.org/
> If you have nothing better to do: http://platosbeard.org/
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>