Welcome to my blog. I've finally decided that resistance to starting one of these is ultimately futile. Hopefully this blog will prove to be enlightening, or at least entertaining, to the people that read it.
As the title of my blog suggests, I am interested primarily in the truth. Unfortunately, the truth may not always be so easy to arrive at. As was once remarked by the character Obi-wan Kenobi, the truth often is different depending on your point of view. This statement is not quite true: the truth must ultimately be based on facts, which are "true" regardless of your "point of view."
I would argue then, that there are at least two kinds of truths: ultimate truths, and percieved truths. Ultimate truths are not based upon our perceptions, while percieved truths are. For example, vague concepts such as an object's being "heavy" will depend on how strong the person is who is trying to lift the object. The ultimate truth of the matter, though, is that regardless of how "heavy" an object is percieved to be, gravity is still pulling the object with the same amount of force.
Percieved truths are certainly real, but have unfortunately lead to the emergence of philosophies that ultimately can't be. The idea of "moral relativism" arises from a form of percieved truths. However, some of its fundamental theories are ultimately either 1) self-contradictory, or 2) contradict with actual facts. For example, some moral relativists would argue that the beliefs of a theist (such as a Christian or Muslim) and the beliefs (or non-beliefs) of an aethesit are equally true, for for each of those two people. This is utlimately wrong, because both systems make a claim, one that there is (are) a God (or gods), the other that there is no God (or gods). While it may be true that each of these parties hold these opinions, both opinions cannot simultaneously be true. Either the Entitiy or entities exist, the Entity or entitities don't exist. Nothing can both exist and not exist.