[...]To posit "there is no such thing
> as absolute, knowable, non-cultural-group-specific truth" implies
> needing to reinvent or revalidate philosophy, logics, mathematics,
> science, scientific methodology, didactics and a whole host of
> other issues.
...isn't that why we're here?
Many of which require years of observation and
> testing to accept. I think you are suggesting a few thousand year
> project duration... I doubt any of us are going to be around that
> long.
...but the memes will be (with any luck)
We can admit the absolute sciences as long as they are
> referenced where used (Standard scientific practice anyway).
...but then we fail to acknowledge the inbuilt biases of the "standard scientific" investigative process. What would happen if we were to rephrase the proposed axion/postulate/conjecture/(etc) in a positive way? ie.
All statements of truth are embedded a particular frame of reference from which they cannot be separated without becoming suppositions.
-psypher
-[advocatus diaboli]