Re: virus: accurate statements vs The Absolute Truth (was KMO

David Leeper (
Mon, 27 Aug 1956 23:39:21 +0000

Kenneth Boyd,

Sorry it took me so long to get back to you on this, but I've been
going back and forth wondering how deeply I want to get into this
discussion, seeing that it's so difficult. I finally figured "What
the Hell." and decided to jump in.

: > Ok. So I'll call this relative truth TRTH, Total Relative TrutH.
: >
: > Next question. Given that OR is in a constant state of flux,
: > stars spinning, atoms moving, etc., wouldn't TRTH be in a constant
: > state of flux as well? Using ! to represent subscript and t to
: > represent a time index, we have:
: >
: > TRTH!t = TRTH!t + n, for n = 0 (of course).
: > TRTH!t != TRTH!t + n, for n != 0.
: >
: > ...where n can be any number.
: Looks OK, if I'm considering time a variable. Or if I'm hacking time
: slices out of a geometrized TRTH.

I don't think we have any choice but to take time into consideration.
Like love, most truth is not eternal.

: However, my heuristics suggest that Absolute Truth constrains Objective
: Relativity, and that Objective Reality constrains TRTH, above.

This makes me sound like a Philosophy Professor: What do you mean by
"Absolute Truth"?

David Leeper
Homo Deus  
1 + 1 != 2