Yuyutsu

«Does Russell’s Teapot theory fit here»

I cannot see how.

I question not your belief system, but Russell’s Teapot theory stipulates the necessity for proof from an objectively unprovable perspective, or position of scepticism.

I know and believe, the two subjects I’ve raised as example, that are both positions of bias, firmly believed to be “true” by their exponents, “seem” unrelated, but I think they are actually compatible examples to be compared equally.

Your a musician by admission, then what strange phenomena creates in people a differing like towards musical harmony which gives a bias for the individual to choose, ( if in fact he does), one type of music over another as more acceptable to himself, which may be abhorrent to another.

How can you then, demand your conclusions as rock solid proof of reality common to all.
And isn’t such a demand a precursor towards Authoritarianism, forcing a particular view upon others who may disagree with a given position in an argument devoid of proof, and simply unprovable, to comply.

What is truth Yuyutsu? Truth is based on evidence.

There are opinions, and there are truths, opinions without proof a unbelievable!

Dear Dan,

Proofs are required only in particular types of settings where they do have a use, yet that use is limited.

Expecting proofs in other settings, including in the appreciation of art and music, is just foolish.

«How can you then, demand your conclusions as rock solid proof of reality common to all.»

I don't!

«What is truth Yuyutsu?»

That which never changes and is the same at any time, past present and future, in any place, in any world and in any mental state, including in waking, dreaming, dreamless deep sleep, coma and death.

«Truth is based on evidence.»

Quite the contrary - evidence is based on Truth!

«opinions without proof a unbelievable!»

Really? What can possibly stop you from believing in anything?

Yuyutsu

#Proofs are required only in particular types of settings where they do have a use, yet that use is limited.#

Of course: For example, proofs in science demand evidence, but truth stretches far beyond science, and in that stretching exercise, truth can be a vapours thing.

Or it could also be argued that the grey zone of truth is exactly where truth is deformed to its greatest extent.
Why did God command the Ark be stored in the darkest of dark places. If God is truth, why is his preference for the darkest places. Maybe that is where truth shines the brightest. (You’d argue that I bet).

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as is truth; why isn’t it likewise that truth also passes through the eyes and ears of the beholder, for the individual to process what is truth?

It is true to say that bikie gangs are in place at Nauru detention centre, but it is not true to say that that is a bad thing.

This approach only further muddies the water, since the case for and against can only be argued from a position of moral interpretation when using your logic, since an argument for and against can only rest on a morality based on God and his edicts: Since God and his edicts can’t be relied on to fashion an answer with universal agreement based on truth, because his existence can never be proved to hold truth in its hand, then neither can truth be determined to satisfactorily conclude the argument using a God focused morality argument.

Cont.,
.

Cont.,

Ethics likewise cannot help with the answer either, as ethics based on no morality which is universally acceptable, can be classified as a point of truth on which to stand any argument for and against.

The truth is then, that it is a perfectly acceptable position for a Government to take, to employ Bikie gangs as security guards, based entirely on pragmatic conclusions.

Seems to me, that since God prefers to dwell in the darkest of places, (such as Nauru for example), some good may transpire from it; only if you are a believer though

It is only truthful to conclude, that as the truthful saying goes, one man’s meat is another man’s poison, truth is not a universally accepted norm at all, and if it were, then there would be no wars nor need for wars: That would be a state of total Authoritarian domination by either God or man.

Preferences are what we are left holding on to, in order to exercise our personal judgements.

Dear Dan,

Gödel's first incompleteness theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems) proves that even within the simple world of natural numbers (1,2,3,4,...), the vast majority of mathematical claims about them can be neither proven nor refuted.

That said about the limited and synthetically well-defined small world of natural numbers, how more so about determining the truth or otherwise of statements about the whole physical world and beyond?!

However, this does not mean that there exist arithmetical statements which are neither true nor false: each arithmetical statement MUST be either, true or false, only that our human intellect may not be equipped to tell which it is.

(that said, in theory, some quantum computer could one day determine the truth or otherwise of such statements, but then quantum computers do not produce proofs nor operate on the pure basis of rational conclusions. Also, such theoretical computers could require so many atoms to build that there are not enough in this universe)

Employing Bikie gangs as security guards on Nauru is not necessarily a bad decision relative to keeping them making trouble within the continent of Australia - that is a matter for personal preferences, yet what is wrong is that Australia holds kidnapped prisoners in Nauru to begin with.

Yuyutsu

The theory of the dense order.

#For total orders this can be simplified to "for any two distinct elements, there is another element between them", since all elements of a total order are comparable.#

Makes sense.

What are the “unknown” factors in any decision which affect outcomes?

OK. So one of the factors affecting the Government decision to employ a Bikle gang as security, may have been their ethnic origin.

There exist Bikie gangs which are predominantly Muslim.

This is the question to answer:
#If the ethnic mix of illegal immigrants is Muslims, why would you not decide to utilise this feature#?