I have never been on board with the ultimate skeptic position.

It is true that our experience of the world must necessarily be interpreted from our sensory organs to a coherent pattern in our brain. Real world translated into a language of sensation which we use to build a model of the world. That's fine, but i don't think that reflects negatively on our ability to percieve the world "as it is" and thus have a true understanding about it, through a perceptual coding, though that may be.

So, flawed as our perceptions may be, and despite that there are more accurate depictions of the world (if our sight accounted for all EM radiation, not just visible light, for instance) there is no good reason to doubt our perception of the world as corresponding to the reality of it, since it has continuaously proven effective and accurate throughout our existence.

I have never had much patience for the hair splitting that goes on when defining what we mean by truth. I think in the context of what the video discusses there is a difference between statements like "that car is blue" and "you can only get to heaven through jesus".

The theory of evolution, the topic of the video, is just such a statement as "that car is blue". While there is a lot of hair splitting that could be done by exactly what we mean by "blue" (royal blue vs sky blue, the paint is blue, not the steal beneath, the paint is just rejecting the blue spectrum, it is not itself blue, blah blah blah) , it is still un-deniable that generally speaking, the car is verifiable as being blue. In that sense, it is an absolute truth, specific minutia of detail not withstanding.

And i do think that the ultimate truth under debate is partitioned off to be about metaphysical truths, more so than it is about "that car is blue" truths.

Another good video. He hit on a lot of points near the end of the video which we covered in the YEC put to rest thread.

But as for the dogma of Post Modern philosophy itself:

The ONLY ABSOLUTE TRUTH is that there are NO ABSOLUTE TRUTHS (Feyerabend)

That's a blatant contradiction easily exposed. Can the Post Modern philosopher be absolutely certain that there is no such thing as absolute truth? Not according to the standard of there being no such thing as absolute truth:

A piece of knowledge is never false or true - but only more or less biologically and evolutionary useful. All dogmatic creeds are approximations: these approximations form a humus from which better approximations grow. (Ernst Mach)

While this all sounds reasonable on the surface, with closer examination we see that it leads us to the dogma of postmodernism that 'The only absolute truth is that there are no absolute truths'. i.e. True knowledge of reality is impossible - we can only imagine things that do not exist, we cannot imagine things that really do exist! (Which is odd when you think about it.) Thus we see that the postmodern idea of no absolute truths is actually a contradiction, as Aristotle wrote 2,350 years ago;

Finally, if nothing can be truly asserted, even the following claim would be false, the claim that there is no true assertion. (Aristotle)

And so the door can not be closed on the possiblity that there are absolute truths. If some one says there is no truth, then they've immediately made a false claim right then and there. It's just a matter of figuring out what's actually true and what isn't, you can't just toss the baby out with the bathwater.

Is it absolutely true that the world was created in six days? There's no evidence to support that conclusion.

Is it absolutely true that life has evolved over billions of years? There is a wide range of evidence to support that conclusion.

I don't see any danger in admitting that absolute truth does exist and can be known. It actually serves to damage the theistic apologists more than help them. It can be readily proven that the bible is not absolute truth, making it obvious that the search for absolute truth continues leaving the bible behind in it's wake of known false claims about truth...

Hey Robert, here's Aron addressing your initial gripes about this video.

very enjoyable vid, good health johnson