apriorian apologetics

 If we love our child, we protect them from things that would harm them. Parental care cannot be made consistent with a progressive tolerant mindset. The person who is tolerant of sin is uncommitted and irresponsible. We see this more clearly when it comes to caring for a child, but to be blasé about sin is to be blasé about the condition of society, and this invariably impacts our children’s lives.   

There are two systems of thought or ideologies, that reflect two philosophies or epistemologies as to the nature of knowledge. If our view as to what knowledge is are wrong, the truth is far from us.

The One Reality Hypothesis postulates a single all-encompassing universe that is known only through the physical sense. This is the phenomenologists position. 

The Two Reality Hypothesis acknowledges there is an epistemology that contains all logical possibilities but one. The excluded hypothesis is the proposition that the universe is composed of absolute truths. Logically there cannot be more than two possible Theories of Knowledge, nor can there be fewer than one, as the one is needed and includes all logical possibilities, but one other. Thus, the one philosophy is logically necessary and the two reality hypothesis is sufficient to include all possible viewpoints. 

In The Two Universe model, one universe contains all possible ideas and viewpoints, other than the idea that truth is formed from logical absolutes. As the idea of a reality composed of contingent truths is incompatible with a reality of absolutes, a reality composed of analytical truths cannot be contained in one that is composed of a posteriori truth. The two realities are logical contradictions and therefore produce two totally different understanding of knowledge.

If there is only one knowable reality, absolute truth statements are not tenable. The One Reality Hypothesis must exclude all absolute statements and all metaphysical propositions. This statement is an absolute truth and is metaphysical in its construction. But we do understand it even though its construction is at odds with the proposition there are no absolute knowable truths.

The claim no absolute truths are knowable cannot be deduced from the One Reality Hypothesis. The One Reality Hypothesis contradicts its own premise, namely that it is all-inclusive. In fact, the One Reality Hypothesis cannot contain its own definition. The definition of the One Reality Hypothesis is a metaphysical construct and not admissible by the standards it establishes for what is knowable or permissible.

All true propositions are absolute truths. That which is not true is false. The claim there is no absolute truth, is a proposition that claims no class of propositions exist that is without at least one exception. This is an absolute truth claim. This claim is not permissible under the rules laid down by the One Reality Hypothesis. Statements that have no exceptions, are not compatible with The One Reality Hypothesis. The One Reality Hypothesis posits or represents, a logical impossibility. The One Reality Hypothesis permits of no absolute truths. Therefore, the conclusion must be, there are two incompatible and logical contradictory, Theories of Knowledge. 

One reality or knowledge system is composed of relative statements, ideas and concepts. The truths of liberal reality are contingent, probabilistic and relative. The truths of The One Reality Hypothesis always contain an element of doubt and by extension, error. There is no moral perfection possible within the liberal conception of life. 

The other Theory of Knowledge or reality construct is the reality that contains logical truth. It excludes all synthetic statements made by The One Reality Hypothesis in a category of things called lies. In a reality in which absolutes are possible, moral perfection becomes possible.

To Summarize:

· The One Reality Hypothesis includes all narratives other than belief there are two realities. 

· The One Reality Hypothesis (ORH) rejects the claims of the Two Reality Hypothesis (TRH). 

· Two Reality Hypothesis affirms part truth exists as lies. 

· The TRH postulates a false and contradictory reality composed of synthetic statements and a posteriori reasoning exists as a belief held by those who reject God. 

· The TRH also postulates there is an analytical reality based on logical thought and a priori statements arrived at deductively. 

· The TRH embraces metaphysics, and logic and the possibility of moral perfection. 

· The Two Reality Hypothesis, postulates God Exists is a foundational axiom and the most basic analytical claim. 

· The two realities have and must have two disparate ideas on rights and the exercise of power.

· The TRH postulates labor has an absolute moral right to the value it creates and absolute moral authority over this value. 

· Those who hold to the ethical ideas derived from the ORH believe there are no natural rights to authority. Position is determined by competitions.

· The Six Moral Maxims state:

o No one is entitled to what others have. 

o No one is entitled to the service of another. 

o No one is obligated to anyone else. 

o No one must pay the cost of others.

o We have a right only to what we create. 

o We have absolute authority over the value we create.

The power of the state justifies its costs, including taxation, unemployment, poverty and pollution, by its capacity to allay fear. Without the regulatory power of the state there are no social costs, without social costs there is no fear. Without its regulatory power the state cannot externalize its costs onto others. Where there are social costs there is no justice. When we have justice there is no need for the state. In short, the state creates social costs and uses the existence of social cost to justify itself and its power.