Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 2

[Immanuel Can]

So if this is "Biocentrism," then it's silly twaddle. I can't believe anybody takes it seriously at all. Do they even read it?

Well we are talking about knowledge here mannie. You know, the story that keeps popping up here.

"Biocentrism," if the chart is telling the truth, clearly isn't any kind of 'knowledge," DAM.

At most, it's a sort of irrational political posture, incomprehensible on some points and dead wrong on others. I've seen this sort of thing before, in screeds about "speciesism" and other completely vacuous concepts that the Gaia movement seems to love to generate.

[Immanuel Can]

The creatures are known...They come from the knower.

Oh. So now you're back to two things existing: the knower and what he knows. The thinker and reality. Dualism.

Or if your "creatures" are real, and if they are "knowers" in their own right, plausibly you're back to a very simple "common sense realism" type of view.

Now we are back to the Dualism argument. The knower and what is known.

Can the knowing be separate from what is known?

Yes. In fact, if there is a "knower" and also a "known," that's two. It's not a difficult sum.

[Dontaskme]

So if this is "Biocentrism," then it's silly twaddle. I can't believe anybody takes it seriously at all. Do they even read it?

Well we are talking about knowledge here mannie. You know, the story that keeps popping up here.

"Biocentrism," if the chart is telling the truth, clearly isn't any kind of 'knowledge," DAM.

At most, it's a sort of irrational political posture, incomprehensible on some points and dead wrong on others. I've seen this sort of thing before, in screeds about "speciesism" and other completely vacuous concepts that the Gaia movement seems to love to generate.

But it's still a story. Just like the books of Bible are a story.

[Immanuel Can]

Well we are talking about knowledge here mannie. You know, the story that keeps popping up here.

"Biocentrism," if the chart is telling the truth, clearly isn't any kind of 'knowledge," DAM.

At most, it's a sort of irrational political posture, incomprehensible on some points and dead wrong on others. I've seen this sort of thing before, in screeds about "speciesism" and other completely vacuous concepts that the Gaia movement seems to love to generate.

But it's still a story.

Well, children have some crossover between reality and fantasy. But we hope adults outgrow the immaturity that confuses fiction with reality, and are able to stabilize a conception of the difference between mere "story" and truth. Those who can't, we have places for..with cushioned rooms and lovely white jackets with sleeves tied up in the front, and all the medication one can ingest.

[Dontaskme]

Yes. In fact, if there is a "knower" and also a "known," that's two. It's not a difficult sum.

The point I was trying to show, is can you separate yourself from your thought?

[Dontaskme]

Well, children have some crossover between reality and fantasy. But we hope adults outgrow the immaturity that confuses fiction with reality, and are able to stabilize a conception of the difference between mere "story" and truth. Those who can't, we have places for..with cushioned rooms and lovely white jackets with sleeves tied up in the front, and all the medication one can ingest.

But we are talking about knowledge, which is a story composed of a bunch of ideas. All of which come from the same place, namely ?


Oh there goes another idea, pop goes the weasel.

You can only have your own truth, for where else is it going to come from?

[Dontaskme]

Well, children have some crossover between reality and fantasy. But we hope adults outgrow the immaturity that confuses fiction with reality, and are able to stabilize a conception of the difference between mere "story" and truth.

IC...How do you know what's 'truth' and what's 'story' ?

[Immanuel Can]

Yes. In fact, if there is a "knower" and also a "known," that's two. It's not a difficult sum.

The point I was trying to show, is can you separate yourself from your thought?

If I understood the question, or the reason anybody would need to "separate" such things, I would give you an answer.

Seems to me that when we say "self" we mean a complex, a body and a spirit together. I have never yet met a "self" that was a thought without a body, or a "self" that was a body that was without a thought. We call the first thing a "ghost," and the second a "corpse." We don't call either a "self."

[Immanuel Can]

Well, children have some crossover between reality and fantasy. But we hope adults outgrow the immaturity that confuses fiction with reality, and are able to stabilize a conception of the difference between mere "story" and truth.

IC...How do you know what's 'truth' and what's 'story' ?

"Story" is that delusion reality destroys. "Truth" is everything reality cannot destroy. It's actually pretty easy, and everybody does it, all the time.

When we catch a child lying, we admonish, "Don't tell stories." What we mean is, "Tell the truth, instead." And if children can all get it, we can too.

[Immanuel Can]

You can only have your own truth, for where else is it going to come from?

That's thinking like Oprah Winfrey, which is to say, not really thinking at all. She says the same nonsense.

You don't have "your own" truth. There's no such thing, and if there were, it would be powerless, being only "your own" and nobody else's duty to care.

Every truth is a public truth, true for everyone. And if it's not, that's the very definition of "fooling oneself."

And where does it come from? All truth comes from the Creator, who said, "I am...the Truth." (John 14:6) It's established by God, encoded in reality, and obligatory for anybody who loves Truth. As Jesus said, "For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” {John 18:37)

If a person doesn't know the truth, it's only because he/she doesn't know God.

[Dontaskme]

Yes. In fact, if there is a "knower" and also a "known," that's two. It's not a difficult sum.

The point I was trying to show, is can you separate yourself from your thought?

If I understood the question, or the reason anybody would need to "separate" such things, I would give you an answer.

Seems to me that when we say "self" we mean a complex, a body and a spirit together. I have never yet met a "self" that was a thought without a body, or a "self" that was a body that was without a thought. We call the first thing a "ghost," and the second a "corpse." We don't call either a "self."

Ok, so all we are doing is arguing over labels then.

So next time I speak for myself, I will refer to a 'mycorpse', or 'myghost'.

Hmm, I suppose it could catch on ...

[Dontaskme]

You can only have your own truth, for where else is it going to come from?

That's thinking like Oprah Winfrey, which is to say, not really thinking at all. She says the same nonsense.

You don't have "your own" truth. There's no such thing, and if there were, it would be powerless, being only "your own" and nobody else's duty to care.

Every truth is a public truth, true for everyone. And if it's not, that's the very definition of "fooling oneself."

I do not understand what you are saying here.

And where does it come from? All truth comes from the Creator, who said, "I am...the Truth." (John 14:6) It's established by God, encoded in reality, and obligatory for anybody who loves Truth. As Jesus said, "For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” {John 18:37)

If a person doesn't know the truth, it's only because he/she doesn't know God.

Is the person who knows God therefore, knows the truth...allowed to explain what that truth is to another person?

[Immanuel Can]

Ok, so all we are doing is arguing over labels then.

No. We're arguing over definitions. That means we're trying to understand what is the right "label" for the thing being described, the "self."

[Dontaskme]

Well, children have some crossover between reality and fantasy. But we hope adults outgrow the immaturity that confuses fiction with reality, and are able to stabilize a conception of the difference between mere "story" and truth.

IC...How do you know what's 'truth' and what's 'story' ?

"Story" is that delusion reality destroys. "Truth" is everything reality cannot destroy. It's actually pretty easy, and everybody does it, all the time.

When we catch a child lying, we admonish, "Don't tell stories." What we mean is, "Tell the truth, instead." And if children can all get it, we can too.

Stories about lying and truth are still within a story. A story about lying, or a story about telling the truth, it's still a story.

[Immanuel Can]

You can only have your own truth, for where else is it going to come from?

That's thinking like Oprah Winfrey, which is to say, not really thinking at all. She says the same nonsense.

You don't have "your own" truth. There's no such thing, and if there were, it would be powerless, being only "your own" and nobody else's duty to care.

Every truth is a public truth, true for everyone. And if it's not, that's the very definition of "fooling oneself."

I do not understand what you are saying here.

It's pretty simple.

If you think you are a donut, and nobody else does, that doesn't mean you get to say, "Well, that's my own truth," and walk away. It means that people put you in the rubber room. You've lost touch with the truth the public all knows is true.

If something is "true," then it's true for everybody. And it's true whether or not everybody happens to know it. It's like gravity; you can pretend it doesn't exist in "your own truth," but you'll still die horribly if you jump off a roof and flap your arms.

Is the person who knows God therefore, knows the truth...allowed to explain what that truth is to another person?

Well, Jesus did. So I'd say so.