Is Truth Value Merely an Occurence?

[godelian]

So basically if the thing can be translated it is platonic, and yet translation is a transference of meaning.

Yes, it needs to be expressible in language.

Picking up a rock and chiseling it into a statue is also a transfer of meaning so a rock can be platonic by that standard.

No, because it is not an expression in language.

You have no real evidence of platonic truth other than subjective abstractions in your own head.

If you accept the same basic beliefs as someone else, you will discover the same deductive truths.

[Eodnhoj7]

So basically if the thing can be translated it is platonic, and yet translation is a transference of meaning.

Yes, it needs to be expressible in language.

Picking up a rock and chiseling it into a statue is also a transfer of meaning so a rock can be platonic by that standard.

No, because it is not an expression in language.

You have no real evidence of platonic truth other than subjective abstractions in your own head.

If you accept the same basic beliefs as someone else, you will discover the same deductive truths.

Language is strictly symbolism. A statue is a symbol.


There is no basic belief when any belief can be broken down or built up infinitely through regressive or progressive dialogue. Your point is mute.

Beliefs are subject to occurence, as they are things by nature of them being distinctions. They occur, like all things occur, and this is the foundation of reality.

[godelian]

There is no basic belief when any belief can be broken down or built up infinitely through regressive or progressive dialogue. Your point is mute.

No, mathematics is foundationalist. There is a bottom to the hierarchy of beliefs. This axiomatic bottom constructs the system. It is not permitted to break these axioms further down. That is simply not how it works. You may be able to engage in infinite regress in other disciplines but not in mathematics.

[Eodnhoj7]

There is no basic belief when any belief can be broken down or built up infinitely through regressive or progressive dialogue. Your point is mute.

No, mathematics is foundationalist. There is a bottom to the hierarchy of beliefs. This axiomatic bottom constructs the system. It is not permitted to break these axioms further down. That is simply not how it works. You may be able to engage in infinite regress in other disciplines but not in mathematics.

There is no axiomatic bottom when you question the axioms as the proofs for the axioms becomes axioms and a circularity occurs.

[godelian]

There is no basic belief when any belief can be broken down or built up infinitely through regressive or progressive dialogue. Your point is mute.

No, mathematics is foundationalist. There is a bottom to the hierarchy of beliefs. This axiomatic bottom constructs the system. It is not permitted to break these axioms further down. That is simply not how it works. You may be able to engage in infinite regress in other disciplines but not in mathematics.

There is no axiomatic bottom when you question the axioms as the proofs for the axioms becomes axioms and a circularity occurs.

The lack of axiomatic bottom makes the entire belief system dysfunctional because logic itself has an axiomatic bottom. What tool can you still use to question anything, if you refuse to accept the tool itself?

[Eodnhoj7]

No, mathematics is foundationalist. There is a bottom to the hierarchy of beliefs. This axiomatic bottom constructs the system. It is not permitted to break these axioms further down. That is simply not how it works. You may be able to engage in infinite regress in other disciplines but not in mathematics.

There is no axiomatic bottom when you question the axioms as the proofs for the axioms becomes axioms and a circularity occurs.

The lack of axiomatic bottom makes the entire belief system dysfunctional because logic itself has an axiomatic bottom. What tool can you still use to question anything, if you refuse to accept the tool itself?

1 is not self evident without context. Add a context and self evidence is not only relational but requires a context beyond it and within it to be further justified this leaving justification as merely a process of ever changing limits where the simplicity of any axiomatic truth is founded strictly within its occurrence...and infinite things occur.

[popeye1945]

A truth value is an experience, firsthand or once removed, as with the learned values you inherit from society. Each biological subject is capable of creating meaning, and bringing that subjective experience/meaning into concrete form in the physical world or society. For biology is the measure and the meaning of all things. Laws, norms, morality, and table manners are the creation of biological consciousness, all arising from biological experience and its sensitivities, plus judgment. All meaning is experience and judgment arising from the union of subject and object. Meanings are the effects of the physical world on your standing biology. Truth occurrence would be the occurrence of the outside world altering you as your biology.

[Eodnhoj7]

A truth value is an experience, firsthand or once removed, as with the learned values you inherit from society. Each biological subject is capable of creating meaning, and bringing that subjective experience/meaning into concrete form in the physical world or society. For biology is the measure and the meaning of all things. Laws, norms, morality, and table manners are the creation of biological consciousness, all arising from biological experience and its sensitivities, plus judgment. All meaning is experience and judgment arising from the union of subject and object. Meanings are the effects of the physical world on your standing biology. Truth occurrence would be the occurrence of the outside world altering you as your biology.

This biology you speak of is inherently tied to the non biological phenomena and is inseperable thus "where meaning occurs" becomes relativistic as the inorganic can be seen as a starting point for the biological to occur, it's transformation into the organic leaves meaning as not limited to the biological and can be seen as a foundational process not limited to biology by necessity of the nonbiological's transformative qualities.

[popeye1945]

A truth value is an experience, firsthand or once removed, as with the learned values you inherit from society. Each biological subject is capable of creating meaning, and bringing that subjective experience/meaning into concrete form in the physical world or society. For biology is the measure and the meaning of all things. Laws, norms, morality, and table manners are the creation of biological consciousness, all arising from biological experience and its sensitivities, plus judgment. All meaning is experience and judgment arising from the union of subject and object. Meanings are the effects of the physical world on your standing biology. Truth occurrence would be the occurrence of the outside world altering you as your biology.

This biology you speak of is inherently tied to the non biological phenomena and is inseperable thus "where meaning occurs" becomes relativistic as the inorganic can be seen as a starting point for the biological to occur, it's transformation into the organic leaves meaning as not limited to the biological and can be seen as a foundational process not limited to biology by necessity of the nonbiological's transformative qualities.

While both subject and object are involved in the formation or emergence of our apparent reality, it is only to the subject that meaning arises, for it is the effects the object makes on the standing state of our biology that gives us experience. The judgment of that experience is knowledge/meaning. Meaning is the sole property of the organism as biological experience, and it never belongs to the object until we bestow meaning upon it; it is otherwise meaningless. Apparent reality is the union of subject and object; the meaning of that reality is biological experience.

[Eodnhoj7]

A truth value is an experience, firsthand or once removed, as with the learned values you inherit from society. Each biological subject is capable of creating meaning, and bringing that subjective experience/meaning into concrete form in the physical world or society. For biology is the measure and the meaning of all things. Laws, norms, morality, and table manners are the creation of biological consciousness, all arising from biological experience and its sensitivities, plus judgment. All meaning is experience and judgment arising from the union of subject and object. Meanings are the effects of the physical world on your standing biology. Truth occurrence would be the occurrence of the outside world altering you as your biology.

This biology you speak of is inherently tied to the non biological phenomena and is inseperable thus "where meaning occurs" becomes relativistic as the inorganic can be seen as a starting point for the biological to occur, it's transformation into the organic leaves meaning as not limited to the biological and can be seen as a foundational process not limited to biology by necessity of the nonbiological's transformative qualities.

While both subject and object are involved in the formation or emergence of our apparent reality, it is only to the subject that meaning arises, for it is the effects the object makes on the standing state of our biology that gives us experience. The judgment of that experience is knowledge/meaning. Meaning is the sole property of the organism as biological experience, and it never belongs to the object until we bestow meaning upon it; it is otherwise meaningless. Apparent reality is the union of subject and object; the meaning of that reality is biological experience.

The object percieved transforms the individual, it provides meaning thus meaning cannot be relegated strictly to the subject.

[popeye1945]

This biology you speak of is inherently tied to the non biological phenomena and is inseperable thus "where meaning occurs" becomes relativistic as the inorganic can be seen as a starting point for the biological to occur, it's transformation into the organic leaves meaning as not limited to the biological and can be seen as a foundational process not limited to biology by necessity of the nonbiological's transformative qualities.

While both subject and object are involved in the formation or emergence of our apparent reality, it is only to the subject that meaning arises, for it is the effects the object makes on the standing state of our biology that gives us experience. The judgment of that experience is knowledge/meaning. Meaning is the sole property of the organism as biological experience, and it never belongs to the object until we bestow meaning upon it; it is otherwise meaningless. Apparent reality is the union of subject and object; the meaning of that reality is biological experience.

The object perceived transforms the individual; it provides meaning, thus meaning cannot be relegated strictly to the subject.

Are you saying that the rock I experience is experiencing me? In the relation between the world as object and a biological subject, meaning is the sole property of the biological organism and never the object; the object is cause; the experience is reaction, and reaction becomes cause to one's outside world. For all beings are cause to all other beings. Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; all meanings are biological experiences.

[Eodnhoj7]

While both subject and object are involved in the formation or emergence of our apparent reality, it is only to the subject that meaning arises, for it is the effects the object makes on the standing state of our biology that gives us experience. The judgment of that experience is knowledge/meaning. Meaning is the sole property of the organism as biological experience, and it never belongs to the object until we bestow meaning upon it; it is otherwise meaningless. Apparent reality is the union of subject and object; the meaning of that reality is biological experience.

The object perceived transforms the individual; it provides meaning, thus meaning cannot be relegated strictly to the subject.

Are you saying that the rock I experience is experiencing me? In the relation between the world as object and a biological subject, meaning is the sole property of the biological organism and never the object; the object is cause; the experience is reaction, and reaction becomes cause to one's outside world. For all beings are cause to all other beings. Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; all meanings are biological experiences.

What I am saying is your existence is because of the rock and that object is an inherent aspect of you thus you cannot negate it as being interwoven with the occurence of experience. The subject may experience, yes, but given the object allows the experience to occur it transforms the subject that gives a process of meaning.

[popeye1945]

The object perceived transforms the individual; it provides meaning, thus meaning cannot be relegated strictly to the subject.

Are you saying that the rock I experience is experiencing me? In the relation between the world as object and a biological subject, meaning is the sole property of the biological organism and never the object; the object is cause; the experience is reaction, and reaction becomes cause to one's outside world. For all beings are cause to all other beings. Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; all meanings are biological experiences.

What I am saying is your existence is because of the rock and that object is an inherent aspect of you thus you cannot negate it as being interwoven with the occurence of experience. The subject may experience, yes, but given the object allows the experience to occur it transforms the subject that gives a process of meaning.

Yes, it is true, there is no such thing as an independent existence. Our apparent reality is dependent as much on the object as it is on the subject, subject and object stand or fall together. The object altering one's biology gives us experience, and experience and judgment of experience is meaning; this meaning never belongs to the object, until the subject projects its experiences onto a meaningless world. A rock is hard relative to the density of one's biology, which makes our apparent reality a biological readout; apparent reality is biological experience. That is not to say there is nothing out there, but we experience what we are capable of experiencing and no more. Apparent reality is biological experience. I think, really, we are on the same page here in the realization that there is no such thing as an independent existence. Although subject and object are vital to our everyday reality, it is the subject that defines meaning and thus reality.

[Eodnhoj7]

Are you saying that the rock I experience is experiencing me? In the relation between the world as object and a biological subject, meaning is the sole property of the biological organism and never the object; the object is cause; the experience is reaction, and reaction becomes cause to one's outside world. For all beings are cause to all other beings. Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; all meanings are biological experiences.

What I am saying is your existence is because of the rock and that object is an inherent aspect of you thus you cannot negate it as being interwoven with the occurence of experience. The subject may experience, yes, but given the object allows the experience to occur it transforms the subject that gives a process of meaning.

Yes, it is true, there is no such thing as an independent existence. Our apparent reality is dependent as much on the object as it is on the subject, subject and object stand or fall together. The object altering one's biology gives us experience, and experience and judgment of experience is meaning; this meaning never belongs to the object, until the subject projects its experiences onto a meaningless world. A rock is hard relative to the density of one's biology, which makes our apparent reality a biological readout; apparent reality is biological experience. That is not to say there is nothing out there, but we experience what we are capable of experiencing and no more. Apparent reality is biological experience. I think, really, we are on the same page here in the realization that there is no such thing as an independent existence. Although subject and object are vital to our everyday reality, it is the subject that defines meaning and thus reality.

If there is no independent existence than anything within the vast spectrum of existence can be relative focal point through which experience occurs and subjectivity loses its meaning.

[popeye1945]

What I am saying is your existence is because of the rock and that object is an inherent aspect of you thus you cannot negate it as being interwoven with the occurence of experience. The subject may experience, yes, but given the object allows the experience to occur it transforms the subject that gives a process of meaning.

Yes, it is true, there is no such thing as an independent existence. Our apparent reality is dependent as much on the object as it is on the subject, subject and object stand or fall together. The object altering one's biology gives us experience, and experience and judgment of experience is meaning; this meaning never belongs to the object, until the subject projects its experiences onto a meaningless world. A rock is hard relative to the density of one's biology, which makes our apparent reality a biological readout; apparent reality is biological experience. That is not to say there is nothing out there, but we experience what we are capable of experiencing and no more. Apparent reality is biological experience. I think, really, we are on the same page here in the realization that there is no such thing as an independent existence. Although subject and object are vital to our everyday reality, it is the subject that defines meaning and thus reality.

If there is no independent existence than anything within the vast spectrum of existence can be relative focal point through which experience occurs and subjectivity loses its meaning.

As far as present-day science can tell us, the only source of knowing is life. All being is cause to the beings of others, who then react to this cause, and in this reaction, the reaction becomes cause to the whole at large. Reaction is how adaptation to the changing world occurs, it is how you are the world, it is the subject and object together which constitutes our everyday reality, read apparent reality. Inanimate objects do not experience and do not create meaning for experience as life does. Life is consciousness, consciousness is life in a subjective realm.