What's stopping us from seeing the truth?

[SpheresOfBalance]

The court oath stands without need of revision. When a person is honest and wishes to tell his story as he understands it, he is be telling the truth, even though it is not the same as another witness to the same events whose story differs. They are both telling their truth.

I disagree, it does not. They do not speak truth but merely a succinct human version of what actually happened in truth, because most people don't know what actually happened and just impart a flawed approximation.

To speak truth would take forever and thus would negate a speedy trial.

It would start something like: From my perspective which takes into account my vision of _____ as reported by doctor ______ , etc, etc, and my hearing blah , blah, blah ; i may be allowing my bigotry to influence my conclusion because the defendant is "that other race;" at a distance of blah my vision may have been obscured blah blah; I believe the car was ____ due to the fact that colors are just the reflection of specific frequencies of the naturally occurring electromagnetic energy emitted by various natural, etc, etc, etc, etc,etc, AD INFINITUM. To say anything less is not that of truth. And the reason I say that humans are incapable of stating truth is because it would eventually lead to the origins if the universe which NO ONE KNOWS!

No one speaks truth, just a infinitesimally brief approximation steeped in infinite assumption and ambiguity!!!!!!!!!

That's the truth of the human animal, my friend! Human civilization is a human construct much like the matrix, that was built upon the human animals insatiable selfishness!!!!!! It's full of lies and deceit, death and destruction and in the end it's own annihilation. Life on planet earth is full of illusion my friend! If in truth they exist, I would trust an extra-terrestrial over a human any day! Beam me up Scottie there's no intelligent life forms on planet earth except plants and all animals other than homo sapiens's. Global warming, warring(killing innocent babies for the powering of your latest electronic toy), feeding the machines and not the people, etc, etc, etc. The list goes on! Selfish, selfish, selfish, selfish!!!! But only for those privileged few at the top. If that Texas sized asteroid came today I'd just smile and think, well, you had you chance, poetic justice, you rich dinosaur!

Sure it's a rant, but no less true! Most fear looking in the mirror objectively. not I! And there's no need to get your panties in a bunch, because I'll be damned if I'll join them! Because the old saying "if you can't beat them join them" is false! If you beat them, you join them, because beating is all they understand. It's best to find a few like minded and leave them. Sure one day you'll see the mushroom on the horizon, but it's surly better than being one of them!

This then is the real reason I've come here, I've always looked to philosophy to help answer the question of meaning. And it's obviously not here! No one here is even close to understanding the human animal such as myself. I'm looking for a reason to hope as I'm surely killing myself everyday with my sedentary lifestyle. Psychosomatic Cancer is just around the corner for me if I fail to find the light at the end of the tunnel of despair born of the understanding of the flawed human animal and his seemingly never ending contradictory nature. And no I don't believe that we are subject to human nature, that's just a cop-out. Human nature can be changed through intellect because it's merely a string of choices piled on top of one another, dating back to our origin. And while it shall require going back to an earlier point and changing direction, it's the only way we'll ever become an intergalactic species, as the current course will be met with our demise.

TRUTH is ABSOLUTE!!
HUMANS do not deal in TRUTH, they deal in BELIEF and spout it as truth! Which is why we're so screwed up!

[chaz wyman]

The court oath stands without need of revision. When a person is honest and wishes to tell his story as he understands it, he is be telling the truth, even though it is not the same as another witness to the same events whose story differs. They are both telling their truth.

I disagree, it does not. They do not speak truth but merely a succinct human version of what actually happened in truth, because most people don't know what actually happened and just impart a flawed approximation.

To speak truth would take forever and thus would negate a speedy trial.

It would start something like: From my perspective which takes into account my vision of _____ as reported by doctor ______ , etc, etc, and my hearing blah , blah, blah ; i may be allowing my bigotry to influence my conclusion because the defendant is "that other race;" at a distance of blah my vision may have been obscured blah blah; I believe the car was ____ due to the fact that colors are just the reflection of specific frequencies of the naturally occurring electromagnetic energy emitted by various natural, etc, etc, etc, etc,etc, AD INFINITUM. To say anything less is not that of truth. And the reason I say that humans are incapable of stating truth is because it would eventually lead to the origins if the universe which NO ONE KNOWS!

No one speaks truth, just a infinitesimally brief approximation steeped in infinite assumption and ambiguity!!!!!!!!!

That's the truth of the human animal, my friend! Human civilization is a human construct much like the matrix, that was built upon the human animals insatiable selfishness!!!!!! It's full of lies and deceit, death and destruction and in the end it's own annihilation. Life on planet earth is full of illusion my friend! If in truth they exist, I would trust an extra-terrestrial over a human any day! Beam me up Scottie there's no intelligent life forms on planet earth except plants and all animals other than homo sapiens's. Global warming, warring(killing innocent babies for the powering of your latest electronic toy), feeding the machines and not the people, etc, etc, etc. The list goes on! Selfish, selfish, selfish, selfish!!!! But only for those privileged few at the top. If that Texas sized asteroid came today I'd just smile and think, well, you had you chance, poetic justice, you rich dinosaur!

Sure it's a rant, but no less true! Most fear looking in the mirror objectively. not I! And there's no need to get your panties in a bunch, because I'll be damned if I'll join them! Because the old saying "if you can't beat them join them" is false! If you beat them, you join them, because beating is all they understand. It's best to find a few like minded and leave them. Sure one day you'll see the mushroom on the horizon, but it's surly better than being one of them!

This then is the real reason I've come here, I've always looked to philosophy to help answer the question of meaning. And it's obviously not here! No one here is even close to understanding the human animal such as myself. I'm looking for a reason to hope as I'm surely killing myself everyday with my sedentary lifestyle. Psychosomatic Cancer is just around the corner for me if I fail to find the light at the end of the tunnel of despair born of the understanding of the flawed human animal and his seemingly never ending contradictory nature. And no I don't believe that we are subject to human nature, that's just a cop-out. Human nature can be changed through intellect because it's merely a string of choices piled on top of one another, dating back to our origin. And while it shall require going back to an earlier point and changing direction, it's the only way we'll ever become an intergalactic species, as the current course will be met with our demise.

TRUTH is ABSOLUTE!!
HUMANS do not deal in TRUTH, they deal in BELIEF and spout it as truth! Which is why we're so screwed up!

If people telling different versions of the truth in court are not actually telling the truth then one or more must be lying, buy your analysis.
As I know, a posteriori that this is not the case, then your assertion if false.
As you have not supported your ranting that "TRUTH IS ABSOLUTE" then I have to say that this conversation is at an end.
You can shout as loud as you want. Shouting is not an argument.
Joking about cancer is in bad taste.

[chaz wyman]

<snip>
Nothing you have said, though goes towards your idea that truth exists beyond the human conception of it. In fact every thing you say supports my argument that truth is truly a human category and not a category of nature.
<snip>

Not at all. The chain of truths (events) that have given way, from the beginning of time, to our current state of existence have existed despite our ability to comprehend them. This then clearly indicates that truth exists without us. If the sequence of events failed at the last moment to give way to us then all those from that time back would be exactly the same as those that did. And we would never have existed in order to debate these truths, but they would have been just as true. Truth you see, is a word that we've assigned to that which is not subject to our interpretation (our conceptualization). It just IS. If we're lucky, in time we shall mature enough to realize their existence. At this time we merely hypothesize what these truths are and call them theories. These are merely beliefs, though educated, and do not necessarily, as of yet, indicate truth. Truth is simply the "state of being" accurate, such that our understanding is in fact knowledge.

Truth is absolute, it is not relative!
Belief is relative, it is not necessarily absolute!

What the serious minded humans think they know, is belief. What the serious minded humans want to know, is the truth. It definitely exists or we wouldn't be here, but can we pick up the scent.

Listen, whilst you keep making unsubstantiated claims, this gives me nothing to consider.
All you seem to be saying is "what I say is true because I keep saying it."
All the evidence that you or I can muster is generated by the human experience. We do not have the ability to reference, or ask nature if the truth existed before humans conceived of such a thing. You are therefore speaking of that which you cannot speak.
You are doing nothing more that ranting.

[chaz wyman]

Oh wait, how about one of the most self-contradictory statements there is:
"Truth is relative."

Exactly, because it is in fact absolute!

Oh I forgot to mention that Sarcasm is usually a self stroking, self defense mechanism designed to assure ones self esteem! Wow the number of "selfs" in that one is mind boggling!

You know it's funny how some humans believe that an idea, that appears to oppose theirs, warrants an attack of it's bearer, regardless of the fact that it wasn't directed at them, such that they launch a preemptive attack.

I wonder if that's how all wars start. Not to worry, I've worked with live nukes in my past, and as such, I'm all to aware of the implications of "mutually assured destruction."

This statement is not at all contradictory nor is it incompatible with my last statement to Lance. ("we generate our own truths but can agree").

Truths can be relatively in agreement. In fact no truth is meaningful unless it relates to something.

When we understand one another our truths agree. In this case our truths relate to one another.
"Relative" is not a contradiction.

"Truth is relative." is actually self justifying as soon as one person things it is false.

ANY statement "Truth is..." demands a relationship.

[lancek4]

Sob wrote: truth is " infinitesimally brief approximation steeped in infinite assumption and ambiguity!!!!!!!!!".
So I guess yours is too?

That is just overly agumentative.
In court, the assumption could be put on the end of the oath: "...to the best of your knowledge and ability". But this is assumed or understood in the context.

I think the underlying principle of 'locating' truth in that kind of venue is that since there is no Truth, and that this is True, that "the truth" of the matter will be found through getting a bunch of possible truths together, the prosecution and defence, with their gathered 'truths', and then these asserted estimations of truth will be acessed by (in the us) 12 people's truths incommunication with each other to come to a decision that amounts to "the truth of the matter". And this method has been agreed upon as the most reliable and air way to find truth, however untrue it may be.
If there is no assumption of the basic meaning of the term, though it may have no correspondant object we can singularly identify, then we are lost. Unknown. Spectres.

[lancek4]

SOB so you rant up there really says to me: truth is the justification of the individual. Your rant is so circular it avoids the inconsistecy of itself. It advocates activism and apathy in the same moment. What are we to do? Gosh.

[lancek4]

The basic question, SOB, is: how do You know what you know? How do you know this object-ive absolute truth?

[chaz wyman]

Sob wrote: truth is " infinitesimally brief approximation steeped in infinite assumption and ambiguity!!!!!!!!!".
So I guess yours is too?

That is just overly agumentative.
In court, the assumption could be put on the end of the oath: "...to the best of your knowledge and ability". But this is assumed or understood in the context.

I think the underlying principle of 'locating' truth in that kind of venue is that since there is no Truth, and that this is True, that "the truth" of the matter will be found through getting a bunch of possible truths together, the prosecution and defence, with their gathered 'truths', and then these asserted estimations of truth will be acessed by (in the us) 12 people's truths incommunication with each other to come to a decision that amounts to "the truth of the matter". And this method has been agreed upon as the most reliable and air way to find truth, however untrue it may be.
If there is no assumption of the basic meaning of the term, though it may have no correspondant object we can singularly identify, then we are lost. Unknown. Spectres.

Finding the truth is like painting a picture.- or making a film
I've been watching a little of the Jackson Dr. trail. The prosecution is trying to paint a picture which suggests that in all the complexity of causal events there was only one man standing in the way of Jackson's life. They are proposing that the world of causality that led to the death of Jacko was the ultimate and singular fault of the Dr. They are using all the classic methods of suspense and plot to lead inexorably to a single moment is time that had the Dr. done differently Jacko would still be alive, and that this single instant in the space time continuum points to a single act. In reality things are more complex than that. All culpability of the whinging , whining Jacko who was addicted to medical procedures and a range of drugs is going to be deemed irrelevant.
I feel sorry for that Dr. doing his best to make a good living for that human monster. he is now facing the edifice of the best legal system that money can buy; the vilification of the public and millions of screaming fans who have already condemned him as a murderer.
Someone at the door...
Oddly... I just had tow young lads at the door nervously holding pamphlets with the word "The Truth...." on them.
I took one look and said; "Ah - I'm interested in the Truth.." (for a moment they looked encouraged) ".. I'm an atheist." , and shut the door in their faces.
Poor Boys - these idiots peddling the ABSOLUTE TRUTH - what else are you going to do with them?

[lancek4]

You're kidding ! How amazingly ironic. As you pointed out elsewhere, yes, I am quite patient with fools. Perhaps it is because I'm the fool . Usually I find that the fool just wasn't ignorant but that he was indeed a fool as well. I've entertained myself once or twice with the door to door Truth peddlers. Lol.

Yes jackjo's doctor may be a victim of circumstance but indeed he may also be a fool decieved and lead by his own self-righteousness and greed (maybe) in his illusion of careing. Maybe this is an example of the 'popular' truth and the issue we are confronting here in this thread. ?

[chaz wyman]

You're kidding ! How amazingly ironic. As you pointed out elsewhere, yes, I am quite patient with fools. Perhaps it is because I'm the fool . Usually I find that the fool just wasn't ignorant but that he was indeed a fool as well. I've entertained myself once or twice with the door to door Truth peddlers. Lol.

Yes jackjo's doctor may be a victim of circumstance but indeed he may also be a fool decieved and lead by his own self-righteousness and greed (maybe) in his illusion of careing. Maybe this is an example of the 'popular' truth and the issue we are confronting here in this thread. ?

Indeed.

Whatever is the culpability of the Dr. I just do not think he is going to get a fair deal. Even if he gets off free- his life is basically over.

As for truth pedlars, my schizophrenic brother who does not get many callers, gets a regular visit by the Jahovah's witnesses. Sometimes our visits co-incide. Sparks often fly - but muted - face to face comms does not allow the same latitude we get online. I always leave amazed at the massive range of interpretations that are the result of reading that same one book. Obviously the differences inter-faith, inter-sect, and inter-cult amaze, but also the differences and contradictions that can exist in the same person!! What would we call that intra-cerebral differences?

[SpheresOfBalance]

If people telling different versions of the truth in court are not actually telling the truth then one or more must be lying, buy your analysis.
As I know, a posteriori that this is not the case, then your assertion if false.
As you have not supported your ranting that "TRUTH IS ABSOLUTE" then I have to say that this conversation is at an end.
You can shout as loud as you want. Shouting is not an argument.
Joking about cancer is in bad taste.

Given tons of support.
Not shouting, shouting is continuous caps!
Not Joking!

At this point you're correct, talking with you would seem to be useless as you project your understanding on my meaning, instead of simply seeking clarification. Look, I have yet to say that your evidence contradicts your assertions, as you have done on numerous occasions. I don't know if you truly don't understand or you're just playing some type of warring game. Everything I've said I seriously believe. Out of respect I never talk at people, I talk to people. Conversation is NEVER about self stroking and always about imparting an idea such that it's understood. I believe that in a GOOD argument all parties walk away with a new understanding. I always shoot from the hip and never play games with anyone. I'm the most honest person you'll ever find on the internet and I'm almost always victimized by some child's immature self stroking attitude. I've never consciously victimized anyone for any reason. One day I'll find someone as honorable as I am. You started in on me, I would ask that you let me finish and just go your merry way. It would seem that we have no time for one another. I won't even ask that you apologize for your earlier insults, if it made you feel good, that's all that matters, RIGHT???

As far as I'm concerned Truth is absolute! Humans are flawed and falsely represent truth for their own selfish reasons; their versions of truth are false in the face of the absolute truth that exists without us.

Relative truth gives rise to chaos and anarchy and seeks to burn witches at the stake! There is no order, there is no balance. And this is contradictory with nature as valance electrons would naturally collide with protons, as planets would not revolve around their star, and people would run wild, raping and killing in the streets. Everything would be chaotic and not support the balance that is life. The ultimate truth speaks of the actual chain of events from their inception to their conclusion that has allowed life to exist. We are born of truth so it's only natural that we seek it. To find it we'll have to purge ourselves of our emotion and become a more logical species, because emotion is the reason we distort truth to serve our selfish desires. We have made some progress when seen from the perspective of our neanderthal fore fathers. In the face of today, I'm not happy with the rate of our progression, as we still kill babies so we can have power for our newest toys. That's what relative truth bears! The only life anyone has complete dominion over is one self, to say/do otherwise indicates you believe you KNOW ALL the TRUTHS of the UNIVERSE, which is FALSE!

[SpheresOfBalance]

Sob wrote: truth is " infinitesimally brief approximation steeped in infinite assumption and ambiguity!!!!!!!!!".
So I guess yours is too? Are you to tell me, that you actually believe that I believe that I'm not Human? Seriously???

That is just overly agumentative.
In court, the assumption could be put on the end of the oath: "...to the best of your knowledge and ability". But this is assumed or understood in the context. In that case they could just say "Truth?" and contextually you'd know, right? It was just a point of clarification!

I think the underlying principle of 'locating' truth in that kind of venue is that since there is no Truth, and that this is True, that "the truth" of the matter will be found through getting a bunch of possible truths together, the prosecution and defence, with their gathered 'truths', and then these asserted estimations of truth will be acessed by (in the us) 12 people's truths incommunication with each other to come to a decision that amounts to "the truth of the matter". And this method has been agreed upon as the most reliable and air way to find truth, however untrue it may be.
I was just trying to make the point that in truth humans know very little truth. For instance my main thrust was that in truth they wouldn't know how to answer unless they had a PhD in psychology a well as a few other sciences that answered the questions of physics, anthropology, etc. And it's not correct to simply remove the burden from the witness's and place it on the jurors as they're bound by the same degree of uncertainty. Shouldn't all that participated be equally responsible for imparting the truth?

If there is no assumption of the basic meaning of the term, though it may have no correspondant object we can singularly identify, then we are lost. Unknown. Spectres.
In the face of the ABSOLUTE truth, sure, but in that of a relative truth; to which 'assumption of basic meaning' are you referring?

[SpheresOfBalance]

SOB so you rant up there really says to me: Thanks for this, I believe it to be wise.(it doesn't place blame, negating defensive posturing)

truth is the justification of the individual.
if you think that I'm saying that we currently use twisted truth to justify our desires, then yes. But I don't believe we should!

Your rant is so circular it avoids the inconsistecy of itself. It advocates activism and apathy in the same moment. What are we to do? Gosh.
Please do me a favor and point out the specific sections. I tend to illuminate contrasting imagery in making my point!

I believe you're enjoying the SOB thing a bit much.

[chaz wyman]

If people telling different versions of the truth in court are not actually telling the truth then one or more must be lying, buy your analysis.
As I know, a posteriori that this is not the case, then your assertion if false.
As you have not supported your ranting that "TRUTH IS ABSOLUTE" then I have to say that this conversation is at an end.
You can shout as loud as you want. Shouting is not an argument.
Joking about cancer is in bad taste.

Given tons of support.
Not shouting, shouting is continuous caps!
Not Joking!

At this point you're correct, talking with you would seem to be useless as you project your understanding on my meaning, instead of simply seeking clarification. Look, I have yet to say that your evidence contradicts your assertions, as you have done on numerous occasions. I don't know if you truly don't understand or you're just playing some type of warring game. Everything I've said I seriously believe. Out of respect I never talk at people, I talk to people. Conversation is NEVER about self stroking and always about imparting an idea such that it's understood. I believe that in a GOOD argument all parties walk away with a new understanding. I always shoot from the hip and never play games with anyone. I'm the most honest person you'll ever find on the internet and I'm almost always victimized by some child's immature self stroking attitude. I've never consciously victimized anyone for any reason. One day I'll find someone as honorable as I am. You started in on me, I would ask that you let me finish and just go your merry way. It would seem that we have no time for one another. I won't even ask that you apologize for your earlier insults, if it made you feel good, that's all that matters, RIGHT???

As far as I'm concerned Truth is absolute! Humans are flawed and falsely represent truth for their own selfish reasons; their versions of truth are false in the face of the absolute truth that exists without us.

Relative truth gives rise to chaos and anarchy and seeks to burn witches at the stake! There is no order, there is no balance. And this is contradictory with nature as valance electrons would naturally collide with protons, as planets would not revolve around their star, and people would run wild, raping and killing in the streets. Everything would be chaotic and not support the balance that is life. The ultimate truth speaks of the actual chain of events from their inception to their conclusion that has allowed life to exist. We are born of truth so it's only natural that we seek it. To find it we'll have to purge ourselves of our emotion and become a more logical species, because emotion is the reason we distort truth to serve our selfish desires. We have made some progress when seen from the perspective of our neanderthal fore fathers. In the face of today, I'm not happy with the rate of our progression, as we still kill babies so we can have power for our newest toys. That's what relative truth bears! The only life anyone has complete dominion over is one self, to say/do otherwise indicates you believe you KNOW ALL the TRUTHS of the UNIVERSE, which is FALSE!

I'm beginning to think you are clinically insane.

Truth is ipso facto a concept generated by human experience.
There is really nothing more to say on the matter.
You have never answered my initial objections.
All you do is repeat again, and again the same unfounded assertions.

I really think you are wasting my time.

[lancek4]

As for truth pedlars, my schizophrenic brother who does not get many callers, gets a regular visit by the Jahovah's witnesses. Sometimes our visits co-incide. Sparks often fly - but muted - face to face comms does not allow the same latitude we get online. I always leave amazed at the massive range of interpretations that are the result of reading that same one book. Obviously the differences inter-faith, inter-sect, and inter-cult amaze, but also the differences and contradictions that can exist in the same person!! What would we call that intra-cerebral differences?

I like that term, but I like to describe it as parallel thoughts that never encounter each other in one mind.