What's stopping us from seeing the truth?

[lancek4]

The only thing stopping you from seeing the truth is the untruth obscuring your vision.
Once the untruth is removed truth is all that remains.
Descartes had a good method for this.

=

I must ask: what is untruth? SOB has a pretty good idea of how to frame untruth, which I think he has framed, in a 'negative' fashion, rather well in our discussion ;
How do you frame it or define it MJB?

[MJA]

"I must ask: what is untruth? SOB has a pretty good idea of how to frame untruth, which I think he has framed, in a 'negative' fashion, rather well in our discussion ;
How do you frame it or define it MJB?"



Untruth is theories and faiths, measurements and probabilities, uncertainties and doubts.
Surely you know your own doubts.
Once removed, your true self is all that remains.
And once you find yourself, you find the truth of All.
One is All, don't cha know!

=

[SpheresOfBalance]

Thanks MQ. I have considered that perhhaps the residuum of ideas since Kant have created a particular discursive environment that has been met by me in my time.
But I cannnot believe I am unique in this respect. I would think that everyone has moments where something new to them is come uponn by them as already encountered. No?
Because, say, with reading of computers or plumbing or reading other philkosophical texts that center in math I hardly have such moments. But I bet some people do.

As you speak of this, I do not see it as hard edged programming. I too have had these ideas born of my own self that have been previously said in so many words. And I am not justifying them merely because I share this reality. Sure an air can give way to a thought or belief. But one has to adopt the view as his/her own, which as far as I'm concerned, doesn't necessarily come easy. I think it more appropriately points to either a common sensed truth or an untruth due to a distortion because of a dominate leaning, as of yet to be fully understood, that we shall eventually uncover, given the time to seek balance.

This duality exists because in fact there are only two spheres of influence. Of the two, where you find yourself (other than balanced), is a product of a dominant sphere, and when it comes to life, dominance is the problem and the killer, where balance is the solution, and the life giver. This fact has been established as the balance of the relatively small (atomic particles {spheres}) that gave way, due to their inertia, to the balance of the relatively large (cosmos {spheres}) allowing for the possibility of the relatively median (symbiosis {spheres}) of life on earth, eventually giving way to a particular type of life with 'two' 'hemispheres'. Now, what we must do, is ensure they seek their natural balance. I believe that we have come to a point were we no longer have to wait to have it just happen, but can manifest the required change via intellect and the knowledge thus far acquired. Because the purest balance of all, is that of the essence of all, the balance of the electromagnetic positive and negative potentials, this balanced energy, the giver of life.

[lancek4]

Thanks MQ. I have considered that perhhaps the residuum of ideas since Kant have created a particular discursive environment that has been met by me in my time.
But I cannnot believe I am unique in this respect. I would think that everyone has moments where something new to them is come uponn by them as already encountered. No?
Because, say, with reading of computers or plumbing or reading other philkosophical texts that center in math I hardly have such moments. But I bet some people do.

As you speak of this, I do not see it as hard edged programming. I too have had these ideas born of my own self that have been previously said in so many words. And I am not justifying them merely because I share this reality. Sure an air can give way to a thought or belief. But one has to adopt the view as his/her own, which as far as I'm concerned, doesn't necessarily come easy. I think it more appropriately points to either a common sensed truth or an untruth due to a distortion because of a dominate leaning, as of yet to be fully understood, that we shall eventually uncover, given the time to seek balance.

This duality exists because in fact there are only two spheres of influence. Of the two, where you find yourself (other than balanced), is a product of a dominant sphere, and when it comes to life, dominance is the problem and the killer, where balance is the solution, and the life giver. This fact has been established as the balance of the relatively small (atomic particles {spheres}) that gave way, due to their inertia, to the balance of the relatively large (cosmos {spheres}) allowing for the possibility of the relatively median (symbiosis {spheres}) of life on earth, eventually giving way to a particular type of life with 'two' 'hemispheres'. Now, what we must do, is ensure they seek their natural balance. I believe that we have come to a point were we no longer have to wait to have it just happen, but can manifest the required change via intellect and the knowledge thus far acquired. Because the purest balance of all, is that of the essence of all, the balance of the electromagnetic positive and negative potentials, this balanced energy, the giver of life.

Nice. This brings to my mind a question:

Is it possible for a whole of humanity (the world populace of any time) to come under a common ethics of what is good? Which is to say, Can humanity as a whole be balanced ?

[SpheresOfBalance]

Speaking of belief ,

I do not believe that humanity will destroy itself. It may destroy the present facade of knowledge with supports our present standard and way of living, but I believe man is ultimately adaptable and will survive because of this trait.
Sure it's just belief, but remember that assumptions and arrogance can blind one to possibility/probability. First and foremost you assume mankind is in control. You assume that his actions won't lead to catastrophic failures. You assume his mistakes can be seen despite his selfishness. Denial, as some one pointed out earlier, is first visited in his coming to terms with potential problems. Assuming he's aware, when it comes to choosing between his, so called progress, and erring to the side of caution, I believe that his sacrifice takes a back seat to his greed and selfishness. It's not like he doesn't have a well established track record.

Which brings to point that our current way of living is just one particular way of adapting. It holds no absolute truth, only the truth which upholds our way of adapting knowledge to the universe.
I'm sorry, but I really have a problem believing that mankind has a clue, as his bartering standards have been two of the most useless elements (slight exaggeration). For us to still use gold and silver (pretty rocks) as a means to dominate each other, (have a slave workforce), in the face of our own death and the truth that is the miracle of life, after all these years, when it's totally unnecessary, attests to his cluelessness. Mankind seems to rather be brawn, as opposed to brain.

Consciousness makes 'sense'; that's what it does as an actual manifestation of the universe it reflects nothing of some absolute-ness of the Universe. Only the human universe. Is the sense a bear makes of the universe 'not true' or based in a 'distortion' of some sort?
A bear only kills to protect it's young or for food, as such it stays within the confines of an ecosystem; a circular means of balance; part of the symbiosis that is planet earth without mans influence. I don't think I have to say anymore.

As far as I'm concerned, Intelligence is not decided by what you 'can' do, but what you 'should' do, where should is dictated by equilibrium and not by a 'will to power.'

I do not think we will 'come to our senses' or something like that, but exactly the good and bad of humanity will bring about, not an end of the world, like we will destroy humanity, but the end of 'that' world which harbors, manifests, establishes what is true for humanity now.
We are no further that the bear; it is merely a part of our universe creation of brain/mind/ consciousness that is human that finctions in such a way that it has a 'truth' which justifies its existance in such a way.
It is 'true' that it does this, but this is not necessarily 'true'.

For all our ability to think, the bear may be in its own 'bear consciousness' think that humans are the dumb brutes who have no 'intelligence'.

Our presumtuousness is linked with technology; we merely establish our selves in such a way. Does the bird making nests have some superior intelligence over, say, a fish who hangs around a sea anamonie?

We merely do what we do. Control is a human manifestation, particular to our way of existing. It has no 'absolute' reality, except in that absolution is a part of our consciousness establishing what is True for itself as an actual creature of the universe.
Everything does as it does. I believe "lack of control" is more appropriate. Bears live within the 'control' of the symbiosis, humans constantly try and manipulate the 'control' of the symbiosis through their 'lack of control' and thus destroy portions of the symbiosis and possibly themselves. Humans have no clue what is 'true' for themselves, outside the natural 'control' of the symbiosis, if anything is. They have beliefs that are products of their 'lack of control,' which they believe, serves them. But I assert that before they can 'control' a 'truth' outside this symbiosis they must first be capable of maintaining 'control' to ensure they remain within the 'control' of the symbiosis as it's the lesson of the 'balance' that is required for 'life' anywhere within this universe.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Thanks MQ. I have considered that perhhaps the residuum of ideas since Kant have created a particular discursive environment that has been met by me in my time.
But I cannnot believe I am unique in this respect. I would think that everyone has moments where something new to them is come uponn by them as already encountered. No?
Because, say, with reading of computers or plumbing or reading other philkosophical texts that center in math I hardly have such moments. But I bet some people do.

As you speak of this, I do not see it as hard edged programming. I too have had these ideas born of my own self that have been previously said in so many words. And I am not justifying them merely because I share this reality. Sure an air can give way to a thought or belief. But one has to adopt the view as his/her own, which as far as I'm concerned, doesn't necessarily come easy. I think it more appropriately points to either a common sensed truth or an untruth due to a distortion because of a dominate leaning, as of yet to be fully understood, that we shall eventually uncover, given the time to seek balance.

This duality exists because in fact there are only two spheres of influence. Of the two, where you find yourself (other than balanced), is a product of a dominant sphere, and when it comes to life, dominance is the problem and the killer, where balance is the solution, and the life giver. This fact has been established as the balance of the relatively small (atomic particles {spheres}) that gave way, due to their inertia, to the balance of the relatively large (cosmos {spheres}) allowing for the possibility of the relatively median (symbiosis {spheres}) of life on earth, eventually giving way to a particular type of life with 'two' 'hemispheres'. Now, what we must do, is ensure they seek their natural balance. I believe that we have come to a point were we no longer have to wait to have it just happen, but can manifest the required change via intellect and the knowledge thus far acquired. Because the purest balance of all, is that of the essence of all, the balance of the electromagnetic positive and negative potentials, this balanced energy, the giver of life.

Nice. This brings to my mind a question:

Is it possible for a whole of humanity (the world populace of any time) to come under a common ethics of what is good? Which is to say, Can humanity as a whole be balanced ?

Of course I believe it's possible. But it will take us 'all' to 'see' 'us' as 'we' 'truly' are; I mean feel it! That, from the perspective of the enlightened astronaut; to see us as the infinite chance(?) conditions that allowed this little beautiful blue marble containing all this diverse permutation of life that hangs delicately in a balanced dance, amidst a endless sea of potential chaos of unfathomable infinite power, which could instantly erase that which, in it's current state of balance, has allowed to exist. For us all to 'feel' that 'all' life is 'special' and to celebrate it daily in a language that we all seem to understand, song and dance. We all need to daily revisit the love of our individual child's innocence and happiness just to be alive.

Of course a roller-coaster train with individual seats for everyone of our 7 billion on a ride around the entire universe, witnessing the birth and death of worlds, stars, blackholes, etc would help to create a lasting impression, I believe.
We could always setup a solo trip for those that fail to feel the gravity of the reality that earth provides, with a dwell time, especially near an event horizon, ever getting closer immediately after a galaxy is consumed, I think ghost white should be their shade of choice before retrieval to ensure they get the picture.

We 'all' just need to see life for what it truly is, a special gift that we all share, to be cherished, as it's too short a trip.

[Mark Question]

why "truth is all that exists"? is that proposition based on realism, empiricism, rationalism or what? what makes other isms better than other, based on what isms?

[lancek4]

I do not think humanity will ever 'balance'.
Within every ethical system there is a 'good' which sees its corresponence with the benefit of humanity, that all that needs to occur is for everyone to 'realize' this good. Unfortunately, as with the effort to convey the Object, such an ethics of good is never truely universalized, only presumed, amoung those who feel 'the 'good', and presumed upon the 'other' who does not see it that they merely need to understand 'better'. So as the ethical system 'progresses' the failure of the good to 'be known' catylizes those who feel they do understand to enforce their 'good'. Such enforcement thus denies the actual manifesting of humanity and becomes, to the aggrigate majority who are not seeing 'the good' to view such enforcement as 'evil'. The ethical system thhus 'dies' or is 'destroyed', and a new ethical system begins. The 'good of humanity' is always retained in the life of humanity, but the discursive scheme is altered.

[lancek4]

Ah ! Spheres of Balance! I think it quite ironic how you, SOb, mirror my opinions perfectly, in that you are clearly expresssing the view I feel is opposite mine. As if you are the 'balancing' of my 'sphere', your 'sphere'. And, that in this, against my assertions, you, to me, are an SOB. Lol. How ironic.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Ah ! Spheres of Balance! I think it quite ironic how you, SOb, mirror my opinions perfectly, in that you are clearly expresssing the view I feel is opposite mine. As if you are the 'balancing' of my 'sphere', your 'sphere'. And, that in this, against my assertions, you, to me, are an SOB. Lol. How ironic.

OK, lance, is that how I refer to SOB, or 'you' 'mean' 'SOB;' Ha Ha?

[zinnat13]

Hi friends,

Sorry to interrupt.

SOB wrote-
As far as I'm concerned, Intelligence is not decided by what you 'can' do, but what you 'should' do, where should is dictated by equilibrium and not by a 'will to power.'

SOB, you got it absolutely right.
I also draw this conclusion many years back, by analyzing myself and some others who were very close to me; my family, friends and those who used to interact me regularly. I wrote down it in my diary with some other thoughts, pertinent with this notion.

Here I learned my second lesson that contrary to the general perception, knowledge and wisdom are two entirely different things. Both are not synonymous. It may sound strange but in my opinion, knowledge is always borrowed because one has to grasp it from any other source. That source can be a person, a book, history or even our own experiences but wisdom cannot be borrowed or learned. It is inherited in one’s intellect and it does not change during the life in normal circumstances. We often assume that a moderately knowledgeable person can’t be wise but this is not true. Knowledge is just like hardware of a computer but without proper software it is of no use and that is wisdom.

So we see that a deed or an effort requires three ingredients. The third part to complete the procedure is dependent on the person who operates the computer. Without an operator both hardware (knowledge) and software (wisdom) are of no use.

The first and most important ingredient is a computer operator which is intention or will. The second ingredient is software which represents wisdom or intelligence and the third portion is hardware and that is knowledge. Later my experiences with people confirmed this conclusion. I came across many persons who were extraordinarily wise without any proper academic knowledge. How one uses wisdom is entirely different thing. For example, a thief is always more intelligent and courageous than a average person, but, he uses his qualities in wrong way.

A person with less wisdom and knowledge but more sincerity and commitment can produce more fruitful results than a wiser person but having less commitment. An intention always carries more weight than intelligence because it (intelligence) cannot be properly used in the absence of right intention and at the next level intelligence or wisdom is always more important than knowledge because it (knowledge) can be acquired easily if one has the wisdom.

IN SIMPLE WORDS KNOWLEDGE IS WHAT ONE KNOWS, WISDOM IS WHAT ONE IS ABLE TO KNOW AND INTENTION IS WHAT one WANTS TO KNOW.

with love,
sanjay

[SpheresOfBalance]

why "truth is all that exists"? is that proposition based on realism, empiricism, rationalism or what? what makes other isms better than other, based on what isms?

Mark, you can 'label' until the cows come home, and in the 'end' you'll be surrounded by cow pies. I believe that everyone, are some, none, and all ism's. They are altogether separate, and yet one. They are separately un-together, and together inseparate. Why attach a label of someone elses ideas to what I say as if they could actually know and that it somehow defines me, pigeon holes me in a safe place that you can keep out of the way in the dark recesses of your mind? I believe it's safe to say that it'd be hard to find a thinking man that believes 100% of any other thinking mans ideas. There will always be that percentage that one cares to improve or ignore.

I am just a human that was born, has lived, and shall die. I have my own ideas that are not meant to harm or destroy, merely find meaning in all this chaos of a selfish mankind, where humility, truth, honesty, fairness, integrity, compassion, empathy, love and understanding rule the day.

Truth: "actuality or actual existence." makes the most 'sense' to me, despite all the ism's I've read, and is not necessarily aligned with any particular one. At the end of the day, it's just the way I see it.

I'm nobody, yet somebody; one of multitudes!

Somehow I believe you know all this already!

P.S. Sometimes I do have a problem understanding your meaning, such that sometimes I don't answer. Also keep in mind that Lance and I have a short history, and since I really can't touch type I can't handle a barrage of data, unless I want to attach the computer to my chest 24/7. So never take it personal, please! Also, I sometimes get a little frustrated and huffy, but be assured I appreciate all of you with you input as it stimulates my mind. I'm already an improved "hunt and pecker" because of my time on this forum. And while 300 and some posts may seem like few to some. This is the most that I've ever contributed to a forum. For those that care to consider it a contribution?

PEACE my friends!

[lancek4]

Ah ! Spheres of Balance! I think it quite ironic how you, SOb, mirror my opinions perfectly, in that you are clearly expresssing the view I feel is opposite mine. As if you are the 'balancing' of my 'sphere', your 'sphere'. And, that in this, against my assertions, you, to me, are an SOB. Lol. How ironic.

OK, lance, is that how I refer to SOB, or 'you' 'mean' 'SOB;' Ha Ha?

I am not surre what this last is meant to say, but I must infer that it is meant good naturedly.
Since I mean mine in the best spirit of comradery and fellowship.
I marvel that I would find one so interested and engaging who thus represents the elemental contrary reality of my view, who is vocal and alive, is not just the rebuttals of my own head concocting counter arguments for myself --
And this active entity with which I have been engaged, in so being the effective counter to my propositions, is thus to me a son of a bitch: definition: a person who is an asshole merely because they counter and thwart at every step, but also: the one who is presented to my self as the opposite in view of my self -- the 'son of a bitch' moment of exclaiming the coming upon a startleing derailing moment.
And, in that your avatar/screen name creates the acronym SOB that is played with in this way (above) - it is actually Spheres of Balance: which by our polemical positions could be seen to be 'balancing' positions in the potential of Truth --
Which is what we have been discussing.

And I say: how ironic! .

[SpheresOfBalance]

Ah ! Spheres of Balance! I think it quite ironic how you, SOb, mirror my opinions perfectly, in that you are clearly expresssing the view I feel is opposite mine. As if you are the 'balancing' of my 'sphere', your 'sphere'. And, that in this, against my assertions, you, to me, are an SOB. Lol. How ironic.

OK, lance, is that how I refer to SOB, or 'you' 'mean' 'SOB;' Ha Ha?

I am not surre what this last is meant to say, but I must infer that it is meant good naturedly
Since I mean mine in the best spirit of comradery and fellowship.
I marvel that I would find one so interested and engaging who thus represents the elemental reality of my view, who is vocal and alive, not just the rebuttals of my own head concocting counter arguments for myself --
And this active entity with which I have been engaged, in so being the effective counter to my propositions, is thus to me a son of a bitch, and in a person who is an asshole merely because they counter and thwart at every stepn but also: the one who is presented to my self as the opposite in view of my self -- the 'son of a bitch' moment of exclaiming the coming upon a startleing derailing moment.
And, in that you avatar/screen name creates the acronym SOB that is played with in this way (above) - it is actually Spheres of Balance: which by our poolemical positions could be seen to be 'balancing' positions in the potential of Truth --
Which is what we have been discussing.

And I say: how ironic! .

I knew what you meant, but I do appreciate your expounding. Yes I believe I tend to be funny that way. Years ago some lady told me I was a master of understatement but she failed to realize that my perception's frame of reference is of potential and possibility. Being firm says you know, but I've found that many don't know. A lot of peoples frame of reference is a construct of our society, I am an individual.

I have found many strange things attached to my person. And I'm neither superstitious nor do I necessarily believe in the paranormal. It's like I'm some sort of magnet. It's like there's more to me that I understand, and it perplexes me. It's almost like I'm a conductor of some energy, but I don't believe in that crap. I often just call it 'love and miracles out of nowhere' after a lyric of a band I listen to. I believe that had I had a proper childhood and not been exposed to all the chemicals and heavy metals that I have, I'd probably have done very well in some sort of science field.

And I thank You, it's been interesting, intriguing, stimulating, educational, and fun. You seen to be capable of maintaining control of you emotions pretty well. Not like some that I don't care to mention. This has also been good for the strengthening of my composure, which I seriously need. I seem to be capable of dealing with the frustration of uncovering new ground more so than that of covering old ground. I'm wondering why increasingly I so readily tire of revisiting old familiar territory where redundancy is seen, where one can be comfortable. It seems that nothing is new, and life has become repetitious. I need to find some renewed vigor. I have found some in this forum. But I need to find a more universal, more permanent solution, because My family is separated, my health is waning and I seem to be lost at a time when finding resolve seems almost hopeless. Economy, blaah! if only it were a perfect world. Don't worry Lance I don't expect you to respond to this, I digress, typing in this forum that which currently plagues me as if it can possibly help. Something will come up.

This:

OK, lance, is that how I refer to SOB, or 'you' 'mean' 'SOB;' Ha Ha?

was simply meant to have a dual meaning where I playfully smote you for messing with my Nym, while on the other hand seeking clarification of your meaning. OK, maybe it wasn't that clever, but I'm easily amused.

[MJA]

Balance is equality too me,
The truth I see.

=