Hi SOB,
If you remember that, what I first posted in this thread about two months back-
Though I am not competent enough to comment but it looks to me that the assumption of SOB is not missing the target by much.
And, I still stand by this.
But, on some points, I would like to differ and the first one is relativism.
You said- Relative truth: places truth in the individual hands = Arrogance!
I do not think that relativism implies any kind of arrogance. I see it just the opposite. The problem is that you are defining it wrongly.
Relativism means that I am surrendering to the reality in a sense that; it is pervasive and infinite, thus, it is not possible for me visualize it in its totality, thus, I am narrating what I am able to conceive and thus perceive, from my point of view. I also accept that it is possible that, due to the infinitive nature of reality, someone, other than me, may have a different perception of reality, because, his positioning or standing is different from me. Thus, even explaining of same object, due to the limited ability to imbue with truth, the expressions may differ, and thus, we may have different versions of truth, which maybe all true.
I would like to remind you the famous parable of six blind men and an elephant, which is widely usurped by the philosophers, without quoting its source; a less spread and renowned religion, Jainism.
In this parable, six blind men try to define the elephant by touching it. One touches its foot, one grabs the trunk, one takes hold of tail, etc. later they explain the elephant total differently.
SOB, this is relativism. They all explain it differently, yet, it cannot be said that they are totally wrong. They all are right in their observation, and thus perception, but, only to the extent of their capability of realization. Sometimes, even experiences are misleading.
Hence, relativism is acceptance of two notions.
First; the truth is infinite and beyond my capability, thus, I am able to absorb only a portion of it.
Second; any other view may be true and should be considered at par with my version.
SOB, I do not see even a hint of egoism or arrogance in it.
The second issue, on which I have a slight difference of opinion, is priori and posteriori knowledge.
I totally agree with your opinion that the knowledge is always posteriori, but, imho, it is applicable to one individual only; not to the mankind, in its totality. Let me explain.
As far as I understood is that; the knowledge is what one earned not learned. It is all about going through the process of experience; either physical or mental. For the first time, any knowledge has to be earned by someone and hence, it is posteriori for that particular person. But, we store it and keep it available for the use of next generations; hence, it becomes priori for them.
Bell invented the basic phone, and we have developed it up to a handsfree device. The makers of the mobile phones need not to invent the principle of basic phone every time. They can successfully carry on the work from there, where Bell left. Hence, the knowledge of basic phone, which was posteriori for Bell, became priori for Apple.
This is perhaps the only difference between the human race and other living species in this world. This is the only reason that we are able to dominate the world. Look at the animals. They live in the perfect state of posteriori knowledge, simply because, they do not have any system or mechanism to store the knowledge, hence, each and every one has to learn on its own; though mammals use to get some sort of training from the parents.
with love,
sanjay
What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
-
SpheresOfBalance
- Posts: 5725
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
zinnat13 wrote:Hi SOB,
If you remember that, what I first posted in this thread about two months back-
Though I am not competent enough to comment but it looks to me that the assumption of SOB is not missing the target by much.
And, I still stand by this.
But, on some points, I would like to differ and the first one is relativism.
You said- Relative truth: places truth in the individual hands = Arrogance!
I do not think that relativism implies any kind of arrogance. I see it just the opposite. The problem is that you are defining it wrongly.
Relativism means that I am surrendering to the reality in a sense that; it is pervasive and infinite, thus, it is not possible for me visualize it in its totality, thus, I am narrating what I am able to conceive and thus perceive, from my point of view. I also accept that it is possible that, due to the infinitive nature of reality, someone, other than me, may have a different perception of reality, because, his positioning or standing is different from me. Thus, even explaining of same object, due to the limited ability to imbue with truth, the expressions may differ, and thus, we may have different versions of truth, which maybe all true.
First off I 'try' and speak precisely, but I often times come up short.My distinction is that, to assert that the 'nature' of truth is relative, is born of arrogance, as it's only meant to serve the individuals desires. But I understand 'all to clearly,' that truth 'as reported by any particular individual, is relative to another's view, due to a plethora of continuously variable, variables, which include all degrees of association, including education, bias, etc.
I would like to remind you the famous parable of six blind men and an elephant, which is widely usurped by the philosophers, without quoting its source; a less spread and renowned religion, Jainism.
In this parable, six blind men try to define the elephant by touching it. One touches its foot, one grabs the trunk, one takes hold of tail, etc. later they explain the elephant total differently.
SOB, this is relativism. They all explain it differently, yet, it cannot be said that they are totally wrong. They all are right in their observation, and thus perception, but, only to the extent of their capability of realization. Sometimes, even experiences are misleading.
Hence, relativism is acceptance of two notions.
First; the truth is infinite and beyond my capability, thus, I am able to absorb only a portion of it.
Second; any other view may be true and should be considered at par with my version.
SOB, I do not see even a hint of egoism or arrogance in it.
It was never the reporting by individuals that I was referring to, and I had thought that I'd made it quite clear earlier in this thread, rather it was always its nature, that I was referring to.
The second issue, on which I have a slight difference of opinion, is priori and posteriori knowledge.
I totally agree with your opinion that the knowledge is always posteriori, but, imho, it is applicable to one individual only; not to the mankind, in its totality. Let me explain.
As far as I understood is that; the knowledge is what one earned not learned. It is all about going through the process of experience; either physical or mental. For the first time, any knowledge has to be earned by someone and hence, it is posteriori for that particular person. But, we store it and keep it available for the use of next generations; hence, it becomes priori for them.
Bell invented the basic phone, and we have developed it up to a handsfree device. The makers of the mobile phones need not to invent the principle of basic phone every time. They can successfully carry on the work from there, where Bell left. Hence, the knowledge of basic phone, which was posteriori for Bell, became priori for Apple.
This is perhaps the only difference between the human race and other living species in this world. This is the only reason that we are able to dominate the world. Look at the animals. They live in the perfect state of posteriori knowledge, simply because, they do not have any system or mechanism to store the knowledge, hence, each and every one has to learn on its own; though mammals use to get some sort of training from the parents.
I agree with what you're saying, but since 'all' knowledge originates as a posteriori, I do not see the significance in calling attention to the fact, that it is handed down, seemingly a priori, unless one is calling attention to the fact, that there could be errors attributed to the mishandling in the passing, that one should always be mindful of, so as to reduce this potential.
Other than what I mentioned, I see no need to make the distinction. In light of my concerns with complacency, I also find it wise to revisit it's a posteriori origins from time to time, to maintain it's efficacy by updating it's accuracy.
with love,
sanjay
As always thanks for your input, I love speaking with all the peoples of the earth. I've always believed that variety is the spice of life and I absolutely love spice.
PEACE to you, my friend!
-
..nameless..
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:39 am
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
Your question reminds me of the fish swimming all over the ocean in search of water!Bill Wiltrack wrote:What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
'What's stopping him from seeing the truth?'
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
[
First; the truth is infinite and beyond my capability, thus, I am able to absorb only a portion of it.
Second; any other view may be true and should be considered at par with my version.
Sanjay ,,if truth is beyond our capabilities , then how do we know if something is true or not .
what system do we use to know what is true but beyond our capabilities ,???
I see this as very old thinking ,
we do know now , we are no longer lost in confusion ,
Evolution is a fact , the earth goes around the sun etc ,
the world is full of facts , and in that world there is only one truth ,
evolution is a fact , therefore creation is not .
you can't say any view is equal to yours ,
that is to say there is no truth ,
if all are equal , then nonsense is truth and fantasy and lies .
just because a person believes , does not make it real or true ,
to be true , you need to base your knowledge on reality ,
the real world , that world of facts .
any individual has the same right to express their opinion ,
but it's truth is determined by how close to reality it is ,,!!!
First; the truth is infinite and beyond my capability, thus, I am able to absorb only a portion of it.
Second; any other view may be true and should be considered at par with my version.
Sanjay ,,if truth is beyond our capabilities , then how do we know if something is true or not .
what system do we use to know what is true but beyond our capabilities ,???
I see this as very old thinking ,
we do know now , we are no longer lost in confusion ,
Evolution is a fact , the earth goes around the sun etc ,
the world is full of facts , and in that world there is only one truth ,
evolution is a fact , therefore creation is not .
you can't say any view is equal to yours ,
that is to say there is no truth ,
if all are equal , then nonsense is truth and fantasy and lies .
just because a person believes , does not make it real or true ,
to be true , you need to base your knowledge on reality ,
the real world , that world of facts .
any individual has the same right to express their opinion ,
but it's truth is determined by how close to reality it is ,,!!!
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
I would ask: are you capable of not seeing what you see? Meaning, are you capable of choosing to see something different that what you see?charon wrote:Actually nothing, is there? The truth, what's actually there, is in front of us. There's nothing to stop us seeing it if we want to.Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
And, how are your 'wants' to see informed by what you already see?
And, what is 'nothing' ?
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
Hi friends,
Godfree wrote-
we do know now , we are no longer lost in confusion ,
Evolution is a fact , the earth goes around the sun etc ,
the world is full of facts , and in that world there is only one truth ,
evolution is a fact , therefore creation is not .
the real world , that world of facts .
This is perhaps what SOB was mentioning; arrogance.
As far as we are discussing it, it proves that there is something remains to be discussed. And if the discussion is going on, it means that there must be something that either you do not know or I do not know.
Let me assume that you know all as you said, then my friend, what are you trying to do here with discussing a layman like me? If you know all then you should not waste your precious time in such useless things. Go to the BBC and tell them that you, one who knows all, have been arrived as they should take an appointment for interview from your secretary, from your busy schedule.
The bleeding arrogance from your words is itself advocating that something is lacking within you.
My dear friend, let me tell you a very simple thing about knowledge that; knowledge is like a weight to the intellect and a truly knowledgeable person will behave just like a tree laden with fruits. The more the fruits, the more it bows. This is a default character of true knowledge of any stream. So, we should not talk in the tone of ego and arrogance; even if we want to refute anyone.
The second identification of the true knowledge is its self radiance. The one, who knows, is bound to be looked as the one who knows. His gesture, attitude and language look different from others. They can easily feel the warmth and calmness of him. His words become commanding and credible too. He needs not to claim his supremacy but others use to offer him such.
My dear friend, the meaning of ‘the one, who knows’ goes far beyond than these words. These sorts of notions are not supposed to be read verbatim in philosophy; at least, I learned this here, at the forums of ‘Philosophy Now’ and also with my experience as well, in the past.
THE MORE I USE TO FEEL THAT I KNOW, THE MORE IT LOOKS TO ME THAT I STILL KNOW NOTHING.
I cannot say how it goes with you.
Godfree wrote-
any individual has the same right to express their opinion ,
but it's truth is determined by how close to reality it is ,,!!!
to be true , you need to base your knowledge on reality ,
Agreed. In that case, we must define the reality, in the first place. So, please tell me in detail what your version of reality is, thus, we will be able to discuss further.
Godfree wrote-
just because a person believes , does not make it real or true ,
Agreed once again. But, my friend, perhaps, you are forgetting that this notion is applicable to you also.
Godfree wrote-
you can't say any view is equal to yours ,
that is to say there is no truth ,
if all are equal , then nonsense is truth and fantasy and lies .
Every one of us owns a view point or ideology, in a form or other. We may call it idealism or something else whatever we like, but, it does not matter. Furthermore, we tend to obsessed very strongly with it. This is true to almost all of us.
What we think about the truth, is not more than just an assumption as we are not sure of that; how will the future unfold?
I can assume that some millions years later humans will have wings and they will be able to fly. As far as the definition of assumption is concerned, this notion looks fine, but, at the same time, it looks illogical also; just because, this imagination does not fit in the framework of our present knowledge. But, we cannot be sure of millions years. If we break down this notion, then it applies to the tomorrow also.
We cannot guarantee that the sun will rise again tomorrow for sure. What if an asteroid, made of dark matter, and thus invisible, is going to hit it tonight? But, the first beam of tomorrow’s sunlight will settle the issue. But, till then, the possibility is always there; no matter how thin it is.
This is to say that we can be sure about the present only, not future. Hence, we can only predict the future. And, at the scale of logic, all of them are equal.
Although, we did not have any conservation earlier, but, I know your line of thinking, and perhaps, you know mine as well. I know what you want to say and you are welcome for that.
Godfree wrote-
what system do we use to know what is true but beyond our capabilities ,???
I see this as very old thinking ,
This is philosophy and I welcome and appreciate that.
The only way to realize the truth is experience, embedded with a slight hint of reasoning. The portion of reasoning in any ideal notion can be compared with a dressing of salad or an icing on the cake; not more than that. Reasoning, and thus thinking, should not be the main ingredient of the dish of assumption; otherwise, it will lead to the notions like those, which I stated above; the humans will fly or the sun will not rise tomorrow.
It may look a bit like old school of thinking, but, it does not bother me at all.
with love,
sanjay
Godfree wrote-
we do know now , we are no longer lost in confusion ,
Evolution is a fact , the earth goes around the sun etc ,
the world is full of facts , and in that world there is only one truth ,
evolution is a fact , therefore creation is not .
the real world , that world of facts .
This is perhaps what SOB was mentioning; arrogance.
As far as we are discussing it, it proves that there is something remains to be discussed. And if the discussion is going on, it means that there must be something that either you do not know or I do not know.
Let me assume that you know all as you said, then my friend, what are you trying to do here with discussing a layman like me? If you know all then you should not waste your precious time in such useless things. Go to the BBC and tell them that you, one who knows all, have been arrived as they should take an appointment for interview from your secretary, from your busy schedule.
The bleeding arrogance from your words is itself advocating that something is lacking within you.
My dear friend, let me tell you a very simple thing about knowledge that; knowledge is like a weight to the intellect and a truly knowledgeable person will behave just like a tree laden with fruits. The more the fruits, the more it bows. This is a default character of true knowledge of any stream. So, we should not talk in the tone of ego and arrogance; even if we want to refute anyone.
The second identification of the true knowledge is its self radiance. The one, who knows, is bound to be looked as the one who knows. His gesture, attitude and language look different from others. They can easily feel the warmth and calmness of him. His words become commanding and credible too. He needs not to claim his supremacy but others use to offer him such.
My dear friend, the meaning of ‘the one, who knows’ goes far beyond than these words. These sorts of notions are not supposed to be read verbatim in philosophy; at least, I learned this here, at the forums of ‘Philosophy Now’ and also with my experience as well, in the past.
THE MORE I USE TO FEEL THAT I KNOW, THE MORE IT LOOKS TO ME THAT I STILL KNOW NOTHING.
I cannot say how it goes with you.
Godfree wrote-
any individual has the same right to express their opinion ,
but it's truth is determined by how close to reality it is ,,!!!
to be true , you need to base your knowledge on reality ,
Agreed. In that case, we must define the reality, in the first place. So, please tell me in detail what your version of reality is, thus, we will be able to discuss further.
Godfree wrote-
just because a person believes , does not make it real or true ,
Agreed once again. But, my friend, perhaps, you are forgetting that this notion is applicable to you also.
Godfree wrote-
you can't say any view is equal to yours ,
that is to say there is no truth ,
if all are equal , then nonsense is truth and fantasy and lies .
Every one of us owns a view point or ideology, in a form or other. We may call it idealism or something else whatever we like, but, it does not matter. Furthermore, we tend to obsessed very strongly with it. This is true to almost all of us.
What we think about the truth, is not more than just an assumption as we are not sure of that; how will the future unfold?
I can assume that some millions years later humans will have wings and they will be able to fly. As far as the definition of assumption is concerned, this notion looks fine, but, at the same time, it looks illogical also; just because, this imagination does not fit in the framework of our present knowledge. But, we cannot be sure of millions years. If we break down this notion, then it applies to the tomorrow also.
We cannot guarantee that the sun will rise again tomorrow for sure. What if an asteroid, made of dark matter, and thus invisible, is going to hit it tonight? But, the first beam of tomorrow’s sunlight will settle the issue. But, till then, the possibility is always there; no matter how thin it is.
This is to say that we can be sure about the present only, not future. Hence, we can only predict the future. And, at the scale of logic, all of them are equal.
Although, we did not have any conservation earlier, but, I know your line of thinking, and perhaps, you know mine as well. I know what you want to say and you are welcome for that.
Godfree wrote-
what system do we use to know what is true but beyond our capabilities ,???
I see this as very old thinking ,
This is philosophy and I welcome and appreciate that.
The only way to realize the truth is experience, embedded with a slight hint of reasoning. The portion of reasoning in any ideal notion can be compared with a dressing of salad or an icing on the cake; not more than that. Reasoning, and thus thinking, should not be the main ingredient of the dish of assumption; otherwise, it will lead to the notions like those, which I stated above; the humans will fly or the sun will not rise tomorrow.
It may look a bit like old school of thinking, but, it does not bother me at all.
with love,
sanjay
-
..nameless..
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:39 am
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
Gentlemen...
On 'Truth';
The entire Universe (only is One!), every moment of existence, constitutes the entirety of Existence.
Existence is all inclusive!
I would equate the entirety of existence, with Reality Realityh is all incusive!
'Truth' must, being 'based' on the Universe/Reality, must also be all inclusive!
Thus, everything exists, everything is Real, everything is True!
Every unique Perspective, every moment of existence, perceives a true feature of the complete Truth/Reality...
"The complete Universe (Reality/Truth/God/'Self!'/Tao/Brahman... or any feature herein...) can be defined/described as the synchronous sum-total of all Perspectives!" - Book of Fudd
All inclusive!
It's ALL True!
We no longer need to reinvent the wheel in questioning anything's Reality or Existence or Truth! We can accept that it is True, and, if we are interested, find out 'how' it's True!
That would be a win/win/win... rather than a battle of egos. All would have 'greater Perspective' of Reality/Truth/'Self!'!
On 'Truth';
The entire Universe (only is One!), every moment of existence, constitutes the entirety of Existence.
Existence is all inclusive!
I would equate the entirety of existence, with Reality Realityh is all incusive!
'Truth' must, being 'based' on the Universe/Reality, must also be all inclusive!
Thus, everything exists, everything is Real, everything is True!
Every unique Perspective, every moment of existence, perceives a true feature of the complete Truth/Reality...
"The complete Universe (Reality/Truth/God/'Self!'/Tao/Brahman... or any feature herein...) can be defined/described as the synchronous sum-total of all Perspectives!" - Book of Fudd
All inclusive!
It's ALL True!
We no longer need to reinvent the wheel in questioning anything's Reality or Existence or Truth! We can accept that it is True, and, if we are interested, find out 'how' it's True!
That would be a win/win/win... rather than a battle of egos. All would have 'greater Perspective' of Reality/Truth/'Self!'!
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
Bollocks. Sythetical assertion of absolution. One sided ideology of power.Godfree wrote:[
First; the truth is infinite and beyond my capability, thus, I am able to absorb only a portion of it.
Second; any other view may be true and should be considered at par with my version.
Sanjay ,,if truth is beyond our capabilities , then how do we know if something is true or not .
what system do we use to know what is true but beyond our capabilities ,???
I see this as very old thinking ,
we do know now , we are no longer lost in confusion ,
Evolution is a fact , the earth goes around the sun etc ,
the world is full of facts , and in that world there is only one truth ,
evolution is a fact , therefore creation is not .
you can't say any view is equal to yours ,
that is to say there is no truth ,
if all are equal , then nonsense is truth and fantasy and lies .
just because a person believes , does not make it real or true ,
to be true , you need to base your knowledge on reality ,
the real world , that world of facts .
any individual has the same right to express their opinion ,
but it's truth is determined by how close to reality it is ,,!!!
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
lancek4 -
are you capable of not seeing what you see?
Yes, I can shut my eyes. Or ignore something.
are you capable of choosing to see something different that what you see?
Yes. If I see a door I can choose another door.
what is 'nothing'?
The absence of things.
are you capable of not seeing what you see?
Yes, I can shut my eyes. Or ignore something.
are you capable of choosing to see something different that what you see?
Yes. If I see a door I can choose another door.
what is 'nothing'?
The absence of things.
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
Ok, nice and dry. Maybe u were being a smart-guy but it would seem that what is meant by 'see' is 'understand'.charon wrote:lancek4 -
are you capable of not seeing what you see?
Yes, I can shut my eyes. Or ignore something.
are you capable of choosing to see something different that what you see?
Yes. If I see a door I can choose another door.
what is 'nothing'?
The absence of things.
What DO we mean by 'see'?
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
Bollocks. Sythetical assertion of absolution. One sided ideology of power.[/quote]
what is the alternative ,???
are we going back to pagan times with multiple gods , gods for this that and the next thing ,surely this is going backwards .
one truth one reality , one real world .
are you going to say that the world that female circumsision exists in is the real world , or do they live in fantasy land , are they deciding on things based purely on fantasy and not the real world .??
was what Hitler preached the truth ,???
racial prejudice assumes one colour is superior to another ,
is that the truth , or are these people deluded .???
if insanity is equal to sanity , in your world ,
then why have any laws at all ,
if people can be mutilated and controlled by dreams ,
is that sane ,?? shouldn't we intervene .???
We have the United Nations ,
attempting to impose one law , one planet , one reality ...
anything else and the lunatics are running the assylum
what is the alternative ,???
are we going back to pagan times with multiple gods , gods for this that and the next thing ,surely this is going backwards .
one truth one reality , one real world .
are you going to say that the world that female circumsision exists in is the real world , or do they live in fantasy land , are they deciding on things based purely on fantasy and not the real world .??
was what Hitler preached the truth ,???
racial prejudice assumes one colour is superior to another ,
is that the truth , or are these people deluded .???
if insanity is equal to sanity , in your world ,
then why have any laws at all ,
if people can be mutilated and controlled by dreams ,
is that sane ,?? shouldn't we intervene .???
We have the United Nations ,
attempting to impose one law , one planet , one reality ...
anything else and the lunatics are running the assylum
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
..nameless.. wrote:Gentlemen...
On 'Truth';
The entire Universe (only is One!), every moment of existence, constitutes the entirety of Existence.
Existence is all inclusive!
I would equate the entirety of existence, with Reality Realityh is all incusive!
'Truth' must, being 'based' on the Universe/Reality, must also be all inclusive!
Thus, everything exists, everything is Real, everything is True!
Every unique Perspective, every moment of existence, perceives a true feature of the complete Truth/Reality...
"The complete Universe (Reality/Truth/God/'Self!'/Tao/Brahman... or any feature herein...) can be defined/described as the synchronous sum-total of all Perspectives!" - Book of Fudd
All inclusive!
It's ALL True!
We no longer need to reinvent the wheel in questioning anything's Reality or Existence or Truth! We can accept that it is True, and, if we are interested, find out 'how' it's True!
That would be a win/win/win... rather than a battle of egos. All would have 'greater Perspective' of Reality/Truth/'Self!'!
How you ask:
Simply remove any measure, uncertainty or doubt.
Truth is All that remains.
Truth is
=
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
what is the alternative ,???Godfree wrote:Bollocks. Sythetical assertion of absolution. One sided ideology of power.
are we going back to pagan times with multiple gods , gods for this that and the next thing ,surely this is going backwards .
one truth one reality , one real world .
are you going to say that the world that female circumsision exists in is the real world , or do they live in fantasy land , are they deciding on things based purely on fantasy and not the real world .??
was what Hitler preached the truth ,???
racial prejudice assumes one colour is superior to another ,
is that the truth , or are these people deluded .???
if insanity is equal to sanity , in your world ,
then why have any laws at all ,
if people can be mutilated and controlled by dreams ,
is that sane ,?? shouldn't we intervene .???
We have the United Nations ,
attempting to impose one law , one planet , one reality ...
anything else and the lunatics are running the assylum[/quote]
Indeed we must find a route through which to act; but I merely offer that the conditions you offer above have not been chosen be you, nor do the conditions upon which you choose allow you a free choice, and that as we act we only confirm and aggrivate the condition we are trying to escape, so far as what we may know against an absolute.
As Zizek puts it (paraphrase): it is not so much the question "how can we let female circumcision exist" or "how could we allow it", but rather "what is it about my existing in knowledge that informs me of this situation" or "in what way do I situate myself as speparate from female circumcision that I may justify my existance"?
The 'one truth' is posited in the same ideal as 'the one ring', and just as fantastic.
Last edited by lancek4 on Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
(That last post the quotes are screwy: lk4 wrote the first quote, Godfree the second, and lk4 the last. )
Re: What's stopping us from seeing the truth?
Some would say: that is a contradiction. Within 'truth is' is an assumption of human potential defined along particular lines.MJA wrote:..nameless.. wrote:Gentlemen...
On 'Truth';
The entire Universe (only is One!), every moment of existence, constitutes the entirety of Existence.
Existence is all inclusive!
I would equate the entirety of existence, with Reality Realityh is all incusive!
'Truth' must, being 'based' on the Universe/Reality, must also be all inclusive!
Thus, everything exists, everything is Real, everything is True!
Every unique Perspective, every moment of existence, perceives a true feature of the complete Truth/Reality...
"The complete Universe (Reality/Truth/God/'Self!'/Tao/Brahman... or any feature herein...) can be defined/described as the synchronous sum-total of all Perspectives!" - Book of Fudd
All inclusive!
It's ALL True!
We no longer need to reinvent the wheel in questioning anything's Reality or Existence or Truth! We can accept that it is True, and, if we are interested, find out 'how' it's True!
That would be a win/win/win... rather than a battle of egos. All would have 'greater Perspective' of Reality/Truth/'Self!'!
How you ask:
Simply remove any measure, uncertainty or doubt.
Truth is All that remains.
Truth is
=
In order for there to be a knowing of such 'truth is', a concordant 'doubt' must exist: thus togther they must be True - yet this too must be doubted. Hence the contradiction which find itself resolved by an Absolute - which cannot be except in reflection of the potential for relativity. Hence the asserted position of 'god': the Absolute Object at which we cease to be human, a purpose by which I am negated for my own comfort.