Philosophy Now Forum

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:23 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2020 3:47 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 5:22 am
I understand your point in getting to the highest possible precision of what is truth, BUT;

1. What is the purpose with the idea of 'truth'?

2. Truth has survival values to humans.

3. But human are exposed to degrees of threats to survival and opportunities for growth.

4. But re point 1-3 we need to restrict/limit the degree of 'what is truth' to optimize within the known conditions.

What matter is 'what is truth' but we also need to discuss 'what is truth' in various perspectives from the highest possible to the lowest but not to falsehood.

If truth has a survival value one has to look at the truth value of survival.

There is no problem with that.
The truth [in alignment with reality] of survival is that ALL* humans are "programmed" to survive till the inevitable.
* all means normal human beings, those who have suicide tendencies are not normal as per DSM-V.

Normal is a state of averages with the extremes between these averages resulting in the average person having minor self destructive/death wish tendencies at one point or another in there life. The survival instinct, to live at any cost, is one extreme counter balanced by the opposite extreme of seeking death.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:30 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:23 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2020 3:47 am

If truth has a survival value one has to look at the truth value of survival.

There is no problem with that.
The truth [in alignment with reality] of survival is that ALL* humans are "programmed" to survive till the inevitable.
* all means normal human beings, those who have suicide tendencies are not normal as per DSM-V.

Normal is a state of averages with the extremes between these averages resulting in the average person having minor self destructive/death wish tendencies at one point or another in there life. The survival instinct, to live at any cost, is one extreme counter balanced by the opposite extreme of seeking death.

Not sure what is your point.
I have already given you the truth of survival.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:44 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:30 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:23 am
There is no problem with that.
The truth [in alignment with reality] of survival is that ALL* humans are "programmed" to survive till the inevitable.
* all means normal human beings, those who have suicide tendencies are not normal as per DSM-V.

Normal is a state of averages with the extremes between these averages resulting in the average person having minor self destructive/death wish tendencies at one point or another in there life. The survival instinct, to live at any cost, is one extreme counter balanced by the opposite extreme of seeking death.

Not sure what is your point.
I have already given you the truth of survival.

In measuring the desire for survival a normal state is a means between two extremes, that of surviving at any cost and that of suicide. The means is between these two extremes, and that is the normal. The normal survival instinct does not seek life at any cost nor does its expressly always seek death either. The survival instinct occurs in grades and as occuring in grades we cannot reduce all truth to that of a survival instinct.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:50 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:44 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:30 am

Normal is a state of averages with the extremes between these averages resulting in the average person having minor self destructive/death wish tendencies at one point or another in there life. The survival instinct, to live at any cost, is one extreme counter balanced by the opposite extreme of seeking death.

Not sure what is your point.
I have already given you the truth of survival.

In measuring the desire for survival a normal state is a means between two extremes, that of surviving at any cost and that of suicide. The means is between these two extremes, and that is the normal. The normal survival instinct does not seek life at any cost nor does its expressly always seek death either. The survival instinct occurs in grades and as occuring in grades we cannot reduce all truth to that of a survival instinct.

You seem to be confused with too much statistics which is not relevant in this case.

From empirical evidences we can infer the "purpose" of the 5 senses are very obvious in terms of the functions they are supposed to perform. That is their 'normal' function.

What is abnormal is when there are defects in their neural connectivity, where the taste neurons are connect to hearing neurons. In this case, the person could hear music when tasting sweetness. Note Synaethesia which is an abnormality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia


It is the same with other generic human standards.
If a person is born without legs, that is not normal.

It is ridiculous to interpret the above in terms of extremes and percentile re the Normal Distribution.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 2:22 am Christianity is a perennial tradition so its essence always was.

St Augustine said, "The very thing that is now called the Christian religion was not wanting among the ancients from the beginning of the human race, until Christ came in the flesh, after which the true religion, which had already existed, began to be called "Christian."

I'd say you're right about Christianity being a perennial doctrine - but most modern Christians would not.

St. Augustine understood Christianity in a way few modern Christians do. This is what I was pointing out above. Augustine sees Christ's teachings as consistent with the Perennial tradition, as did the Desert Fathers, but his Church rejects this idea. Indeed, it went to great trouble to brutally suppress this idea and to destroy the early Christian tradition in order to become a religion of Empire.

Likewise, those who are sceptical of Christ's teaching have no idea what Augustine was saying here.

So there are two kinds of Christians, those who believe it is a unique religion dependent on faith and authority, and those who believe it is an expression of an inner knowledge equivalent to Buddhism, Sufism, Advaita and so forth and part of the Perennial philosophy.

This makes is difficult and dangerous to generalise about Christians.

Pete

I'd say you're right about Christianity being a perennial doctrine - but most modern Christians would not.

St. Augustine understood Christianity in a way few modern Christians do. This is what I was pointing out above. Augustine sees Christ's teachings as consistent with the Perennial tradition, as did the Desert Fathers, but his Church rejects this idea. Indeed, it went to great trouble to brutally suppress this idea and to destroy the early Christian tradition in order to become a religion of Empire.

Likewise, those who are sceptical of Christ's teaching have no idea what Augustine was saying here.

So there are two kinds of Christians, those who believe it is a unique religion dependent on faith and authority, and those who believe it is an expression of an inner knowledge equivalent to Buddhism, Sufism, Advaita and so forth and part of the Perennial philosophy.

This makes is difficult and dangerous to generalise about Christians.

You're right but what is a kid who has felt the attraction to what Christianity offers yet is intimidated by the influence of the world around him so becomes "normal"? That is why I admire Simone Weil. She had the intellect and inner taste to realize that universal meaning is a reality even in the meaningless world so lived the kind of life which would eventually remember perennial human meaning and acquire the objective results of her search.

Thomas Merton records being asked to review a biography of Weil (Simone Weil: A Fellowship in Love, Jacques Chabaud, 1964) and was challenged and inspired by her writing. “Her non-conformism and mysticism are essential elements in our time and without her contribution we remain not human.”

Who has the intellectual freedom with the need and the will to experience Christianity? As much as they are rejected, the world needs this quality of being so humanity can become human.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:25 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:50 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:44 am
Not sure what is your point.
I have already given you the truth of survival.

In measuring the desire for survival a normal state is a means between two extremes, that of surviving at any cost and that of suicide. The means is between these two extremes, and that is the normal. The normal survival instinct does not seek life at any cost nor does its expressly always seek death either. The survival instinct occurs in grades and as occuring in grades we cannot reduce all truth to that of a survival instinct.

You seem to be confused with too much statistics which is not relevant in this case.

From empirical evidences we can infer the "purpose" of the 5 senses are very obvious in terms of the functions they are supposed to perform. That is their 'normal' function.

What is abnormal is when there are defects in their neural connectivity, where the taste neurons are connect to hearing neurons. In this case, the person could hear music when tasting sweetness. Note Synaethesia which is an abnormality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia


It is the same with other generic human standards.
If a person is born without legs, that is not normal.

It is ridiculous to interpret the above in terms of extremes and percentile re the Normal Distribution.

No the normality of a survival drive necessitates a bell curve between two extremes that of the survival drive and that of the death drive.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 6:18 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:25 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:50 am
In measuring the desire for survival a normal state is a means between two extremes, that of surviving at any cost and that of suicide. The means is between these two extremes, and that is the normal. The normal survival instinct does not seek life at any cost nor does its expressly always seek death either. The survival instinct occurs in grades and as occuring in grades we cannot reduce all truth to that of a survival instinct.

You seem to be confused with too much statistics which is not relevant in this case.

From empirical evidences we can infer the "purpose" of the 5 senses are very obvious in terms of the functions they are supposed to perform. That is their 'normal' function.

What is abnormal is when there are defects in their neural connectivity, where the taste neurons are connect to hearing neurons. In this case, the person could hear music when tasting sweetness. Note Synaethesia which is an abnormality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia


It is the same with other generic human standards.
If a person is born without legs, that is not normal.

It is ridiculous to interpret the above in terms of extremes and percentile re the Normal Distribution.

No the normality of a survival drive necessitates a bell curve between two extremes that of the survival drive and that of the death drive.

You missed the point again and going off tangent.
The above is applicable while one is alive but
don't you know the fact and certainty of mortality which cannot be put on a normal distribution?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:06 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 6:18 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:25 am
You seem to be confused with too much statistics which is not relevant in this case.

From empirical evidences we can infer the "purpose" of the 5 senses are very obvious in terms of the functions they are supposed to perform. That is their 'normal' function.

What is abnormal is when there are defects in their neural connectivity, where the taste neurons are connect to hearing neurons. In this case, the person could hear music when tasting sweetness. Note Synaethesia which is an abnormality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia


It is the same with other generic human standards.
If a person is born without legs, that is not normal.

It is ridiculous to interpret the above in terms of extremes and percentile re the Normal Distribution.

No the normality of a survival drive necessitates a bell curve between two extremes that of the survival drive and that of the death drive.

You missed the point again and going off tangent.
The above is applicable while one is alive but
don't you know the fact and certainty of mortality which cannot be put on a normal distribution?

Whar people except as moral can be put on a normal distribution.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 23, 2020 4:49 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:06 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 6:18 pm
No the normality of a survival drive necessitates a bell curve between two extremes that of the survival drive and that of the death drive.

You missed the point again and going off tangent.
The above is applicable while one is alive but
don't you know the fact and certainty of mortality which cannot be put on a normal distribution?

Whar people except as moral can be put on a normal distribution.

The point is off tangent.
Did you misread 'mortality' for moral??

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 3:08 pm Pete

I'd say you're right about Christianity being a perennial doctrine - but most modern Christians would not.

You're right but what is a kid who has felt the attraction to what Christianity offers yet is intimidated by the influence of the world around him so becomes "normal"? That is why I admire Simone Weil. She had the intellect and inner taste to realize that universal meaning is a reality even in the meaningless world so lived the kind of life which would eventually remember perennial human meaning and acquire the objective results of her search.

Hi Nick. It's sad, but the Church does not explain what Christianity really has to offer. It has abandoned the search for knowledge and replaced it with blind faith and dogma. As a consequence many young people in Christian societies turn away and reject religion despite their natural sympathy for much of its teachings. If they were introduced to those such as Simone Weil and the gnostic or 'inner' teachings then there could be no 'intimidation'. But they are told to shut up and believe, and in this day and age such advice is ridiculous.

Thomas Merton records being asked to review a biography of Weil (Simone Weil: A Fellowship in Love, Jacques Chabaud, 1964) and was challenged and inspired by her writing. “Her non-conformism and mysticism are essential elements in our time and without her contribution we remain not human.”

My view also. Christianity stripped of mysticism and self-enquiry is an advertising campaign with no product. The social effects of this dumbing-down of religion are devastating. It leads to a pandemic of scepticism, and rightly so.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:23 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Aug 22, 2020 3:08 pm Pete

I'd say you're right about Christianity being a perennial doctrine - but most modern Christians would not.

You're right but what is a kid who has felt the attraction to what Christianity offers yet is intimidated by the influence of the world around him so becomes "normal"? That is why I admire Simone Weil. She had the intellect and inner taste to realize that universal meaning is a reality even in the meaningless world so lived the kind of life which would eventually remember perennial human meaning and acquire the objective results of her search.

It's sad, but the Church does not explain what Christianity really has to offer. It has abandoned the search for knowledge and replaced it with blind faith and dogma. As a consequence many young people in Christian societies turn away and reject religion. If they were introduced to those such as Simone Weil and the gnostic or 'inner' teachings then there could be no 'intimidation'. But they are told to shut up and believe, and in this day and age such advice is ridiculous.

Thomas Merton records being asked to review a biography of Weil (Simone Weil: A Fellowship in Love, Jacques Chabaud, 1964) and was challenged and inspired by her writing. “Her non-conformism and mysticism are essential elements in our time and without her contribution we remain not human.”

My view also. Christianity stripped of mysticism and self-enquiry is an advertising campaign with no product. The social effects of this dumbing-down of religion are devastating. It leads to a pandemic of scepticism, and rightly so.

I believe the debate between Valentinus and Irenaeus covers this problem. Irenaeus mostly was the winner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:26 pm I believe the debate between Valentinus and Irenaeus covers this problem. Irenaeus mostly was the winner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism

Hello Belinda. Nice to meet someone who knows their history.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:53 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:26 pm I believe the debate between Valentinus and Irenaeus covers this problem. Irenaeus mostly was the winner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism

Hello Belinda. Nice to meet someone who knows their history.

Thank you, but I understand only that the Gnostic heresy may be a clever explanation of the human condition, but the objection of Irenaeus is that it is elitist. The Gnostic heresy excludes from full membership of the Xian community the ordinary people who are not able to be mystics.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 2:55 pm Thank you, but I understand only that the Gnostic heresy may be a clever explanation of the human condition, but the objection of Irenaeus is that it is elitist. The Gnostic heresy excludes from full membership of the Xian community the ordinary people who are not able to be mystics.

It's a common misunderstanding albeit there would be a little truth in it. It's like saying not everyone can be a decent guitarist, so let''s abolish the guitar.

This elitist view of mysticism cannot be held by anyone who studies the topic, but doing so was often difficult prior to the internet.



.