Philosophy Now Forum

Truth is experience, and it is true to the biology experiencing it, not necessarily to the physical world. A true experience is a biological readout, a reaction to the energies of ultimate reality. Alter biology and you alter the experienced truth, for experience is truth to the conscious biological subject. To determine whether an organism's truth experience agrees with the physical world, one would need the input of another or a collective of the same type of organisms that make a collective judgment, but that does not make the subject experience wrong, experience is always true to its biology not the physical world.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 12:09 am Truth is experience, and it is true to the biology experiencing it, not necessarily to the physical world. A true experience is a biological readout, a reaction to the energies of ultimate reality. Alter biology and you alter the experienced truth, for experience is truth to the conscious biological subject. To determine whether an organism's truth experience agrees with the physical world, one would need the input of another or a collective of the same type of organisms that make a collective judgment, but that does not make the subject experience wrong, experience is always true to its biology not the physical world.

Consulting HI (human intelligence) via e-prime: Sometimes, procrastination leads to suffering and then no-procrastination becomes the cure, until that cure of busy-ness that follows no-procrastination becomes the disease. The cure for that resulting disease, that imbalance of the spheres, leads to the equanimity of purposeful action, as naturally and biologically intended by any particular life’s form, making any human action in the physical world just as free of doubt as animal action.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 10:20 am

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 12:09 am Truth is experience, and it is true to the biology experiencing it, not necessarily to the physical world. A true experience is a biological readout, a reaction to the energies of ultimate reality. Alter biology and you alter the experienced truth, for experience is truth to the conscious biological subject. To determine whether an organism's truth experience agrees with the physical world, one would need the input of another or a collective of the same type of organisms that make a collective judgment, but that does not make the subject experience wrong, experience is always true to its biology not the physical world.

Consulting HI (human intelligence) via e-prime: Sometimes, procrastination leads to suffering and then no-procrastination becomes the cure, until that cure of busy-ness that follows no-procrastination becomes the disease. The cure for that resulting disease, that imbalance of the spheres, leads to the equanimity of purposeful action, as naturally and biologically intended by any particular life’s form, making any human action in the physical world just as free of doubt as animal action.

The above is somewhat puzzling, with perception, there is no time delay or procrastination, the experience is immediate. Reaction takes a moment, and less than a full moment if, like other animals, we are functioning on instinct. Only questioning experience takes time, that is the value of instinct, it is instant judgment, instant decision, instant reaction. Experience is the information that guides you through the world, the captain of your ship so to speak. Instinct is reciprocal causation, experience-reaction. Are you trying to question personal truth as experience? Perhaps you could rework your intention.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 8:54 pm

Purposeful action, as opposed to aimless meandering, backtracking and procrastination, can be the result of instinct or it can be the result of intellectual, imaginative considerations that eliminate all but one course of action, with the latter being an advantage for humans who like to design.

Walker wrote: ↑Fri Feb 28, 2025 1:24 am

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 8:54 pm

Purposeful action, as opposed to aimless meandering, backtracking and procrastination, can be the result of instinct or it can be the result of intellectual, imaginative considerations that eliminate all but one course of action, with the latter being an advantage for humans who like to design.

Hi Walker,

Indeed, but that doesn't change the fact that all experience is personal truth, regardless of whether the experience agrees with the state of the physical world. Personal truth is always true to the biology that experiences it, and true to the state of that biology. Personally, I do not believe in personal actions, I believe in personal reaction to experience, which again is personal truth, whether the experience agrees with the outside world or the collective judgement of a peer group of a common species. There is no such thing as human action, there is but human reaction, even a mentally creative reaction is still a reaction to experience which the organism deems to be true. Cause comes from the outside, accept perhaps in an epileptic, involuntary movements-- a short circuit. Even procrastination, while agreed it is not an action, it is a reaction. I don't believe you can give me an example of a human action, which I could not show to be a reaction. The thought that other creatures are reactionary while humanity is an exception is simply ego. Granted, the mind of the human species is capable of profoundly complex reactions in solving puzzles, complexity produces complexity, but it is all based upon the experienced truth of the organism and its truth experiences.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:01 amThere is no such thing as human action, there is but human reaction, even a mentally creative reaction is still a reaction to experience which the organism deems to be true.

This seems like semantics. Any performed act that requires motion is an action, and even stillness is an action when it's a reaction, or non-volitional such as during sleep.

Walker wrote: ↑Fri Feb 28, 2025 10:51 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:01 amThere is no such thing as human action, there is but human reaction, even a mentally creative reaction is still a reaction to experience which the organism deems to be true.

This seems like semantics. Any performed act that requires motion is an action, and even stillness is an action when it's a reaction, or non-volitional such as during sleep.

Many people feel they respond independently in the world, almost like the unmoved mover. While it is true organisms have choices, all those choices are reactions to the larger reality of the physical world. There is no such thing as an independent existence, no such thing as an unmotivated response, and to me, a motivated response is a reaction not an action. You're right, the confusion is in the semantics, the popular semantics. You see, simply being is cause to all other beings. Action you could say is being, it is what being is, energy in motion, and other energies in motion, other beings react to the presence of other beings. Non-volitional, to me volitional is motivation, can you give me an example of a non-volitional response? I don't think sleep qualifies, there is such a thing as bodily consciousness, although this is a little trickier to deal with, we can have a go at it. The one thing the organism can never do, is not react to its environment, that would mean they are dead. " EVEN STILLNESS IS A REACTION." Indeed, if the stillness is motivated, it is a reaction, if it is not motivated, the subject is dead.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 01, 2025 1:51 amNon-volitional, to me volitional is motivation, can you give me an example of a non-volitional response?

Volition is the power to choose, which is will power. I always have a non-volitional reaction when I step on one of our pooch's squeaky toys. It sounds and feels like I’m stepping on something alive. Without volition, my body always reacts with a physical stumble and mental jolt, no matter how many times I do it. Each time is like the first time. The situation is somewhat the same when intellect is involved. For example, Wimpy has mooched hamburgers from Popeye for so long with a promise to repay on Tuesday that this pattern has become his choiceless reaction to hunger. Others often develop the choiceless reaction to appetite by walking from the couch to the kitchen and only alter that behavior when the consequences become intolerable, i.e., choiceless.

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Mar 04, 2025 6:04 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 01, 2025 1:51 amNon-volitional, to me volitional is motivation, can you give me an example of a non-volitional response?

Volition is the power to choose, which is will power. I always have a non-volitional reaction when I step on one of our pooch's squeaky toys. It sounds and feels like I’m stepping on something alive. Without volition, my body always reacts with a physical stumble and mental jolt, no matter how many times I do it. Each time is like the first time. The situation is somewhat the same when intellect is involved. For example, Wimpy has mooched hamburgers from Popeye for so long with a promise to repay on Tuesday that this pattern has become his choiceless reaction to hunger. Others often develop the choiceless reaction to appetite by walking from the couch to the kitchen and only alter that behavior when the consequences become intolerable, i.e., choiceless.

Hi Walker,

Motivation, you cannot move in the world without it, and willingness is a reaction to something, motivation comes from outside oneself. Taking a step is motivated by a response reaction to wishing to be elsewhere, stepping on an unseen toy is an accident. Hunger is one motivation that comes from within in the form of a need, but the fulfillment of that need is outside one's self, as you move to satiate the hunger by acquiring food from without. Certainly, there is the power to choose, but the one thing that a subject cannot choose is to not react at all, for even the consciously withheld response is a reaction to the situational circumstance. I am toying with the idea that consciousness itself is reaction throughout the mind-body. Certainly the interrelated, interdependent tissues and organs of the body are cause and reaction to one another, the same holds true in the subject's relationship to the physical environment. Even disease is a reaction to invasive organisms and/or chemicals, just as Cancer is caused by many sources and its reaction is mutation. All being is cause to all other beings, and it is consciousness focused that becomes the reaction to the particular. There is no such thing as an independent existence. Cause and reaction in reciprocation is the foundation of existence, and the key to chemistry. Patterns of behaviour over time can become somewhat automated, and carried through time become instinct, the cause of the instinct is a constant in the environment, both cause and reaction become hardwired in the nervous system of the organism, neither cause nor reaction is lost, it has you might say become, whole body consciousness.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:42 pm

Reaction is a key notion, and description. As I recall you have some familiarity with Buddhism. In the Buddhist sense of reaction, eventually all practices and evolutions, over many lifetimes or during one lifetime, reach the same point, and that is the point of reaction. At that point, or at that state of evolution if you will, the reaction in the instant that it appears is unbidden. The reaction appears as energy either mild or hot, but in that first instant it is simply unattached mental energy. The point is, when that energy of reaction is spontaneously and instantly rechanneled back into awareness, before it can cling to an emotion, into awareness where the energy then opens doors of perception and the associated thoughts of understanding, a much greater territory opens, more encompassing of reality than one bounded by preconceptions, that because of their dualistic nature, are always subject to external manipulation, and now even moreso with the birth of AI.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Mar 13, 2025 3:59 am

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:42 pm

Reaction is a key notion, and description. As I recall you have some familiarity with Buddhism. In the Buddhist sense of reaction, eventually all practices and evolutions, over many lifetimes or during one lifetime, reach the same point, and that is the point of reaction. At that point, or at that state of evolution if you will, the reaction in the instant that it appears is unbidden. The reaction appears as energy either mild or hot, but in that first instant it is simply unattached mental energy. The point is, when that energy of reaction is spontaneously and instantly rechanneled back into awareness, before it can cling to an emotion, into awareness where the energy then opens doors of perception and the associated thoughts of understanding, a much greater territory opens, more encompassing of reality than one bounded by preconceptions, that because of their dualistic nature, are always subject to external manipulation, and now even more so with the birth of AI.

No, I am not all that familiar with Buddhism, but it sounds fascinating. Could you recommend reading materials on this process?

Oops. My mistake. There’s lots of books. Best to learn about Buddhism face-to-face from a teacher and follow a trusted teacher’s advice, if you really want to learn.

“If you could do that …”

“Scrubbing that little spot,” softens up the ego. Softening up the ego works on the same reactionary principles as some Buddhist preparatory practices designed to make one receptive to the teachings.

The emotionally charged fellow in this clip is talking about channeling reactionary energy. He's never been softened up. His ego is as hard as steel, and in control, and so he thinks that powerful emotions channeled into awareness is something that works on a voluntary basis, and it does, however it doesn’t bring peace of mind. In the end, he does find peace of mind. He found it late, better to find it early.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUcIcxi5QGw

Change, gravity, psychology, size, suffering; these are Truth. We keep checking them and they keep being there. How well we can know our odds the whole project of epistemology. Personal truth is an individual's perspective, regardless of how well it lives up with the consensus version. That does not imply a personal truth is more or less verifiable, just that it must be understood as an individual perspective, independently of all other perspectives, unique in time, space, and scale.

Advocate wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 11:53 pm Change, gravity, psychology, size, suffering; these are Truth. We keep checking them and they keep being there. How well we can know our odds the whole project of epistemology. Personal truth is an individual's perspective, regardless of how well it lives up with the consensus version. That does not imply a personal truth is more or less verifiable, just that it must be understood as an individual perspective, independently of all other perspectives, unique in time, space, and scale.

Biology is the measure and meaning of all things. It is the sole creator of meaning in the world, and thus, it is the center of its universe. To perhaps, to an unfortunate extent, the organism is an island unto itself. The fact that an organism can recognize itself in others is deliverance from utter loneliness. So, I guess differently expressed, we are on the same page here.