Philosophy Now Forum

attofishpi wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

attofishpi wrote:What's stopping us from seeing the truth?

What truth?

Exactly

Oh...
that truth.


Cause and Answer=God

Arising_uk wrote:What would becoming the truth be for you?

lancek4 wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

lancek4 wrote: Together it might be seen that the "Truth' they both are searching for in discussion eludes them both because of the 'truth' both of the individually rely upon. Both of them together, each in thier own Truth but together creating the polemic, comprises the denied reality. ... Chaz, what is not hopeful about my proposition there. the Hermunetics comment was just me mumbling to myself, but as to the rest of it: tell me what or how it is not helpful. Helpful toward what end? What end are you proposing that I am not addrssing with my proposition?

I was not helpful dumping me and him in the same category; searching for the truth "which eludes them".
1) I am not searching for the truth., like many other human fictions.
2) He thinks it has existed since the dawn of time itself, and is not searching either.

What if I were to say that we are just another life form, living and exericeing the way humans do, as bears do the way bears do; would this be true?


True, except for the spelling mistake.


Is the human fiction of truth, true? That there is a human fiction, is this true?

The human truth, is a fiction from the aspect of the purely conceptual and falsely ascribed 'objective" position, which no humans can maintain.
That which is the truth is all the human fiction in a sense that the Universe would abide were we not present, and the truth lives and dies with us. There is no meaning in 'truth' living outside the human consciousness, though it is possible that there exist other forms of life in the Universe that also share a similar idea.

how might we speak of atoms and genes and behavior and pshychology if there is not some sort of truth?

You point is what? Truth is that which is of interest to the human mind. Atoms and genes are not dependant on the truth in any sense.
This touches on a fundamental problem with the way humans conceive the universe. As I said below -the anthropic principle.

I think you guys have already tread that water, but then I ask: from where are you getting the truth that allows you to say what is not true (and therefore true)? There must be some truth somewhere.

There you go again with "you guys". Well "us" guys agree on nothing here. I'm getting my concept of truth from a cerebral process that dcides what I would wish to collect as knowledge and information , as distinct from what I consider to be fantasy.

chaz wyman wrote:For me that would be a sentence which was nonsense.

chaz wyman wrote:...

True, except for the spelling mistake.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:Becoming truth would be more like coming closer to clear self-consciousness whereas being associated with my intellectual function would be moving away from what I would consider becoming more of the truth.

Arising_uk wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:For me that would be a sentence which was nonsense.

I guess that'd be because the phrase 'becoming the truth' was not yours but it should make sense to Bill or not as may be the case.

lancek4 wrote:And, how is it that you can have your True, and have it be True?

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



Clear self-consciousness for me would be towards a disassociation from my intellectual function.



To do and act rather than just think.




.