Philosophy Now Forum

Do We Create or Discover Truth?




Presented Argument:




The question of do we create or discover truth originates in the acts of diverging and converging phenomena.




If one explores, effectively they diverge from a point of origin, and projects themselves towards an unknown.




If one creates, effectively they converge points of origin (the phenomena themselves) and unite these phenomena from nothingness as this new phenomena did not effectively exist prior.




The act of diverging (differentiating) phenomena exists dually to the act of converging unifying phenomena and in these respects both act relatively as dualistic notions of observing the limits which form phenomena.


In one respect the act of divergence observes a boundary line which seperates phenomena by observing their inherent relations, while the act of convergence observes the boundary line which fundamentally acts as a connector and makes them both one and the same.


In these respects we, relatively speaking, are left with a dualism of divergence and convergence where both are opposites and exist simultaneously from the limit itself in which the extend where the act of divergence and convergence effectively synthesize as "limit" itself. I may have to elaborate on this point further.


So going back to the question of discovery or creation:




1) All discovery, at its root point, is an act of exploring the unknown with the unknown effectively being ignorance itself.




2) All creation, at is root point, is an act of manifesting something from nothingness in the respect it did not exist prior.




3) All discovery and creation, effectively, are the manifestation of limits as the "pushing of one's limit".







Agree, Disagree, Maybe?

I would say it is both. Our brains create it, our senses discover it.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Sat Aug 25, 2018 9:22 pm I would say it is both. Our brains create it, our senses discover it.

PhilX

But we observe our brains creating it through the senses (MRI, etc.) and the senses are reasoned through the brain?

Truth is discovered.

The proof is that the same truths, principles, facts, thoughts, chain of causation, answers to mysteries, food recipes, etc., can be independently discovered by two strangers who are forever incommunicato.

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:43 am Truth is discovered.

The proof is that the same truths, principles, facts, thoughts, chain of causation, answers to mysteries, food recipes, etc., can be independently discovered by two strangers who are forever incommunicato.

Are the stranger really incommunicato if they are observing the same thing? Quantum Entanglement?

Both.

I think 'truth' is what is 'true', what is 'fact', so, yeah, we can discover 'truth' (what is true/fact).

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:02 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:43 am Truth is discovered.

The proof is that the same truths, principles, facts, thoughts, chain of causation, answers to mysteries, food recipes, etc., can be independently discovered by two strangers who are forever incommunicato.

Are the stranger really incommunicato if they are observing the same thing? Quantum Entanglement?

They can both observe a condition, but each observer is also an element of that condition, so each as a separate and different element of the condition, changes the condition.

I don’t think the big quantum guns are necessary.

Only a finite number of implications that follow from a change in knowledge are available to two or more individuals, thus independent access to the same knowledge will lead to discovering the truth of the ways this newly discovered knowledge applies to known conditions. Great minds think alike.

Walker wrote: ↑Fri Sep 07, 2018 4:51 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:02 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:43 am Truth is discovered.

The proof is that the same truths, principles, facts, thoughts, chain of causation, answers to mysteries, food recipes, etc., can be independently discovered by two strangers who are forever incommunicato.

Are the stranger really incommunicato if they are observing the same thing? Quantum Entanglement?

They can both observe a condition, but each observer is also an element of that condition, so each as a separate and different element of the condition, changes the condition.

I don’t think the big quantum guns are necessary.

Only a finite number of implications that follow from a change in knowledge are available to two or more individuals, thus independent access to the same knowledge will lead to discovering the truth of the ways this newly discovered knowledge applies to known conditions. Great minds think alike.

But are the greatness of the minds an extension of the phenomena being percieved?

The greatness is a lack of corruption, thus explained.

There is one mind.
Multiple portals access the one mind.

The incarnation of the portal determines the nature of the access.
Corruption of the portal limits the incarnation’s natural access.

Corruption of the mind portal is caused by biological disease, trauma, inflammation (wearing out), or ignorance.

A heavily corrupted human (i.e., ignorant due to attachment caused by desire) can thus be on par with an uncorrupted animal, since animals are generally too stupid to be corrupted.

An uncorrupted human is not ignorant (due to clinging caused by desire), and will thus think alike another of the breed in the same condition. Maybe even with abouncy rhythm.

The thinking is great when it functions as designed for animal or man or any other access portal, without rust or gunk buildup.