A theory of truth

Discussion in 'Existentialism' started by Flesh Mound, Dec 17, 2012.

  1. Flesh Mound

    Flesh Mound Member

    Messages:
    245
    Likes Received:
    2
    One of the constants of knowledge is that knowledge is ever changing, but through perseverance we achieve great progress in our quest for truth in a world that is completely relativistic. This allows us to break from the mold to discover new universal axioms for which we previously lacked the proof.

    These axioms can however become an achilles heel if too much effort is spent analyzing them, as this becomes unfruitful labor, that could be better spent in arduous and vain exertion. I think that if we are to ever break out of our limited and insignificant role in this world and achieve immateriality, then it is in our best interest to consider the inutile influences that exist in this world and the inexistent effect they have on our lives. Only then can we truly be what we are meant to be.

    Thoughts and opinions?
     
  2. thedope

    thedope glad attention Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,574
    Likes Received:
    1,203
    Knowledge is being shared.
     
  3. We're already what we're meant to be. There is no magical equation at the end of the rainbow to explain existence. There shouldn't be. We are chaos. And it's not a bad thing. On the contrary, it's astounding that chaos is capable of producing the abstract concepts it produces.

    I'm not that impressed by knowledge. I am impressed by it, but not as impressed as most people are. There is no understanding the world except by experiencing it.
     
  4. tikoo

    tikoo Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,978
    Likes Received:
    487
    One job is to keep the earth from being wobbly . It's
    a group that does this and they are One . In the book
    they published it's admitted they're really not much good
    at doing anything else since they , each alone , is a poor
    broken spirit .
     
  5. Yog-Sothoth

    Yog-Sothoth Member

    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wouldn't that be knowledge still?
     
  6. bird_migration

    bird_migration ~

    Messages:
    26,375
    Likes Received:
    37
    I find it very arrogant to think we are meant to be something more than what we are. In that case either God or Nature is being a sarcastic bastard or extremely inefficient.
     
  7. ScottErthSnd

    ScottErthSnd Member

    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    We are what we where meant to be. In my opinion we are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively.
     
  8. Mountain Valley Wolf

    Mountain Valley Wolf Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    933
    What it is is dangerous-----once we feel that we have stumbled onto a truth, then we fall victim to reductionist thought, and become convinced that it is the newer and better answer, and it then becomes forced on others.

    Perhaps this is all part of the learning process. Unfortunately, we all too often forget that such truths are born of existentialist experience---i.e. human experience, and that there are no universals, all values and morals that we conceive of are based on nothing more than a human perspective. Even the deepest spiritual experience that we can achieve, we experience as a human.

    Then perhaps one day we will understand that the only value that could come close to a universal would be one that is so all-inclusive, that even as a reductionist concept it would have no reductionist values. It would have to be unconditionally accepting of all the multiplicities of creation, and affirming of each and every one. It would represent a breakdown of duality, and of value judgement, and it would need to allow for an infinite level of subjectivity (for all that is conscious is subjective in its own right).
     
  9. Anaximenes

    Anaximenes Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    9

    The theory of truth is finite. Thus at the outset theoretically knowledge cannot be shared. What is to remark to be called "sharing", maybe some kind of knowledge on it's own? We share with the dead as much as with the living; we share with others we know about as much as with the fellowman in regard as a stranger. That way the sharing is undetermined for that finite theory. The theory is determining of as much sharing as being self-absorbed. Knowledge is finding an unjust assessment of anyone in particular, and finding Justice for being implicitly part of History for everyone; I am self-absorbed now. Maybe not, not knowing who I am.:biggrin:
     
  10. aesthetic

    aesthetic Z

    Messages:
    716
    Likes Received:
    54
    When man learns to ignore truth and accept lies; the world will be a better place.
     
  11. Monkey Boy

    Monkey Boy Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,908
    Likes Received:
    391
    You mention immateriality. This would be when we are flexible enough to flow with life. Time disappears and we are alive, fulfilled at the highest level, being who are. When I was a kid I found it while building sand castles and forts in the woods. It's the same now. There's such satisfaction in non-clinging creation. It's one way to pure experience.
     
  12. thedope

    thedope glad attention Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,574
    Likes Received:
    1,203
    Theoretical knowledge is assumed through re-cognition.
    Knowledge is material and occupies space in the mind. Some care more for it than others and so it seems to exist in clumps but none are without it. The time you seem without it is when it seems absent anywhere.
    knowledge is complete or it is theoretical.

    The statement knowledge is being shared can be written/comprehended with or without a comma between being and shared.
     
  13. I don't know whether that which one can't speak of is knowledge or not.
     
  14. Gongshaman

    Gongshaman Modus Lascivious

    Messages:
    4,602
    Likes Received:
    998
    They aren't called axioms for nothing.
     
  15. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    truth is easy when we're not hiding it with words.

    we communicate mostly with words, so the result is, truth is not something we can really communicate. but its there. it just isn't the things we are able to say.

    at least not in ways that aren't way more complex then truth is itself.

    that's why the easiest, truest thing to say, is that truth is what is there, when no one is saying anything.

    everything we say obscures it, at least a little. but we can each see it just fine, if we look without trying to say, and without being distracted by other people saying.

    and every kind of thing said about any kind of belief, is just that much a distraction from truth as any other kind of saying about anything else.

    truth is just there and that's not a problem, we just need to quit thinking its something we can tell each other.

    all we have to do, is just shut up and look, instead of lying to ourselves and trying to get everyone else to tell themselves the same lies as we want to tell ourselves.

    to say that knowledge is always changing. this is inaccurate too. each of us is always aquiring more raw data. and the more we accumulate the progressively more accurate image we can form in our minds of what is. but each of us only known what we've each individually learned, even though all of us togather can use more knowledge then each of us individually has.

    but that doesn't mean what we aquire knowledge OF is constantly changing. some things do, but increase in our collective knowledge isn't a change of what we learn it about.

    see what i mean. about the problem with words i mean. if you look at something without distorting yourself, what you see is what you see.

    but as soon as you try to put it into words and tell them to someone, the will always see something else.

    we think we use the same words to mean the same things. but do we? really?

    in rough approximation yes, but in the finer details, no way in hell. that's why mechanical drawings have dimentions, because for dimentions there are standards, and the drawing makes it clear where which dimentions go.

    but if you just try to tell someone in words, then you'd better not want anything to specific, because you're not going to get it.

    the universe, or that tree, or that rock, you know, that is something that is there, but you put words with it, you could end up with almost anything.

    so you know, its fun to talk, but at some point you just have to realize, that all words are bull-shit.
     
  16. thedope

    thedope glad attention Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,574
    Likes Received:
    1,203
    If words are all bullshit then the announcement of such is bullshit as well. A self contradictory determination is unreliable. Words are symbols for conditions. Every word we speak has at it's root an experiential conjugation and the only reason we are able to communicate in words at all is because our experience is in common. One thing that makes communication with words inexact is the perception that our experiences are not in common, that you can't know the truth about me because my love or my suffering or my motives are special.
    Special or unique in this vain is the ego's greatest defense against truth and the firm ground on which miscommunication is built.

    When we speak a word with conviction we contort ourselves in a vibratory way and our engagement is visceral. As we speak we appeal to and for conditions and we feel justified in our words, the word condition meaning to speak with at it's root.

    There are phenomena we must account for in understanding each other. It takes time to become familiar with a persons locally impressed inflection or particular vernacular within the larger framework of a shared language. That is each person has a particular way of saying things or using particular words that is related to a local formative timing, but everyone is saying the same thing. As we develop a common vocabulary we get a sense that we know this person. Common vocabulary cannot be assumed it must be developed or cultivated over time even though we share a particular language.
    Our communications can be quite exact, providing the consistent motive of communication. Trying to prove a point is not quite the same as trying to communicate in general.
     
  17. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    jumping to conclusions is jumping to conclusions. pointing out that truth is most often obscured by verbal communication, is NOT saying words are bullshit. but it IS the most common and popular way in which we deceive ourselves.

    words have their uses. but truth, in any absolute sense, can only be approximated in the process of verbal communication. and perceiving existence in communicative terms, IS the very thing that keeps most people from even trying to look, and distracts the rest of us, from being able to see at all clearly.

    example: a rock and tree, the are truth in their own sense, but saying the word rock is not a rock, saying the word tree is not a tree. a cat and a picture of a cat, are VERY separate truths.
     
  18. thedope

    thedope glad attention Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,574
    Likes Received:
    1,203
    All deception is the same being a level of mis-identification. In truth now, it is impossible to lie. Certainly coming to conclusions has nothing to do with determining what is real as reality is ongoing and moreover in that recognition there is cause for confidence' as reality supports it's constituents.

    Reality presents no justification for fear.

    Any "fact" perceived as you say is an approximation as perception is not knowledge but can lead to it. It is in assuming the vibratory or luminous content of any thing beheld that we are translated into knowledge. Words are obviously meaningless absent their experiential conjugations. We deceive ourselves when we forget that we are the progenitors of all the phenomena we claim. We show up here and by our descriptions adjudicate the conditions of our lives.


    I don't understand what you are suggesting here. Words are for communication. It is the sense that your motives or circumstances require special understanding to be appreciated or that your real motives can be concealed that is the barrier to meaningful communication not the inadequacy of words.

    The only relevance I see in this is when it comes to saying something and meaning what you say. It is more meaningful to say a rock is not a tree. Obviously a symbol for a condition is not the condition itself but we assume conditions on the basis of words.
     
  19. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    it is more meaningful to say a rock and the word rock are two very seperate things. like a cat and a picture of a cat.

    have you ever been around a real cat? or a rock or a tree.

    these things are their own truth, but these words, they are just words.

    words will always be just words, and that is a seperate thing from truth.
     
  20. thedope

    thedope glad attention Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,574
    Likes Received:
    1,203
    I don't think so. They aren't separate things they stand in relation to one another. Rock and tree don't meet except the rock be in solution.

    Indeed and I wouldn't be able to reply to the question if not for the symbols standing for conditions.

    Words are words but are meaningless absent their experiential conjugations.

    .
    Symbols are symbolic of and that is the truth about them.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice