Methods Of Inquiry

What does belief have to do with discerning truth other than to define what the belief is, i.e. I believe the opposite. That statement of itself is true as you compare your belief to what has been written. Beliefs don't contend with the truth, only with other beliefs. How are you going to make it objective? I would say don't take any oaths of fealty to an idea, i.e. rely on belief in making quantitative calculations. Your belief only qualifies your level of engagement, it does not change anything about the world but it sure can affect ongoing apprehension.

I don't know the details of the hypothetical, the truth always relative is in the details. We are all right in the fact we exist. We both can observe truth in comparison. If you can posit a definite example with values we can both see then it can be shown in practice. From this proposed perspective or method of inquiry there is no abstract the truth out there. It is all real. The truth is relative to some definite comparison. Now when you are dealing with abstract concepts then the truth of them comes from the question how do they function.when compared to your own substantial experience. You can also convert abstract values to numerical value and perform math functions as a method of testing whether things add up, which is what axiomatic reasoning does.

 

I reiterate we must address our previous cultural programming, become as little children, in order to become good subjective apprehenders as we are taught to believe and care for things more or less. A scientist is not lost in the world without a microscope or telescope but he is lost without an alert open mind.

 

What I mean by reassuring is that reality supports it's constituents. Reality does not become unreal. If you feel vulnerable it is not realities fault. Reality is responsible for you feeling at all.

You can say love reassures but really it is familiarity or the family. The motherly sooth. The fatherly instruct. Everything is love or the call for it.

 

What is true is that we have beliefs.

What you believe is what you are convicted in and convicted or bound by. the truth is not an abstract set of propositions but a definitive true or false. You are just confusing the terms belief and truth. (principle, what is the same is the same and what is different is not the same)

Importantly though they do have an affect on your subjective ability to apprehend the world. You could say this is their, (beliefs,) objective effect. The world when filtered through belief affects your conclusions as well as even the questions you are willing to consider. Science doesn't go beyond the subjective but through it. Your subjective estate is not personal property, it is an opportunity for apprehension via sensation The body is a communication device.

If in one sense truth is always then that is it's only sense. Truth is always and always relative to true terms and it's definite distinctions are true or false, not eventually or in some terms or sometime true and sometimes not.

Please don't get into buddhist concepts. That would just obscure the issue and I think your learned conceptions are already affecting your ability to understand what I am saying.

You are distorting any true meaning of truth by making the qualifications objective truth and ultimate truth. That is the nasty bug that makes subjective apprehension questionable, the temptation to subjectively qualify instead of exactly quantify.

I didn't say abstract truths, I said abstract values. Put it this way, any hypothesis..
.

 

Who said anything about feeling vulnerable? If a reality of watching a bunch of tigers rip apart a qazelle is reassuring to you, then that is how it is to you....reassuring....but that is not the case for me.
I am not making this personal.
Love exists in all forms not just a father or mother's love.

 

To reassure is to remove doubt or fears. Is there some doubt or fear you have about a tiger ripping apart a gazelle? Not trying to make it personal. We are never upset for a fact but for interpretation of fact.

 

doubt or fear? yes, for the gazelle.....but that is reality......the hunted and the hunters....but I do not find this a reassuring reality.....

 

The fact that everything dies is not so reassuring either.....
There are lots of realities that are not reassuring to me.

 

man's inhumanity to man...

poaching....

What horror film is worse than let's say bringing an elephant down and slicing away their tusks for the ivory and leaving them to die there?
Can anything made up be worse than that?

 

By convicted I mean having conviction in.
"What is your definition of truth?"
Correct by comparison
"Whatever".
And this is the crux of the problem. We need to refine or calibrate our measuring device. Need to autoclave the head so it doesn't contaminate the experiment.
"truth is always"... "in one sense"
This is what you said, in one sense the truth is always. There are no multiple senses or tenses of truth, there is true or false.
"and it's definite distinctions".... which you do not define..... "are true or false".
The definite distinctions are defined right there, true or false. Relatively true is not a definite true distinction.

When I say qualify I mean place relative qualifications upon the subject, as in relatively true. Relatively is a qualification. The truth is true, not relatively true.

One way of subjectively qualifying something is to say it is subjective, and therefor not quite trustworthy.

 

If something exists, it is true. Which I take literally to mean that everything is true. There is only that which is, which includes lies. We cannot exclude lies in order to attempt to hide from them. There is one ultimate fact, that which is, and what is more true than what is a fact? So do not bother to argue about what is true and what is untrue.

 

Gobbledeegook. That's a sweet "deepity" you've got there.

"If something exists, it is green. Which I take literally to mean that everything is green. There is only that which is, which includes red. We cannot exclude red in order to attempt to hide from it. There is one ultimate fact, that which is, and what is more green than this fact? So do not bother to argue about what is green and what is red."

 

What other kind of truth is there besides objective truth? There is that qualifier again that makes truth mean different things and this is what is best to get away from as far as our method of inquiry. There is no subjective truth there is subjective or personal experience about which we can say true things. Do you see how I am parsing these things? Personal experience is one thing a sameness to itself and determining truth is another sameness to itself but not the same as personal experience although determining truth can be a part of the subjective experience. Anyway going this route there are not many truths but many true comparisons we can make and truth then is no longer a mystery but just an answer to a question.
Yes the point about boiling point is true. There are an infinite number of true statements or comparisons you can make not an infinite number of truths. There are only two positions on the truth scale and they are true or false.

So is it a true theory? True and theory are not the same. it is a theory that so far works and to what extent are the true things we can say about it.

 

I make the distinction that reality is one thing and everything that exists is real but not every thing we say or perceive is true or accurate. So don't bother to argue about what is real or not. what is not real does not exist.

 

You say "gobbledeegook", but you want me to know what "deepity" is. I will not argue with you, because in a thread about truth where everything is true, what is the point?

All that exists is good, which is a part of being true. It is this goodness that you long for, but are reticent to accept the ugliness, so you hide.

 

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=definition+of+deepity

Yes, everything is true! Up is down! Out is in! blue is red! male is female! I suppose then you don't really eat "food" right? I mean you just chew on whatever is in close proximity to your mouth, since the statement "this chair is food" is a statement in reality, and therefore true?

I'm confused. You said:

1) All that exists is good.

2) I'm unwilling to accept the ugly.

If everything is good, from whence comes my valuation of ugly things and my reticence to accept it? Or is my reticence also part of the good? Yay! We don't have to do any work anymore, it's all good Let's all fall off the grid and drink our own urine and if some murderers or police come to bother with us that'll be all fine and dandy too since it's all true and beautiful.

 

^