Member 212
2 entries

Winnipeg, CA
Immortal since Dec 11, 2007
Uplinks: 0, Generation 2

Information Pollution
  • Affiliated
  •  /  
  • Invited
  •  /  
  • Descended
  • Recently commented on
    From ChefQuix
    Truth Nodes
    From ChefQuix
    In search of the Noosphere
    Now playing SpaceCollective
    Where forward thinking terrestrials share ideas and information about the state of the species, their planet and the universe, living the lives of science fiction. Introduction
    Featuring Powers of Ten by Charles and Ray Eames, based on an idea by Kees Boeke.
    From ChefQuix's personal cargo

    Truth Nodes
    Truth is sacrosanct to the human character. The only way we can build a philosophical construct of our identity is through cornerstones of truth, upon which we build more complex structures of truth for the purposes of explaining our reality. We all share one, indivisible truth - the acceptance of our unique perception. Everyone inately understands that the person watching the movie screen of our life is a unique individual, and something that we alone possess. But we also understand that everyone else out there is witness to their own showing, their own unique perception of the events unfolding in their life. Well we may not awknowledge it, at a fundamental level we all understand that our own reality is ours, and ours alone.

    The problem lies in reconciling diametrically opposed truths. There are easy examples of this, say one person may believe devoutly in the existence of god, and one may not. These are irreconcilable, as they're both taken on faith of their own character, and would destroy any truth structures that have been built on top. So how do you tell which perception is right?

    Truth is not a democracy. The majority is not always right, as has been seen countless times in the study of science. Once an idea becomes entrenched in a society, it takes a monumental effort to prove it otherwise, as the opposing perception of truth has such momentum within the people which form that societal group. At the same time, one cannot be so plastic as to attach equal importance to each new fad idea that comes along, for it may not be grounded in truth, as much as the person promoting it may wish and believe it to be so.

    This is the delicate balance, between falsehoods and truth, that we all wage in our day to day lives. It seems that few of us have the wherewithal to examine our beliefs logically, and change them accordingly and without bias towards that truth that is more truthy than the rest.

    Mon, Dec 17, 2007  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote (8)
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (2)

    aeonbeat     Tue, Dec 18, 2007  Permanent link
    acts of a person are signs of what he preaches, no matter what he claims to be preaching. this means that no matter what a person says to believe, any gods or ideals, the way he lives his life is the real sign of what he preaches

    most of the people just pretend to practice what they preach. but part of them is really concerned about that and tries to get closer to this ideal, result of the superego x complexes

    in other words, the worst person you know may occur the best in the right moment... and what's worse, the best person you know may appear to be the real antichrist (not antagonist...)
    ChefQuix     Tue, Dec 18, 2007  Permanent link
    That's a great point, but it still doesn't determine what is true or not, just what a person believes is true.
    aeonbeat     Wed, Dec 19, 2007  Permanent link
    do you believe that we will determine this in this conversation? if you do, it may even happen... so, let us create some reality then, shall we? ;)

    and what would this world be without doubt and opposition? how are we gonna measure good? or anything else? do we really need to measure? if we just experience it, there's no need to note it in a scheme, expressing our hunger for patterns... "to create is god, to reproduce is human", wasting more than what we're creating is not that easy to notice when we're having other "more important" things in your mind. but since more and more people are noticing it (or are there for real?), maybe it's really necessary more then ever to know what's really true and what's not... what's real and what's not...

    we need to know the truth in order to free ourselves. this is important to have in mind, when searching for it... you don't need to be religious in order to notice the beautiful idea behind every ancient belief. they say: conscious and intentional love in different ways... that's before someone added something to it... probably. in the same time, the world is separated in many groups, preaching the same... this is silly. all men are meant to be good when born - now this is truth to me. of course for someone else it might be the opposite. but i think no man really can find sense in this, feeling it deep inside... there's no need of inventing the wheel again...

    i say if we're practicing what we preach and we're preaching not what all ancient books and religions interpret, but really understanding the truth, feel it and intend it! then everything should be ok - i mean, isn't it what why we're searching for it? :)

    what would change if we know exactly what the true and what not is? we can see it even now, we know what's truth, we feel it and you're just about to experience it, but, oh, what a miss...
    ChefQuix     Wed, Dec 19, 2007  Permanent link
    Right, I only talk about a need for truth, for a satisfyingly rigorous truth in order for us, as humans navigating a great uncertainty, to be able to set a course in our own mind in the maelstrom that is the internet, with all the false truths that are presented to us. You cannot deny that over and over again, completely opposite truths are both presented in unequivicable terms. This is the problem, this is the dilemma. Sorting through the myriad of personal truths to find something that is indeed factual is what I'm after. I'm tired of the waves of opposing opinions presented as fact. I want something to believe in that wasn't written thousands of years ago, something that is relevant to the desert of the real.
    aeonbeat     Mon, Dec 24, 2007  Permanent link
    Simplifying to the max, finding the one algorithm, understanding the 'whole' pattern. How? Since truth is in the eye of the beholder... How to get rid of conventionalities? Is this what we're asking? Is it what really need?
    Wildcat     Mon, Dec 24, 2007  Permanent link
    gouranga said: Since truth is in the eye of the beholder...

    yet if I understand clearly the point made by Chef, there is a truth (not THE but A) that is not in the eyes of the beholder, or maybe a more accurate description could be or should be :there is a truth for different dimensions of beholding.
    not all humans can perceive all dimensions of a truth, and some as Chef pointed out are "truther" than others, or belong to a more ample reality if you like.
    I do not necessarily advocate a logical validation yet there is doubt that deeper truths, larger truths, encompass a wider range of personal truths, these in turn may apply to a particular individual and even then only for a brief period of time, before she "discovers" or unveils a deeper or larger truth.
    I do not believe in an absolute truth, for there is an-going process of refinement continuously updating and upgrading the level of complexity of truth we can comprehend.
    hence truth can be described as the localized perception of a dynamic process in its application to a particular individual at a particular point in time, perceiving a given set of dimensions. change any parameter in the above and you change the truth.
    aeonbeat     Mon, Dec 24, 2007  Permanent link
    I think to really understand truth is to experience it. experience through emotions, thoughts and intentions - the past, the present and the future in one. to fully believe in it as actually creating it - the truth a.k.a. what's real. i think it's about being involved, but not only a beholder, to be able to recognize a non-relative truth, one that's filled with meaning a.k.a. the pattern of everything, the ultimate algorithm - manifest of the divine spark. what are our reasons so that we want to know the truth, what do we need it for? just to calm down and sleep in tranquility? or be anxiety-free that whatever we do is right? are we anxious? what are we really anxious about? isn't it us... individually... isn't this actually fear? what about love? where is it in this equation? what if we already have the answer, but not the right question, losing ourselves in a maze of pale thoughts, wasting more than what we produce.

    let us share our points of view about truth and notice differences, please
    feanne     Tue, Dec 25, 2007  Permanent link
    Our Philosophy class in high school said, Truth is the agreement of the mind with reality.. 'Truth' is dependent on 'reality', not on the mind. Or... the truth of something does not depend on whether you believe it or not— if it's true then it's true, if not then it's not.
    aeonbeat     Tue, Dec 25, 2007  Permanent link
    what's measuring that then? when me and you agree or not...
    feanne     Wed, Dec 26, 2007  Permanent link
    Hmm, maybe I need an example to make myself clearer. Like this:

    I say: I think the elephant is blue.
    You say: I think the elephant is red.
    In reality: The elephant is white.

    Then we're both wrong because reality differs from what we have in mind.

    Something of an oversimplification but yeah... something like that.
    aeonbeat     Thu, Dec 27, 2007  Permanent link
    Yes, I had the same example in my head, So, how do we find out for sure if it is white? What's a dispatch measure for that... some kind of synchronism? we close your left eye and you see the world one way, then we open it and close you right one to see it from a different angle - it is different. Finally we open them both and we have at least two points of view collected. we have a better idea of reality, we recognize patterns, we save energy, by wasting less then the first time, so we can use it on something else. but i still have to experience that the elephant is white so to be sure it is. and in fact you could say it is blue and i could say it is red, but what we experience as truth is the same, just using different labels for the same thing. and this is a major problem probably. so here it is, our absolute truth... right in front of our perceptions. what's next?
    Wildcat     Thu, Dec 27, 2007  Permanent link
    but what we experience as truth is the same, just using different labels for the same thing

    Given that we have different neuro-structures and different neuro-chemical balances (not to mention physiological (both in brain shapes and nervous architecture) differences it is highly probable that the above statement is false, e.g we do not experience the same truth and label it differently.

    I think that the case is upside down, we experience similar but different truths and label it the same (or similar) for the purpose of facilitating communication between human and construction of civilization. hence language is the great equalizer (though some will claim that it brings the whole edifice of human experience down.)
    aeonbeat     Thu, Dec 27, 2007  Permanent link
    so you don't think we feel the same inside, no matter what we show outside? how does labeling the same way something that's not actually the same help the construction of civilization...

    what i think is that we do experience similar but different truths and label em differently too, because we don't know what to trust absolutelly, because we as single beings still can't get rid of what's relatively, once and for all. struggling to balance intuition, mind and heart