Return Home
It is currently Sun May 26, 2024 6:00 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:36 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:21 pm
Posts: 20
Location: Chicago, IL
How do you know that something, somewhere, is true? Im not concerned with relative truths, or reliable observations. I mean Ultimate, Absolute Truth. How do you know Truth exists?

I think the answer comes down to the fact that you didnt make yourself. You did not create yourself, so there must be something of which you are derived. You dont have the ability to dictate what truth is or isnt, or whether it even exists or not, because you didnt make yourself. You are not authority on the issue.

But im having difficulty really logically piecing this together. I can see how just because I dont know what the truth is, doesnt mean it doesnt exist. But I dont see how I can prove that it does exist.


Top
PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:52 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Look up epistemology in WikiPedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology You come rather late to the table. This is a very old question.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:40 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:31 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: Florario/Ontorida
I seem to recall Tom saying nothing is 100% certain and everything is subject to a probability you assign

I don't think we have a choice but to deal with what appears to be real, maintaining that loose grip of open scepticism

rather than getting lost in abstraction, which is a short step from nihilism, I think it is better to solidify in your apparent perceived reality

dialing up the weighting on how each intent impacts stakeholders....taking loading and unloading the dishwasher more seriously, and taking philosophy less seriously

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?


Top
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:47 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:21 pm
Posts: 20
Location: Chicago, IL
Ok ok. After further clarification, I have found that the question comes down to one of faith. Is faith a rational thing? Am I a responsible IUOC by accepting faith? I dont think faith is the same thing as belief.

I cannot prove that absolute truth exists, but to not believe in it because I cannot prove it results in a huge decrease in QoC. Tom always talks against beliefs, but does he ever talk about faith? Can I accept faith without intellectual suicide?


Top
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:57 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
No faith in not rational and religious faith request you set aside rationality by not leaning on your own understanding just like any other Belief Systems based faith like science.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:15 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:53 am
Posts: 2525
Azuolas wrote:Ok ok. After further clarification, I have found that the question comes down to one of faith. Is faith a rational thing? Am I a responsible IUOC by accepting faith? I dont think faith is the same thing as belief.

I cannot prove that absolute truth exists, but to not believe in it because I cannot prove it results in a huge decrease in QoC. Tom always talks against beliefs, but does he ever talk about faith? Can I accept faith without intellectual suicide?
Do a term search on faith. Use the word twice to screen out superfluous uses. (I think it works that way if you click 'search all terms', not just 'any').

"Truth", yep, there's lots of literature out there already and some discussion on this site too.

Depending on one's state of consciousness, the sense of truth varies. (The sense of truth, that is different from 'The Truth').
In some it is blazingly obvious, others not.

"Absolute Truth", if it exists at all, is God's problem, if you ask me.
...and best to leave it that way: If you ever meet absolute truth....
well: think about that.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:53 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 1:39 pm
Posts: 1247
Azuolas wrote:How do you know that something, somewhere, is true? Im not concerned with relative truths, or reliable observations. I mean Ultimate, Absolute Truth. How do you know Truth exists?

I think the answer comes down to the fact that you didnt make yourself. You did not create yourself, so there must be something of which you are derived. You dont have the ability to dictate what truth is or isnt, or whether it even exists or not, because you didnt make yourself. You are not authority on the issue.

But im having difficulty really logically piecing this together. I can see how just because I dont know what the truth is, doesnt mean it doesnt exist. But I dont see how I can prove that it does exist.
This is long but maybe useful:
One of the realizations that occurred while reading My Big Toe by Thomas Campbell was the notion of having probable truths instead of beliefs. Perhaps it might be useful for others as well.

Book 1 of the My Big Toe trilogy helps to clarify the idea that beliefs are limiting and are functions of the ego as a means to coddle our fears. We choose to believe something or have faith that something is true, so that we can ignore the other (not so warm and fuzzy) possibilities. We might also choose to believe or have faith that something is true as a means to deal with our fear and anxiety toward the uncertain nature of our existence. A quick history of the various religions, societies, and cultures is an excellent clue as to just how common and vast this process is. Okay, so I got it: belief and faith are limiting and not so good in terms of growth and understanding of Big Truth.

So the dilemma then of course was: how does one move forward while not believing or having faith in anything? Much of My Big Toe resonated with me. However, to move forward in any way, it seemed like I had to have faith that there was some truth to it or believe that it was true (at least to some degree). It seemed as though I was just falling into another belief trap. So my first thought at that time was: "okay, I just need to go find some proof." I very quickly realized that amongst such vast uncertainty, there is little actual “proof” to be found. Any evidence found along the way had too many gaps that would have to be filled in with belief and faith. Echoing Descartes, the only thing that I could really say was true with a great deal of certainty was that I exist... I can think and experience.

At that point, I had very little to work with: I exist, belief is limiting, and I was surrounded by a great deal of uncertainty. Well, this stopped me in my tracks. How could I move forward with this? The solution it turns out was both simple and eye opening. It is all of course plainly stated in My Big Toe. It just goes to show that one must actually experience something to fully "get it".

Part of the realization was that beliefs are limiting because they omit the existence of other possibilities. A belief does not allow itself to be wrong. A belief says that everything else is wrong except for itself. Ask somebody with very strong religious beliefs what some of the alternative possibilities are in terms of their existence. This is a very scary notion to somebody with strong beliefs and rightfully so (so don’t actually do it). Imagine taking everything that you thought was true and suddenly having it threatened to be ripped apart. It's not a good feeling. This sheds some light on religious wars no doubt.


So, I considered my own beliefs. I had over 15 years or so nailed them down to three basic ideas: 1. There is something “out there” beyond myself that is inherently "good" 2. The purpose of life is to learn how to love (grow toward love, etc) 3. Nothing else really matters all that much. I was lucky that my beliefs were fairly simple. So in considering these things, I realized that I could not really say with 100% certainty that they were true or accurate. So what if they were completely wrong? Well, I may just turn to dust and the universe will continue on. I could find that I am part of some sick alien experiment. I may realized that I should have been baptized years ago because now I can't get into heaven. Maybe I am laying in a computer matrix somewhere and this is all just a very vivid illusion. You get the idea. Are these considerations any more far fetched than the various religious and cultural beliefs that have existed throughout history?

Okay fine, so now what? How do we move forward? Letting go of everything we believe about our existence is like turning out all the lights and then trying to decide where to go. At some point it hit me: I can move forward based on the idea that something or some idea might be true so long as I am willing to face and accept that it could be wrong. Aha! So this is how that “open-minded skepticism” thing that Tom Campbell keeps talking about works. I can say that I hold the probable truth that I am here to grow toward love, but I must be willing to consider and fully accept that I may be confused or completely wrong. In this way open-minded skepticism is not just about a scientific approach. It is also very much about having a great deal of humility and courage. So I might say, "I am a limited being with a limited understanding, but I choose to move forward based on what I currently find to be most probable. I realize that my current probable truths may be wrong, but I move forward with courage in spite of this uncertainty. My path is one of growth and understanding, and I will look honestly at whatever I may come across along the way." This made the idea of having a "spiritual warrior’s" attitude make a great deal more sense. The battle at hand is with self.


So in the end, my realization was this:
I can move forward based on what I currently hold as my probable truths. For something to function as a probable truth and not a belief, I must fully consider the fact that it may be completely wrong. I must be able to look those other (often not so pretty) possibilities in the eye, accept them, set them down, and move on. I must accept my limitations and move forward with what I have. This approach requires a great deal of humility and courage. The goal is not to cover up or get rid of the uncertain nature of our existence. We have to accept uncertainty. It will likely always be there. The best we can do is to keep moving forward with our current probable truths. Those probable truths of course must be held lightly. As our understanding increases, we will likely have to set them down and replace them with new (and temporary) probable truths. This, as Robert Bruce recently said in a discussion with Tom Campbell is to “remain in the question.” If I ever come to a point where I feel like the question is fully answered, then either I am stuck in a belief trap or I am all knowing... and I’m pretty sure I know which one is more likely. (rhymes with “relief snack”).

Of course, all of this must also be held lightly and as a temporary probable truth :)

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"


Top
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:56 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:31 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: Florario/Ontorida
nice

one small pushback on a a minor point - groups (well, dictators actually) initiate war as a natural behavior of entropy - if two groups at war happen to have different religions, it is not the religion that is the cause of the war, the religion is merely a correlated factor...groups of the same religion are very capable of warring against each other, and there are many examples of this - one observation...when you remove religion from the equation, the behavior in war becomes much more evil, with the belief in NPMR removed. Theism is merely shorthand for NPMRism.

I think this supports your main point...just replace "God" with "NPMR" or "Quantum Physics"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?


Top
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 7:48 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Remember that in Tom's model of reality, everything began from the Void and the random, non information, which existed there. From this, everything that has been developed must be relative. All intellectual concepts exist in relationship to other concepts. That is where it began and that is how it developed and how all languages in which we express our thoughts arose. Everything is subjective, relative, and there is really no basis for an absolute truth. Absolute truths come from something, a deity perhaps, making such a statement and declaring based upon authority that it is an absolute truth. If you accept that as an aspect of this reality, then there can you find your absolute truth. If you follow the MBT model which includes AUM but no deities, then you have no source for absolute truths as AUM has declined the role. AUM seeks everything of value but not absolute truth.

In PMR which is at base a probability construct, you will especially not find it.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:34 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:11 am
Posts: 772
Would it be an absolute truth that there is no absolute truth?


Top
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:37 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
You could certainly say that it is probable that there is no absolute truth. Thought you had me. Ha!

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:35 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:11 am
Posts: 772
Random thought...How high do you guys think the probability of something has to be for it to be considered an approximate truth?


Top
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:44 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:53 am
Posts: 2525
Truth or Schmrooth... who cares? There are better and worse models (for any particular application).
That's all.

Remember "This is really true!" are the magic words that transform a model into a belief system.

When you hear someone speaking those words, well, expect to be dealing with belief system issues.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:02 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Montana wrote:Truth or Schmrooth... who cares? There are better and worse models (for any particular application).
That's all.

Remember "This is really true!" are the magic words that transform a model into a belief system.

When you hear someone speaking those words, well, expect to be dealing with belief system issues.
I have always found a bit of a niggle (cognitive dissonance) with Tom having said something quite like that "this is really true" or "real" at some point in his story (in a video or maybe in person at a lecture I've been at rather than the book I think).
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:35 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:11 am
Posts: 772
bette wrote:
Montana wrote:Truth or Schmrooth... who cares? There are better and worse models (for any particular application).
That's all.

Remember "This is really true!" are the magic words that transform a model into a belief system.

When you hear someone speaking those words, well, expect to be dealing with belief system issues.
I have always found a bit of a niggle (cognitive dissonance) with Tom having said something quite like that "this is really true" or "real" at some point in his story (in a video or maybe in person at a lecture I've been at rather than the book I think).
Love
Bette
You guys seem to be mixing absolute truth with regular truth. I would bet that when Tom uses it in that context that he doesn't mean absolute truth but rather truth at this point in time type of thing.


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited