Truth – An omnipresent law, sanity’s core pillar
Let´s get started with the first part of my metaphysical talks. Truth – a saving grace, a core pillar keeping our sanity intact. An omnipresent law to be embraced or ignored. None can win, lose nor hide.
I should begin with a brief introduction to my concept of pillars. My next article will fully explain it, but for the need of this one we´ll go with such a definition. Throughout our lifespan (from very early stages) we are continually processing all the life experiences we have been taught, singular ideas (coming from a person, or a small group), conceptual ideas (large groups, cultures), contextual ideas etc. Eventually stuff that is in harmony with what we perceive as truth is used to build (and in time upgrade) our pillars of life. Those pillars function is to be there for us whenever we are out of our comfort zone. Not having those pillars covering your back at all times means you´re being exposed to the stress. The more critical minded one is, the more effectively is reconstruction of pillars done, when a right stimuli threatens stability of one (or more) of them.
Truth as an omnipresent law.
It is a really hard-to-grasp kind of thing. There is an infinite amount of logically true statements, yet the Truth is one and only. One cannot own truth, since it’s immaterial and same for all the species in the universe. It does not lead, create nor control, it isn’t good nor bad – it just IS. Statement that everyone has his own truth is fundamentally false and on top of that so very dangerous. Not knowing the truth does not implicate that it does not exist. When two representatives of any specie are in interaction with each other and disagree, there are three possibilities what might have happened. 1. Both representatives were right, but were unable to code the information into something, which can be understood by the other side, leading to disagreement due to misunderstanding. Since both sides are strongly convinced that they are right, there is no way how to achieve mutual comprehension, unless one side is able to effectively recode the information from its head into comprehensible statement for the other side. If the argumentation is done right, comprehension should arise sooner or later, when both sides dig deeper into their life pillars (believes) and question them. 2. One side is right, whereas the other is not. During an interaction representative that is right will start to form an argument that will try to introduce truth to the other representative (the more radical the way will be the lower probability of success). Two eventualities arise. Representative that is false will be critical minded, therefore be able to question his own pillars – resulting in agreeing and rebuilding or disagreeing and keeping old pillars. 3. None is right. Two eventualities arise once again. One is either aware of the fact that his information gathered, concerning the believe that is false, is not sufficient therefore he might not be right, or one will not care at all and will fight till last breath to force the slightly different wrong statement onto the other. Situation where both representatives are right and both have different essential component of their pillar regarding that event can never happen. Many different ways lead to the acquisition of the “essence of the truth”, a completely different structures are built around the essence, but the essence remains the same for all beings.
Truth as sanity’s core pillar
Construction of life pillars is a very complex process in which truth is playing a pivotal part. Whenever one perceives an action it´s immediately being consciously processed and confronted with knowledge we possess and life pillars already built. Millions of those action per day have zero information value (a car went by…hurey!), but every single day we are, at least couple of times, exposed to completely new information. The knowledge and experiences are trying to make a sense out of it – discovering at least a portion of the essence of the truth. Sometimes we find what we seek and sometimes we are fooling ourselves that we found what we sought. Once we have the essence, whether it is real or fake, we start to incorporate them into the life pillars we already have, or if we discover something around which we have no real pillar working already, we use it as a core element for a new pillar. By that we are creating a protection of our sanity. When we have the pillars, if we choose not to think about the action perceived at all, it just hits the construction and bounds off – keeping our sanity intact. What I’m trying to say is that what we believe is truth makes core elements of all our believes later on. The less sceptical we are to the truths discovered (meaning the less testing of whether it really is true or just false information) the higher chance of a mistaken believes along the way of life. Critical mindedness, open mindedness, discussions, background research whether the sources of information aren´t fake are all valid ways how to acquire at least the portion of the truth. The less ignorant human being is the more of his sanity is at stake when the realization comes upon him that pillars in which he believed all along has no essence of the real truth.
We could say it´s a complex description of reality. It shouldn’t be affected by any personal concerns. We are never going to discover it fully, however, in mankind’s potential is to close the distance between what we perceive as a reality and what reality really is. Alas basic surveillance tells me that most of the people perceive truth as something subjective (ripping out good from its eternal battle between good and bad and substituting it for the truth), therefore creating one of the reasons why humanity lacks stronger consensus.
This is my take on truth. I would singlehandedly falsify this theory if I asserted that I know the truth about truth. So let me know how you guys perceive it. Let the discussion begin! :)
P.S. If you are interested in what I´ll try to accomplish here check out my introduction article
So I read through it once, and got a decent grasp of what you're trying to convey. I have very similar ways of approaching reality, but where you say "life pillars" I say "Ideological framework", heh.
However, I have to say that I disagree with the notion of "Truth" as being something that's immaterial. This seems to be a metaphysical substance claim (along the lines of substance monism, dualism, and pluralism) about something we cannot know by assumption alone.
I hold quite readily that we have 3 assumptions about reality:
This initial framework is how I test metaphysical claims about reality, in the regard that if it is testable with predictive capabilities; such as pragmatism, or what is called the "Primacy of Existence" then it is much more suitable for the outcomes of what can be considered "Truth".
I definitely think that my approach to what is true is from outcomes, rather than from the onset that you are describing. That being said, I only have basic proofs behind this initial approach to truth. Heh.
Also
///The more critical minded one is, the more effectively is reconstruction of pillars done, when a right stimuli threatens stability of one (or more) of them. /// :p You look into the void long enough and it will consume you. Knowledge of universe is the next step into madness, especially when you have looked into the void long enough to be part of it. I face this conundrum now-a-days, and it is a personal hell.
I was so looking forward to reading your replies and they didn’t fail me :). Is truth something material then? Using your assumption of existing universe. Physical laws that are happening are (we assume) also the truth. Is then the truth the idea of them laws or the laws themselves (because then I see how the truth could be material). So I’ve studied briefly the primacy of existence and it kinda plays into my cards. By this terminology I could say that truth is the existence (everything comprehensible and incomprehensible) and our consciousnesses are trying to decipher its nature. Everyone’s approach to truth should be from outcomes, but if there is such a thing as truth, then it has to exist even without the outcomes that help us understand it.
In reply to the last paragraph I can only say that I fight this by knowing myself and by being ever-happy. By the paragraph you also made an entrance into my fantasy universe…don’t know yet where I´ll use it but I will if you are not against :).
The Primacy of Existence is perhaps one of the best claims about "truth" in the essence that there is not really truth, but just reality and all that is entailed by reality. The idea of truth is contingent on observation (I.E. minds having to come to terms with reality). So it is not so much that truth itself is material, but that truth is the outcome of material processes (the mind).
When it comes to what is true, I definitely hold that it's outcomes, as what comes before is just the nature of reality. But in that claim it holds that there is infinite truth outcomes to every input of reality. So there has to be some sort of agreement on what is a pragmatic truth for understanding the system of reality; a useful truth persay.
I've long since fought the concept that we call the "void". It's always been with me; this ever present knowledge, and it is both frustrating to not understand how to convey it, but also frustrating to not be able to fully process all the knowledge.
I usually just chalk it up to me being actually crazy. :^) It stops me from talking about it to others and coming across as a nut-case.
I'm glad you enjoyed the read though. [:
I find it really appealing to call the reality the truth. So what you’re saying is that if there was no living being in an entire universe there wouldn´t be any truth to be discovered – just reality. On the other hand that is appealing to so I´m unsure now which idea I like more :D.
Regarding the second paragraph. I disagree that there are infinite outputs. You are bringing subjective matter into essence that is strictly objective. Agreement can only be made about what is good or bad for any kind of imaginable group or individual. Truth isn’t anything discussible
Truth is just what can be discovered about reality. The discoveries that correspond to reality are true. Those that do not, are not.
To the infinite outputs, it's a matter of perspective within the scale of the observable. But I guess it's more suitable to say indefinite outputs, since at any point in time there is always an indefinite amount of inputs.
By the very nature of what we call truth, there is both usable and unusable truths. We breathe, that notion is a usable truth since it helps us in bio-fields. Dark holes exists, is an unusable truth (at the moment) since we cannot do anything about it. Kind of understand where I'm going?
Totally! I agree. We are on the same page now. When I´ll have time I´ll check your new post which caught my eye.
Most of the ideas you have mentioned about truth are true but some are not...For instance "We could say it´s a complex description of reality. It shouldn’t be affected by any personal concerns. We are never going to discover it fully, however, in mankind’s potential is to close the distance between what we perceive as a reality and what reality really is." how do you know that we are never going to discover that...the truth is that you dont know...and such statements contradicts the core idea of truth itself...im just pointing out my views here...
Thanks for your insight! Let me make this clear. You are absolutely right, that I have no idea whether humanity will or will not manage to do so and I accept that it looks like made a “bold statement of truth” :D. The reason why I said the cited sentence is that I THINK that humanity’s potential is not high enough to reveal all the truths in universe. Humanity tends to think highly of itself and I on the other hand am trying to stand firmly on the ground.
I just lost over 350.00 investing in Pillar Token
https://steemit.com/steemit/@rogerwilson/lost-350-00-usd-on-pillar-token
what does it have to do with the post?
my sincere apology, you are correct. just having a moment here.
I will be more careful in the future to stay within my topic. Peace
We have the same approach on this matter, although the terms may differ. I'm preparing a future article on the same issue in the near future. You have my follow, hope I can have yours and we can share ideas :)
Be sure to share your article when its done:)
@fingersik sure thing!