Belief and reality

[Valjean]

The Truth behind the illusion may be gleaned and described in several ways despite the inadequacy of language.
Counter-intuitive truths of relativity or quantum mechanics, for example, can be described mathematically and they can, to a degree, be pictured in the mind through the use of syllogisms, paradoxes and allegories. People have been doing this for thousands of years: Plato's cave, Xeno's paradoxes, Schroedinger's cat and Einstein's twins come to mind.
To experience Reality directly and perfectly, however, requires an alteration of consciousness. Just as rotating one's perspective will reveal the truth of an optical illusion, adding a dimension or two to our 3-D consciousness will reveal a Reality previously entirely inconceivable. The problem of communicating this to the sleeping masses remains, though.
Some, like Buddhists, make no attempt to describe the ineffable. Others, like Hindus, weave elaborate and colorful allegories. Only mathematics/logic can truly begin to picture it, but the equations still cannot be directly conceived by a 3rd-state mind.

 

[PureX]

I've said the same thing before, however the problem of saying that there is no truth, is that it comes with a paradox as Socrates (I think) pointed out.
If you state that "there is no truth,"
then how do you know that statement itself is true?

If the statement is correct, then obviously we couldn't know that it's correct. And interestingly enough, this is exactly the position that we find ourselves in.

 

[Willamena]

If the statement is correct, then obviously we couldn't know that it's correct. And interestingly enough, this is exactly the position that we find ourselves in.

If we cannot know it is correct, then correctness effectively does not exist for us.

If we can say, 'that is correct" or "that is not correct," then correctness exists for us.

 

[PureX]

If we cannot know it is correct, then correctness effectively does not exist for us.

But this would be what they call a "red herring".

To not know that something is correct, is to NOT KNOW. To not know doesn't mean that correctness exists or doesn't exist, it only means that we don't know.

If we can say, 'that is correct" or "that is not correct," then correctness exists for us.

But that isn't what's being said. All that's being said is that we don't know. And interestingly, this would be our logical condition if there were no truth ... not knowing. So in a way, it could be argued that our not knowing is in itself evidence supporting the contention that truth does not exist.

 

[Ozzie]

The Truth behind the illusion may be gleaned and described in several ways despite the inadequacy of language.
Counter-intuitive truths of relativity or quantum mechanics, for example, can be described mathematically and they can, to a degree, be pictured in the mind through the use of syllogisms, paradoxes and allegories. People have been doing this for thousands of years: Plato's cave, Xeno's paradoxes, Schroedinger's cat and Einstein's twins come to mind.
To experience Reality directly and perfectly, however, requires an alteration of consciousness. Just as rotating one's perspective will reveal the truth of an optical illusion, adding a dimension or two to our 3-D consciousness will reveal a Reality previously entirely inconceivable. The problem of communicating this to the sleeping masses remains, though.
Some, like Buddhists, make no attempt to describe the ineffable. Others, like Hindus, weave elaborate and colorful allegories. Only mathematics/logic can truly begin to picture it, but the equations still cannot be directly conceived by a 3rd-state mind.

This is a fantastic post. Particularly the mention of mathematical rotation as an allegory of physical movement in rotation as a change of perspective. This is particularly interesting to the debate of what is real and not. The physical movement in rotation is allegorical, but can be acted out. At the same time, the rotation is an appreciation of an elaborate 3-D coordinate geometry as a representation of a real object. The 3-d aspect shows that the rotation can be appreciated in 4 dimensions also. In a sense appreciation of a real time interaction can be captured in a mathematical object.

Whether the mathematical object is real or not is a different question. If it is, it is a real representation treated by the same perceptual processes as those required for processing real 3-d objects, stationary or moving. However, perceptual processes are hard-wired and cognitively impenetrable. This suggests mathematical objects which are accessible to consciousness are not real objects, but either generated brain objects in which case they are not real, or an epiphenomenon that is percepually available (and useful). I think the latter is a better explanation at least. The phenomenology of language can be treated in the same way.

 

[Ozzie]

Seyorni, I would like to ask as a separate question: Does scholarly Hindus support the notion of mathematics as a support for their spirituality?

 

[Willamena]

But this would be what they call a "red herring".

To not know that something is correct, is to NOT KNOW. To not know doesn't mean that correctness exists or doesn't exist, it only means that we don't know.
But that isn't what's being said. All that's being said is that we don't know. And interestingly, this would be our logical condition if there were no truth ... not knowing. So in a way, it could be argued that our not knowing is in itself evidence supporting the contention that truth does not exist.

It's not a "red herring," it's just a defense of truth and its associated correctness.

And the claim was that we cannot know something that is "relative," not that we don't know.

 

[Dr. Nosophoros]

The only reason the world is the way it is is because enough people believed someone elses version of the truth, throw it all off and see it for yourself.

 

[doppelganger]

Seyorni, I would like to ask as a separate question: Does scholarly Hindus support the notion of mathematics as a support for their spirituality?

Erwin Schrödinger was a mystic as well as a quantum physicists who found much of quantum mechanics reflected in the Hindu notion of "tat tvam asi" or "you are it."

He wrote:

"Hence this life of yours which you are living is not merely a piece of the entire existence, but is, in a certain sense, the WHOLE; only this whole is not so constituted that it can be surveyed in one single glance. This, as we know, is what the Brahmins express in the sacred, mystic formula which is yet so simple and so clear: 'Tat Tvam asi' this is you...And not merely 'someday'; now, today, every day she is bringing you forth, not once, but thousands upon thousands of times, just as every day she engulfs you a thousand times over. For eternally and always there is only now, one and the same now; the present is the only thing that has no end."

 

[Quiddity]

There was a philosopher whose name eludes me at present. He believed that if someone could believe in something and that is what made it true.

My question: Do you think that if you believe something, that just because you believe that it is true? Do you believe that belief and reality the same thing or two different things?​

I believe the subjective is intended to become objective. The channel being through the human species.

 

[Super Universe]

This is basically true in a way. Believing in something does not make it come true, humans aren't that powerful, but believing in something means it does exist somewhere.

A more accurate description would be to say that if we are able to imagine something then it exists but perhaps not in the exact form we imagine.

The alien creature from the movies may not exist but somewhere a creature may have acidic blood, somewhere else there may be an upright walking creature with a hive mentality, and somewhere else there may be a creature with a second extendable set of teeth.

Here's why, humans cannot create. Humans are not capable of original thought. We take what already exists and we flavor it with a little of this and a little of that and we think it's new while never creating or inventing a thing.

Try an example, think of something original...

Whatever you were able to come up with was an abstract idea that took things that already exist, like perhaps a lime green Volkswagen, filled it with something else that already exists like maybe dirt, then imagined funny plants (that exist) shaped them to look like Arnold Schwartzenegger (exists) but made them grow out of the windows of the car.

Perhaps you would then name this contraption a Schlugeflueter and sell it on E-bay? No one ever thought of that specific configuration of items before but none of it is invented or original. It's completely abstract.

You might think that someone had to come up with an original idea once for the vehicle to exist but it's a natural extension of the bicycle, which is an extension of the wheel, which is an extension of a rolling rock.

 

[PureX]

This is basically true in a way. Believing in something does not make it come true, humans aren't that powerful, but believing in something means it does exist somewhere.

A more accurate description would be to say that if we are able to imagine something then it exists but perhaps not in the exact form we imagine.

The alien creature from the movies may not exist but somewhere a creature may have acidic blood, somewhere else there may be an upright walking creature with a hive mentality, and somewhere else there may be a creature with a second extendable set of teeth.

Here's why, humans cannot create. Humans are not capable of original thought. We take what already exists and we flavor it with a little of this and a little of that and we think it's new while never creating or inventing a thing.

Try an example, think of something original...

Whatever you were able to come up with was an abstract idea that took things that already exist, like perhaps a lime green Volkswagen, filled it with something else that already exists like maybe dirt, then imagined funny plants (that exist) shaped them to look like Arnold Schwartzenegger (exists) but made them grow out of the windows of the car.

Perhaps you would then name this contraption a Schlugeflueter and sell it on E-bay? No one ever thought of that specific configuration of items before but none of it is invented or original. It's completely abstract.

You might think that someone had to come up with an original idea once for the vehicle to exist but it's a natural extension of the bicycle, which is an extension of the wheel, which is an extension of a rolling rock.

This is only one (rather limited) theory.

I think a more plausable view would be that of Gestalt, where the combination of existing ideas form a new idea that is more than just the sum of it's parts; just as a bicycle is so much more than the sum of it's parts. And the evidence for this is the difference between a box full of bicycle parts, and a bicycle. They both contain all the same parts, but the specific integration of those parts can, in the case of the bicycle, become a whole new and wonderful object/idea.

 

[joeboonda]

John 3:16 (King James Version)

16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

If I stand in the road and a truck is coming quickly towards me, about to run over me, I may choose not to believe it, but that will not change the fact that that I am about to be hit by a truck. Therefore, it is of extreme importance we believe the truth, and not false teachings. We must struggle at all costs, without prejudice,to find the truth, for our eternal destiny hangs in the balance. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God! Jesus said that He is the truth, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. Trust Him today without delay!!!

 

[Cynic]

John 3:16 (King James Version)

16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

If I stand in the road and a truck is coming quickly towards me, about to run over me, I may choose not to believe it, but that will not change the fact that that I am about to be hit by a truck. Therefore, it is of extreme importance we believe the truth, and not false teachings. We must struggle at all costs, without prejudice,to find the truth, for our eternal destiny hangs in the balance. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God! Jesus said that He is the truth, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. Trust Him today without delay!!!

How does proselyting add to the discussion?

You are entailing (with certainty) that
- we have an eternal destiny that is hanging in the balance.
-that there is a "living God"
-that Jesus is truth

These are mere beliefs, which do not necessarily conform to reality. If you think they do, then please explain the methodology you've used to arrive to these conclusions.
If you are driving a vehicle, and I told you from the driver's side window that your rear tire is flat, how do you confirm that your tire is flat?
Do you just believe me, do you look for coherency and consistency (i.e. hissing sound, loss of traction), or do you pull over and take a look at the flat tire for yourself? In other words, do you use reason, empiricism, etc, to confirm that you have a flat tire?

 

[joeboonda]

How does proselyting add to the discussion?

You are entailing (with certainty) that
- we have an eternal destiny that is hanging in the balance.
-that there is a "living God"
-that Jesus is truth

These are mere beliefs, which do not necessarily conform to reality. If you think they do, then please explain the methodology you've used to arrive to these conclusions.
If you are driving a vehicle, and I told you from the driver's side window that your rear tire is flat, how do you confirm that your tire is flat?
Do you just believe me, do you look for coherency and consistency (i.e. hissing sound, loss of traction), or do you pull over and take a look at the flat tire for yourself? In other words, do you use reason, empiricism, etc, to confirm that you have a flat tire?

Yes, logic, reason, researching, analyzing, examining prophecies come true, history, archeology, other peoples testimonies and experiences with God, etc. Anything humanly possible to find out if there is a God, if He loves me, if He sent His Son to pay for my sins. I believe if a person searches for God with all their heart, they will find Him, for He is not far from any one of us. But, like a person who refuses to believe man walked on the moon, despite the evidence of film, moon rocks, etc. so one may ignore any evidence for God, although it is all around them.

 

[Cynic]

Yes, logic, reason, researching, analyzing, examining prophecies come true, history, archeology, other peoples testimonies and experiences with God, etc. Anything humanly possible to find out if there is a God, if He loves me, if He sent His Son to pay for my sins. I believe if a person searches for God with all their heart, they will find Him, for He is not far from any one of us. But, like a person who refuses to believe man walked on the moon, despite the evidence of film, moon rocks, etc. so one may ignore any evidence for God, although it is all around them.

Can you give examples of evidence: logical or empirical proofs?

 

[Ernesto]

We all experience reality through a personally biased 'grid'. It is biased because of our experiences, our genes and our assumptions. No two people experience the same world (although some intimate couples may appear to come close); in this sense, all that we perceive is only one's own interpretation, and therefore not technically True Reality. However, the belief in an abstract concept - while it necessitates proof in order for others to believe it -
makes it true in as much as it is true to the holder of the belief.

Much like something Terry Pratchett once wrote: "Belief is the strongest force in the universe. It may not be able to move mountains, but it can create someone who can."

 

[Christiain]

God, for lack of a better word, is equal to X ( ! ) + y ( ? ) + z ( .... )

X marks the spot; but, y does X mark the spot...

What I mean by this is that life, God, The Force, or whatever you call it, NEEDS belief to function. It needs beliefs, strong beliefs to determine where everything and nothing should be or not be.

I wont go as far as saying that this is The Meaning Of Life but it does explain a hell of a lot.

Therefore for I wont say that if you simply believe something that makes it true but I will say that if you believe something strongly enough you and others can and will make it true.

Realising: Making it real

The Mind Matters (Alters Matter) and Matter Minds. What a pain in the arse life can be!