wellwisher
Well-Known Member
Our "objective" knowledge is based on foundation premises at a point in time. For example, at one time, the earth was assumed to be flat. At that time, this foundation premise structured the mind in terms of how logic needed to be applied to observation, for that logic to be considered objective.
If the earth was flat; hypothetically, and you sailed to the end, you would fall off. This is logically consist with the foundation premise, and therefore would appear objective, since there is no flaw in the rules of reason. However, at a deeper level, the assumed objectivity was actually contingent on a foundation premise, that was subjective; in our time, but was treated as objective; in its own time.
Part of the temporal problem has to do with prestige. You can climb the company ladder of science and philosophy, easier, if you accept its temporal foundation premises. If you disagree and/or depart, thereby changing any foundation premise, your conclusion will vary, using logic, and the system will turn against you. The subjectivity of prestige plays a big role in temporal objectivity. A good modern example is man made global warming. Consider that happens if you dare to depart
The brain process data, not only in 2-D; logic via cause and affect, but also in 3-D. The left brain is more 2-D and the right brain is more 3-D. We can use the left brain to process logic, even if the premises are not valid. The logical structure can still be good, even with bad premises. Foundation premises are very unique, in that like a foundation, these support all the logical weight above. These foundation premise are often take for granted. Most are not even be conscious to most people, since how often do you go in to the cellar. Most live in the upper rooms of the house.
The way the two sides of the brain relate can be seen with an example. Thoughts that are 3-D, are analogous to a ball. It has depth, width and height. We can approximate the 3-D ball with a larger number of 2-D planes, each with a common center, and each at a different angle. See below. This diagram shows how temporal objectivity relates to 3-D objective truth.
Objective truth is spatial or 3-D, while logical opinions are like the planes used to approximate the 3-D ball. Each opinion will express some objective truth, but not the entire truth. The entire truth is approximated by the sum of all the opinions. These discussion forums are a way to simulate 3-D; ideas at different angles on a common center or topic.
For example, Democrats and Republicans both have their own foundation premises and each express truth but neither has the entire truth. As shown below, each plane is plotted is part of the 3-D image of the right brain. This overlap allows us to intuitively feel the 3-D truth of the ball. This induced 3-D feeling is often mistaken as meaning our 2-D plane is the entire3-D ball; conscious merged with unconsciousness.
Real 3-D thought; the whole truth, is different. It behaves by it own type of 3-D logic. As an analogy, picture if the ball above was a golf ball. I take a golf club and I drive it down the fairway. The ball will deform in 3-D following natural laws for 3-D deformation.
In terms of the many rational planes, these will become twisted and knocked out of their planes. This mind dynamics would be considered irrational, since the logic of the 2-D plane breaks down. Others will call it a statistical aberration. But at the same time, since the deformed 2-D planes still overlap the intuitive feeling; deformed 3-D, the feeling will changes due to the deformation in 3-D. Our belief systems can rocked at the level of its foundation premises, as a foreboding of change appears.
When Newton looked at the solar system with his telescope, his data smacked the3-D ball with a golf club. Rational planes were knock out of place, since the old foundation premises were in question due to the logic of the plane becoming deformed in 3-D. It took a while to change due to the hierarchy of prestige having a capacitance that continued to reform the old plane. Some members of science accepted the deformation and the need for new foundation premises, so the new age began. But this was not an easy path, since the change threatened the prestige of the status quo, which tried to reform the old plane with bandaids.
If the earth was flat; hypothetically, and you sailed to the end, you would fall off. This is logically consist with the foundation premise, and therefore would appear objective, since there is no flaw in the rules of reason. However, at a deeper level, the assumed objectivity was actually contingent on a foundation premise, that was subjective; in our time, but was treated as objective; in its own time.
Part of the temporal problem has to do with prestige. You can climb the company ladder of science and philosophy, easier, if you accept its temporal foundation premises. If you disagree and/or depart, thereby changing any foundation premise, your conclusion will vary, using logic, and the system will turn against you. The subjectivity of prestige plays a big role in temporal objectivity. A good modern example is man made global warming. Consider that happens if you dare to depart
The brain process data, not only in 2-D; logic via cause and affect, but also in 3-D. The left brain is more 2-D and the right brain is more 3-D. We can use the left brain to process logic, even if the premises are not valid. The logical structure can still be good, even with bad premises. Foundation premises are very unique, in that like a foundation, these support all the logical weight above. These foundation premise are often take for granted. Most are not even be conscious to most people, since how often do you go in to the cellar. Most live in the upper rooms of the house.
The way the two sides of the brain relate can be seen with an example. Thoughts that are 3-D, are analogous to a ball. It has depth, width and height. We can approximate the 3-D ball with a larger number of 2-D planes, each with a common center, and each at a different angle. See below. This diagram shows how temporal objectivity relates to 3-D objective truth.
Objective truth is spatial or 3-D, while logical opinions are like the planes used to approximate the 3-D ball. Each opinion will express some objective truth, but not the entire truth. The entire truth is approximated by the sum of all the opinions. These discussion forums are a way to simulate 3-D; ideas at different angles on a common center or topic.
For example, Democrats and Republicans both have their own foundation premises and each express truth but neither has the entire truth. As shown below, each plane is plotted is part of the 3-D image of the right brain. This overlap allows us to intuitively feel the 3-D truth of the ball. This induced 3-D feeling is often mistaken as meaning our 2-D plane is the entire3-D ball; conscious merged with unconsciousness.
Real 3-D thought; the whole truth, is different. It behaves by it own type of 3-D logic. As an analogy, picture if the ball above was a golf ball. I take a golf club and I drive it down the fairway. The ball will deform in 3-D following natural laws for 3-D deformation.
In terms of the many rational planes, these will become twisted and knocked out of their planes. This mind dynamics would be considered irrational, since the logic of the 2-D plane breaks down. Others will call it a statistical aberration. But at the same time, since the deformed 2-D planes still overlap the intuitive feeling; deformed 3-D, the feeling will changes due to the deformation in 3-D. Our belief systems can rocked at the level of its foundation premises, as a foreboding of change appears.
When Newton looked at the solar system with his telescope, his data smacked the3-D ball with a golf club. Rational planes were knock out of place, since the old foundation premises were in question due to the logic of the plane becoming deformed in 3-D. It took a while to change due to the hierarchy of prestige having a capacitance that continued to reform the old plane. Some members of science accepted the deformation and the need for new foundation premises, so the new age began. But this was not an easy path, since the change threatened the prestige of the status quo, which tried to reform the old plane with bandaids.
Last edited:
