Why can't we have the truth?

[Nietzsche]

Potentially, in the scientific sense of the idea. I don't know too much about what science has to say about it, but I wouldn't reject its findings. I would say that if there were multiple dimensions/universes/whaterver, that they would all still have their own reality just like this universe has its reality, which is unchanging within that system. All of those realities would then exist concretely, and would not be subjective or change from person to person, all things within the system are subject to the reality of that system, and because we cannot hop from one universe to another at will, we cannot change the reality we are in at will.

Let me simplify for everyone here;

Multiple realities does not mean everyone here has their own reality. We exist in a reality. All of us here, in the same reality. Far as we know, no one has pulled a Rick and hopped between alternate realities.

 

[Quintessence]

Potentially, in the scientific sense of the idea. I don't know too much about what science has to say about it, but I wouldn't reject its findings. I would say that if there were multiple dimensions/universes/whaterver, that they would all still have their own reality just like this universe has its reality, which is unchanging within that system. All of those realities would then exist concretely, and would not be subjective or change from person to person, all things within the system are subject to the reality of that system, and because we cannot hop from one universe to another at will, we cannot change the reality we are in at will.
But this, or really any of the stuff about personal realities has nothing to do with my OP.

If we think about it a bit, discussions about the nature of reality do relate to questions about truth. We often define what "truth" is on the basis of what we define "reality" to be, right?

In the context of things like religious experiences in particular, it seems to me people functionally exist within their own little personal universes or realities that can be said to change from person to person. The territory is the same - we could say it doesn't change (or at least we believe that is so) - but anything we believe we know about territory gets filtered through our own biases and becomes subjective. Maps of territory. I suppose some people believe humans can know the territory somehow. That's something I have a hard time wrapping my head around. Of course, these same people don't tend to believe there is a maps/territory distinction at all, so maybe that is it. They don't see a difference between the chair and how they experience the chair and think about the chair. And who knows, maybe there isn't one? It seems like there is to me, so I go with it. That has worked out pretty well so far.

 

[Quintessence]

Let me simplify for everyone here;

Multiple realities does not mean everyone here has their own reality. We exist in a reality. All of us here, in the same reality. Far as we know, no one has pulled a Rick and hopped between alternate realities.

What do you think about journeywork, Nietzsche?

Maybe I should explain that a bit. It's not uncommon for Pagan cultures to have had a conception of an "other" world or worlds that could be experienced or journeyed to. Things like Shamanic practice and the like are used to facilitate those journeys, though there are also other traditions and such. They do hop between or experience "alternate realities" like you talk about here. How would you regard that sort of thing? Or maybe it is not a thing for you?

 

[lovesong]

I don't know why it decided to un-color some of your quotes, gah!

If we think about it a bit, discussions about the nature of reality do relate to questions about truth. We often define what "truth" is on the basis of what we define "reality" to be, right?

I was more asking why Pagans are expected to have the subjective worldview, why it's looked at as a taboo for us to have an objective view of things. I wasn't trying to get into a whole thing about the views themselves, but about the expectations and stereotypes we have that say we should think X, Y, or Z. But I see how one can naturally lead to the other, so fair enough I guess.

In the context of things like religious experiences in particular, it seems to me people functionally exist within their own little personal universes or realities that can be said to change from person to person. The territory is the same - we could say it doesn't change (or at least we believe that is so) - but anything we believe we know about territory gets filtered through our own biases and becomes subjective. Maps of territory. I suppose some people believe humans can know the territory somehow. That's something I have a hard time wrapping my head around. Of course, these same people don't tend to believe there is a maps/territory distinction at all, so maybe that is it. They don't see a difference between the chair and how they experience the chair and think about the chair. And who knows, maybe there isn't one? It seems like there is to me, so I go with it. That has worked out pretty well so far.

Gah! This is the thing with different worldviews, they can be so tricky to understand. You're confused about how my ideas would work, and I'm confused about how yours would work. I want to figure out what you're getting at, I really do, the idea sounds like an interesting brain puzzle. I'll be thinking about this for a while, believe me!

What do you think about journeywork, Nietzsche?

Maybe I should explain that a bit. It's not uncommon for Pagan cultures to have had a conception of an "other" world or worlds that could be experienced or journeyed to. Things like Shamanic practice and the like are used to facilitate those journeys, though there are also other traditions and such. They do hop between or experience "alternate realities" like you talk about here. How would you regard that sort of thing? Or maybe it is not a thing for you?

This wasn't to me but I hope you don't mind me chiming in anyway. Personally I consider those places to still be part of our universe/dimension/system/whatever. They aren't visible to us as we move throughout the day because of the limitations of the physical body, but that doesn't mean they are different dimensions or separate realities. I consider them part of our reality, but just as we cannot see atoms or sound waves without certain machinery, we cannot see the other planes without the appropriate tools/techniques.

 

[Quintessence]

I was more asking why Pagans are expected to have the subjective worldview, why it's looked at as a taboo for us to have an objective view of things.

Apologies - my brain has a tendency to skip a few paces laterally on topics and see how some big-picture things relate to the topic. That, and I suppose I don't share this taboo; perhaps because in my experience, Pagans have been grounded yet flexible on these things. Some lean more one way than the other. Hell, which way I lean depends on the day of the week, apparently.

Gah! This is the thing with different worldviews, they can be so tricky to understand. You're confused about how my ideas would work, and I'm confused about how yours would work. I want to figure out what you're getting at, I really do, the idea sounds like an interesting brain puzzle. I'll be thinking about this for a while, believe me!

In many respects, it's supposed to be a puzzle. I don't have the answer to it either. As mentioned earlier, part of the point is for it to remind me of other things - of the importance of humility, of the limits of knowledge, of the spectacular wonder and mystery of our world. Like many stories, it isn't necessarily the literal words of the story that are the most important, but the mindset that emerges from it. Perhaps I can blame the adults who, when I was a child, were always going on about how such and such was "impossible." I hated that word. I felt that they lacked imagination. Still do. Imagination can take you anywhere you can imagine and let you do anything you can imagine. Adults don't take imagination seriously enough.

This wasn't to me but I hope you don't mind me chiming in anyway. Personally I consider those places to still be part of our universe/dimension/system/whatever. They aren't visible to us as we move throughout the day because of the limitations of the physical body, but that doesn't mean they are different dimensions or separate realities. I consider them part of our reality, but just as we cannot see atoms or sound waves without certain machinery, we cannot see the other planes without the appropriate tools/techniques.

That's fair. I'm not sure how one divides up reality either. Ultimately how we slice the pie is an artifice. It's likely that no two of us approach doing that in precisely the same way.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

This is going to be a bit of an unstructured rant, it's been on my mind lately and I just wanted to get it out there.

Why is it assumed that we, as Pagans of various sorts, have to accept the idea of subjective truth? It seems like it is the expectation that Pagans will say things along the lines of "what's true for you is true for you, and what's true for me is true for me," or "everyone has to find their own truth,"? It seems as if, while every (or most) other religion is allowed (meaning it's expected or more socially acceptable) to proclaim that they have the truth, we are not? Sure, we can say that we believe we have the truth, but that seems almost like a taboo. Is it because we have the stereotype of being pacifistic and open to everyone, or because of the new age influences that seem to have shaped what other's expect from us? Or is it simply because we're in such a minority that we're expected to tuck our tails between our legs?

What do you think? Do you, deep down, believe that you really do have the truth, or do you genuinely hold the idea of subjective truth? Why do you think that the later is what's most often expected of us?

When an ant crawls up your car tire and under your hood, can it know the true purpose of the transmission? Would it be capable of understanding?

Big T truth is a white whale. Anyone that says they understand what is going on in a greater metaphysical context is lying, or deluded.