The Truth Unlimited
When we speak of an objective truth we now know we actually mean a third party construct of a subjective truth that has acquired mass appeal. Objective truths can seem emotional and they are, the idea of god is an emotional idea in so far as god is concerned about love and equally quick to anger. The idea of justice has obvious secularize appeal but it is still based on the third party accumulation of subjective circumstances against an individual, further it equals revenge and it is based on fear, thus such thing as justice is an objective truth that has mass appeal because it doesn’t forgive it punishes. The idea of a country as a secular organization is highly suspect as countries inspire patriotism and can serve to create rivalries between distinctive cultures that hide themselves behind the idea of nationalism and geography. Culture itself has its own demarking prejudices and in fact it is wholly based on prejudices that have historical roots, the customs of a given tribe can serve up some striking personifications that may well terrorize outside of their silent cultural sphere, that is to say culture becomes vocal and aggressive when it is not natively intuitive.
Reviewing the above we can conclude another thing about objective truth, it hinges on the emotional aspects of the humanity that personifies it. And since we have called an objective truth a type of truth then it shall not escape us that there are other types of truths, personal truth, subjective truth, environmental truth, idealistic and secular truths etc.
A personal truth is the most interesting character of them all as it presumably serves the individual in highly ambitions terms, those of the self, what I am going to make of myself, what I feel I am, how I project myself to world and how I come to terms with the objective reality. By all means this truth is the most ambiguous as it does not have a great deal of potency outside of the subjective character that defines it, I happen to think while writing this book that I am a good, well a damn good philosopher and this is my third philosophy book so my pretensions are admirable only that I have not been published, never, that is to say that the objective and secular environment has neither acquired my philosophical principles nor thought them necessary so as to explore them, the likelihood that I will die an unpublished and thus unfulfilled philosopher is most probable, so that the implications of my philosophy may have no occurrences in the real world, thus most people live and die without their personal truth having any effect on the real world; but that is not to say that it hasn’t cost them, indeed my trials in my determination to make a philosopher out of myself have been constant and not negligent in stature, certainly my life has been more difficult for it but the world is not less nor much more for it hitherto, this is because if the world felt any need for my philosophy it would adopt it either through me or through another facsimile construct.
It shouldn’t come as a surprise that there is a difference between a secular truth and an objective truth so we shall attempt some clarity on the matter. We already know an objective truth is a third party construct with mass appeal but a secular truth is a whole other animal it is a truth without any emotion to it, it is a centrist, it is nondenominational, that is it caters to all but it doesn’t require faith from any! This types of truths do not know how to hurt, they don’t uptake offence, a perfect example of a secular truth is knowledge and its attribute education, in theory anyone can get an education to practice a given secular profession regardless of their culture, religious leanings or political affiliations, you could see a Muslim and a Jew practicing medicine in the same hospital, you could readily accept an Atheist and a Christian both being pilots, their secularized professions allow them to come from different cultures and from different belief systems and still practice same professions, this is because professions as a result of education and a product of knowledge have been secularized, the same would not be true for a Priestess of witchcraft, her profession requires an entanglements of faith that has no room for either objectivity or secularization, it is thus riddle with constrains that secularize professions do not suffer and thus this tends to gain them grater acceptance from the masses.
The key to any secularization is that the participation process be open and highly accessible, that is anyone can go to a university as long as they pass the entrance exam and there is occupancy. The process is open you just have to pass the test and at least in principle anyone can pass the test if they study hard enough, thus secular truths dominate a wide spectrum and do so because they are presumptuous but not dogmatic. But let us hang in there a little bit longer for there is that word presumptuous and that sort of adds that nice element of personalization that secularization is usually able to avoid, that presumption comes in its meritocratic stance, anyone may participate but then the assumption is that everyone has the potential to acquire knowledge and to reach the same results that are endemic to it, that is we assume that Your IQ and My IQ and the IQ of Einstein are potentially equal in nature, and it is jus a certain amount of effort and training that will allow their true development, such however, and we can kill it here, is not the case; the case is that I cannot pass exams, the truth is that any IQ test I take would prove an unfavorable IQ outcome, and it doesn’t matter how much I study - knowledge is not native to my brain specification; and You, well you probably can learn and are probably trainable but that doesn’t mean that you could be an Einstein, instead you are just smarter than me, that is all; and get this wonderful fact, the only way that a knowledge based meritocracy can keep up its image is by falsely telling us all that it is an instrument that any and all can learn to use while it equally remains elitists, so as not to say down right arrogant, in practice.
A PhD is a proud human being and society as a whole elevates such in status and rewards accordingly but this is so because the doctor is an estimable part of a prestigious clan, the clan itself will protect the profession by regulating how many may participate, what must be done to join, and what will be taught of the subject matter and how the practice will be executed, further this clan will lobby on its behalf to promote causes and laws pertinent to its interest, and so there you have the secularized personified; a secular scientists that is also an evolutionist might not want creationism being taught at school because it desecularizes knowledge, however the very impediment of the teaching of religious concepts will invariably imply that the secular are not truly secularize. Further it is important to note that in order to teach one must first deconstruct and categorize a process that largely takes out feeling, desexualizes and sterilizes any given subject, so that in fact any religion taught at school is bound to be secular in that it could technically be taught by either an Atheist or a Christian in a course of comparative religion, implying of course that it has been depersonalized and it is thus less inclined to move students towards worship and subjective practice. In a sense the process of curriculum development favors the suspension of belief and creates a critical thought process that is able to cynically disembody any belief system; thus secularized fears of the teaching of creationism are unfounded as based on their own principles, but not unfounded as based on their own vital advancements in the art of pedagogy, the mysticism of epistemology and basic curriculum development.
Of course the truth is unlimited and so we must reach some truths which appear so unlimited that they become suspect, an all knowing god, an omnipotent god, a perilous devil, then there is myth, an incredulous truth, or the idea that there are spirits and alien civilizations and even quantum falls into the category of incredulous truths.
We must circumvent this topic with the outmost caution, there is no way for us to say that myth is false without equally calling into question Greek and Nordic mythology much to the devastation of those peoples whose civilizations thrived so successfully because of those very beliefs. That is we can say myth is myth and therefore not real but the fact is that the origins peoples didn’t think of myth as myth rather they believed these were there gods flaws and all, we can safely assume that they would think of our idea of a perfect mono-god, supreme being as equally doubtful, there is no such a perfect god, both the Greeks and Norse had doable gods, they were imperfect in every way, why they even committed adultery and slept with humans, the Greek and Nordic gods were thus supportable in the context of reality and undoubtedly in every sense of the word, including the sworn sword matchable with reality.
Idealistic truth is a whole other thing, even as religion might have idealistic objectives, the perfect god and nirvana they are still real in the context that they speak on behalf of an emotional interest of well being while idealistic truths such as those of Hegel and Marx and Adam Smith tend to cater to premises that are depersonalized and cleverly inspirational purely at the intellectual level; a place where there is no other factor of probable satisfaction except that everything go according to plan, thus a pure capitalistic expression may supply society with a working economic system but it doesn’t provide a humanistic expression that could make it tolerable if genuinely successful, thus the reason why you haven’t witnessed a capitalistic system reach pure perfection, it has in it an inherent tendency to self destruct because its third party construct depersonalizes it and thus, as it reaches critical mass, becomes unsustainable by its own premises because it is intolerable to the individual.
Religion as a whole is a personalized construct, it cannot be depersonalized even as it thus have a certain degree of third party truth which invades its personalize purity, the difference however is that religion can be subjective and prejudice where capitalism cannot be prejudice, communism equally suffers the same deficiencies, this objectifies them to the point where they have the, perhaps unrealized potential, to serve absolutely no one in particular and without that personalize self interest then they will invariably tend to depersonalize their followers into generic constructs which can only cater to, for instance, intellectuals that have an interest in killing emotion so as to be genuinely smart; these turns them into rational constructs that cannot have a prejudice because that would destabilize their intellectual construct and you cannot, though many people have done it, but you cannot die for an intellectual construct, this is why Stalin had to forcefully sacrifice the Russian people for the sake of communism, and also why in the reverse why it is not difficult to get Christians and Muslims to starve or die for their causes.
One of the most idealized truths and yet the least likely to obtain its objective is the idea of Justice, where truth will prevail and that implies that Justice itself is Just. We cannot hit hard enough on the mythic proportions of this idea, it assumes that Justice is naturally just and not tied in some unforgiving way to the system or systems from which it arises. The fact of the matter, I love saying that, the fact of the matter is that Justice is subjective to culture, a Muslim brother might not feel that justice has been done until he has stoned his sister to death for cheating on her husband, her husband might not feel vindicated till the dowry has been properly returned with interest and apology in hand, it is said that some warriors when they were caught by the sacrifice abundant Aztecs did not feel right if they were not ritually sacrificed, it is all Justice under some guise, there is no such thing as universal justice, thus any type of justice is only secular in the sense that it serves its nation and culture but hardly secular once it encompasses International or Universal objectives. Justice will always claim to serve all, and it serves Justice well to serve the most and greatest number, but Justice itself will have a difficult time defining its laws based on the majority, thus it has to narrow its approach to law and laws to what it can be an overview of general opportunistic views. Further any form of Justice is largely based on the hardened code of Justice, that is for Justice Lawyers, Judges, Courts, Law Clerks, and Constitutions and more important Laws and Law Schools will all be more important to Justice than the Justice of a given individual circumstance. Hence the reason why you will some times find Justice taking the side of criminals or the side of political righteousness, as that might well be more important to show how secularized Law and Justice truly are, that is to say that some execution of justice is a justification of same.
Idealism is thus the least possible of all truths and the least real, far les real that mythical truth, there can be witches and leprechauns that is far more possible than that there is a perfect god, the problem, I think you can see it already, the problem with the perfect god is that it is idealistic, however religion is saved from its idealism by one incredible factor its followers continue to sin and through sin personalize religious truth.
And because of that fact, that when people personalize something it becomes more credible we can reach the conclusion that the truth of the real world that we have today, a world of 6 billion people, a world where millions starve to death, a world where there are millions of aborted babies, and millions of displaced, a world where 3 percent of the overall populace lives with great wealth and impunity, a world in which the great number toil while a few serve as the professional servants of the system, a world where religions have become monopolies and where the construct of the flow of capital has become the dominant theme, that world where the metaphysical has been killed by scientists sporting only provable truths, only empirical and axiomatic truths, that world where health care is an option, that world where nutrition is not part of the general diet, that world must be the most real incarnation possible of a real truth based on the all encompassing compromises imaginable, that is the truth that has been to the greatest degree personalized and accepted and thus has reached the maximum mass tolerant appeal possible under the gripping circumstance of the overall construct of reality which no one in particular may grasp, including how the metaphysical and the material and the unknown and the known and ultimately with the nothingness where all these coalesce in regions of extreme obscurity for us to manage or regulate, all come together in a sinew permissible in hell.
That however does not mean that we are doomed to a preordained destiny, deterministic outcomes are those that the scientific world predicts, but unfortunately as not everything is controlled by science and its physics the reality overcomes those limitations, there isn’t a deterministic universe because no one entity has absolute control of the variables and the potential is constantly reengineering itself to produce any number of possible outcomes all of which get washed away every pico second and recombine to make yet something completely different possible, the causality of existence is thus total and absolute, we have ended in this possible reality and we have been part of the bricks that concretize it, but equally the amount of time in existence that you can expect of this reality could be equally insignificant in the context of all and everything.
Further we can not discount Quantum truth from the equation and its uncertainty principle which basically turn scientific proof into a fancy of observations, and I am willing to accept that kind of fanciful truth as it allows us to doubt ourselves indefinitely and substantially; still I am aware that the truth of self doubt is equally inherently unstable and worse it is cynically stable, so we should always endeavor to believe in something as that has a greater degree of observation but equally we must be aware that to not believe in something in particular does create a Quantum truth of uncertainty and doubt, what you see is what you get.
Now since we have contrived this truths and the truths then acquire a life of their own, and mind you that when we say we have contrived these truths, we mean along with everything that is not us and how that has equally contrived these truths, then you have your obtained reality and its changeable potential, thus we have the ability to impact upon any truth by mere process of belief and by the process by which we convince others and coerce the environment to adopt our truths, the success of Einstein has more to do with his ability to present the argument in convincing terms than in any truth inherent within the proofs that he offered, and of course he didn’t offer any proofs but was more arrogant than that, he knew we would convince ourselves because frankly relativity is very likable, but more important and less kind towards Einstein, the world had already inherited the truth that he merely read out.
Which brings us to a terrible and difficult aspect of these truth things, and that is that since we cannot stress the reality beyond the potential constructs that have formalized its believable structure, we come to the truth that matters most, the moral truth, and it matters most because it is wholly and fundamentally personalized to our emotive species and being constructs, and the moral truth tells us that there is something wrong with the world, tells us that some how the world is not in order with our endemic truth, or that our endemic truth is contradictory in how it manifest itself in the construct of world, into the civic and social and even across species interdependencies and relationships, and so you have a magnificent proof that there is a truth that is pure to you and reaches contradiction when you touch the material or even the metaphysical world, and that truth cannot reach harmony in this world and certainly not as the manifestation that you are in it!
Still there is a certain buoyancy factor that should and ought to stabilize to a greater degree your relationship with universe because the universe seeks congruence through energy simmerings and moral simmerings and civic and international simmerings so that all things may coalesce with the working parts that they share in their inherent evolution from pure constructs, which though different may in fact have communality in spirit, of course that is a misuse of the word spirit but sometimes one has to be abusive to speak the truth.
As a result it is possible to imagine that all things are trying to find a similar truth, even if that truth is as boring as a further simmering, and that that truth is defined by communality and not by discrepancy and thus the fact that there is discomfort for all in the context of universe means that we are still struggling and that the truth as currently defined condones that struggle and that an alternative truth is equally being thought by all the things being and non being that are observing, touching, feeling and interacting with one another as part of today’s fatal truth. And we know this not just due to the incongruence between the environment and ourselves, we know it more for the divisions and stresses that mince between emotive same species and species at large.
Thus all this mean that there are no objective truths? That is to say truths that don’t depend on us? Truths that exists outside of us? Truths that are so independent that they don’t really care if they affect our lives? For one thing is clear Justice and Knowledge and Religious truths care about how they effect our lives, that is what makes them fundamentally subjective but are there truths outside of us, truly autonomous to our whims and wants and desires?
Unfortunately the answer to that is yes!
There are more truths that don’t care about us and don’t need us than there are truths that care about us, in fact there is nothing that makes us supreme or special in the universe, the universe could well do without us, our race to the finish is to make the universe dependant upon our ideals and values, we don’t much care about anyone else’s idea of the universe, and thus it is so that we are aiming to encrust and to harden our ideals in the context of universe so that all those other truths that do not favor us will cease to exists or have to warm up to us. We are one of a kind truth in the universe, we are a compact sort of truth, but we are not the only kind of truth that the universe harbors, and all the other truths are technically hostile, though we might have our endeavor to survive and to express and to have an emotive and conscious existence, that is not the same as to say that we have shared interests, we don’t, the fact that it is so difficult for us to travel to another galaxy or that it is so difficult for us to survive in a basic material existence, that is our longevity is short, those are signs that we are not and cannot survive in the truly objective truth, all objective truths by definition do not support our existence, they don’t care about us, that is precisely why scientific obsession with truths outside of our emotive reality are so harmful to us, science is asking us to believe in things that are wholly independent of us, this even as science and its practitioners are wholly dependant on us believing them.
ricardo
Reviewing the above we can conclude another thing about objective truth, it hinges on the emotional aspects of the humanity that personifies it. And since we have called an objective truth a type of truth then it shall not escape us that there are other types of truths, personal truth, subjective truth, environmental truth, idealistic and secular truths etc.
A personal truth is the most interesting character of them all as it presumably serves the individual in highly ambitions terms, those of the self, what I am going to make of myself, what I feel I am, how I project myself to world and how I come to terms with the objective reality. By all means this truth is the most ambiguous as it does not have a great deal of potency outside of the subjective character that defines it, I happen to think while writing this book that I am a good, well a damn good philosopher and this is my third philosophy book so my pretensions are admirable only that I have not been published, never, that is to say that the objective and secular environment has neither acquired my philosophical principles nor thought them necessary so as to explore them, the likelihood that I will die an unpublished and thus unfulfilled philosopher is most probable, so that the implications of my philosophy may have no occurrences in the real world, thus most people live and die without their personal truth having any effect on the real world; but that is not to say that it hasn’t cost them, indeed my trials in my determination to make a philosopher out of myself have been constant and not negligent in stature, certainly my life has been more difficult for it but the world is not less nor much more for it hitherto, this is because if the world felt any need for my philosophy it would adopt it either through me or through another facsimile construct.
It shouldn’t come as a surprise that there is a difference between a secular truth and an objective truth so we shall attempt some clarity on the matter. We already know an objective truth is a third party construct with mass appeal but a secular truth is a whole other animal it is a truth without any emotion to it, it is a centrist, it is nondenominational, that is it caters to all but it doesn’t require faith from any! This types of truths do not know how to hurt, they don’t uptake offence, a perfect example of a secular truth is knowledge and its attribute education, in theory anyone can get an education to practice a given secular profession regardless of their culture, religious leanings or political affiliations, you could see a Muslim and a Jew practicing medicine in the same hospital, you could readily accept an Atheist and a Christian both being pilots, their secularized professions allow them to come from different cultures and from different belief systems and still practice same professions, this is because professions as a result of education and a product of knowledge have been secularized, the same would not be true for a Priestess of witchcraft, her profession requires an entanglements of faith that has no room for either objectivity or secularization, it is thus riddle with constrains that secularize professions do not suffer and thus this tends to gain them grater acceptance from the masses.
The key to any secularization is that the participation process be open and highly accessible, that is anyone can go to a university as long as they pass the entrance exam and there is occupancy. The process is open you just have to pass the test and at least in principle anyone can pass the test if they study hard enough, thus secular truths dominate a wide spectrum and do so because they are presumptuous but not dogmatic. But let us hang in there a little bit longer for there is that word presumptuous and that sort of adds that nice element of personalization that secularization is usually able to avoid, that presumption comes in its meritocratic stance, anyone may participate but then the assumption is that everyone has the potential to acquire knowledge and to reach the same results that are endemic to it, that is we assume that Your IQ and My IQ and the IQ of Einstein are potentially equal in nature, and it is jus a certain amount of effort and training that will allow their true development, such however, and we can kill it here, is not the case; the case is that I cannot pass exams, the truth is that any IQ test I take would prove an unfavorable IQ outcome, and it doesn’t matter how much I study - knowledge is not native to my brain specification; and You, well you probably can learn and are probably trainable but that doesn’t mean that you could be an Einstein, instead you are just smarter than me, that is all; and get this wonderful fact, the only way that a knowledge based meritocracy can keep up its image is by falsely telling us all that it is an instrument that any and all can learn to use while it equally remains elitists, so as not to say down right arrogant, in practice.
A PhD is a proud human being and society as a whole elevates such in status and rewards accordingly but this is so because the doctor is an estimable part of a prestigious clan, the clan itself will protect the profession by regulating how many may participate, what must be done to join, and what will be taught of the subject matter and how the practice will be executed, further this clan will lobby on its behalf to promote causes and laws pertinent to its interest, and so there you have the secularized personified; a secular scientists that is also an evolutionist might not want creationism being taught at school because it desecularizes knowledge, however the very impediment of the teaching of religious concepts will invariably imply that the secular are not truly secularize. Further it is important to note that in order to teach one must first deconstruct and categorize a process that largely takes out feeling, desexualizes and sterilizes any given subject, so that in fact any religion taught at school is bound to be secular in that it could technically be taught by either an Atheist or a Christian in a course of comparative religion, implying of course that it has been depersonalized and it is thus less inclined to move students towards worship and subjective practice. In a sense the process of curriculum development favors the suspension of belief and creates a critical thought process that is able to cynically disembody any belief system; thus secularized fears of the teaching of creationism are unfounded as based on their own principles, but not unfounded as based on their own vital advancements in the art of pedagogy, the mysticism of epistemology and basic curriculum development.
Of course the truth is unlimited and so we must reach some truths which appear so unlimited that they become suspect, an all knowing god, an omnipotent god, a perilous devil, then there is myth, an incredulous truth, or the idea that there are spirits and alien civilizations and even quantum falls into the category of incredulous truths.
We must circumvent this topic with the outmost caution, there is no way for us to say that myth is false without equally calling into question Greek and Nordic mythology much to the devastation of those peoples whose civilizations thrived so successfully because of those very beliefs. That is we can say myth is myth and therefore not real but the fact is that the origins peoples didn’t think of myth as myth rather they believed these were there gods flaws and all, we can safely assume that they would think of our idea of a perfect mono-god, supreme being as equally doubtful, there is no such a perfect god, both the Greeks and Norse had doable gods, they were imperfect in every way, why they even committed adultery and slept with humans, the Greek and Nordic gods were thus supportable in the context of reality and undoubtedly in every sense of the word, including the sworn sword matchable with reality.
Idealistic truth is a whole other thing, even as religion might have idealistic objectives, the perfect god and nirvana they are still real in the context that they speak on behalf of an emotional interest of well being while idealistic truths such as those of Hegel and Marx and Adam Smith tend to cater to premises that are depersonalized and cleverly inspirational purely at the intellectual level; a place where there is no other factor of probable satisfaction except that everything go according to plan, thus a pure capitalistic expression may supply society with a working economic system but it doesn’t provide a humanistic expression that could make it tolerable if genuinely successful, thus the reason why you haven’t witnessed a capitalistic system reach pure perfection, it has in it an inherent tendency to self destruct because its third party construct depersonalizes it and thus, as it reaches critical mass, becomes unsustainable by its own premises because it is intolerable to the individual.
Religion as a whole is a personalized construct, it cannot be depersonalized even as it thus have a certain degree of third party truth which invades its personalize purity, the difference however is that religion can be subjective and prejudice where capitalism cannot be prejudice, communism equally suffers the same deficiencies, this objectifies them to the point where they have the, perhaps unrealized potential, to serve absolutely no one in particular and without that personalize self interest then they will invariably tend to depersonalize their followers into generic constructs which can only cater to, for instance, intellectuals that have an interest in killing emotion so as to be genuinely smart; these turns them into rational constructs that cannot have a prejudice because that would destabilize their intellectual construct and you cannot, though many people have done it, but you cannot die for an intellectual construct, this is why Stalin had to forcefully sacrifice the Russian people for the sake of communism, and also why in the reverse why it is not difficult to get Christians and Muslims to starve or die for their causes.
One of the most idealized truths and yet the least likely to obtain its objective is the idea of Justice, where truth will prevail and that implies that Justice itself is Just. We cannot hit hard enough on the mythic proportions of this idea, it assumes that Justice is naturally just and not tied in some unforgiving way to the system or systems from which it arises. The fact of the matter, I love saying that, the fact of the matter is that Justice is subjective to culture, a Muslim brother might not feel that justice has been done until he has stoned his sister to death for cheating on her husband, her husband might not feel vindicated till the dowry has been properly returned with interest and apology in hand, it is said that some warriors when they were caught by the sacrifice abundant Aztecs did not feel right if they were not ritually sacrificed, it is all Justice under some guise, there is no such thing as universal justice, thus any type of justice is only secular in the sense that it serves its nation and culture but hardly secular once it encompasses International or Universal objectives. Justice will always claim to serve all, and it serves Justice well to serve the most and greatest number, but Justice itself will have a difficult time defining its laws based on the majority, thus it has to narrow its approach to law and laws to what it can be an overview of general opportunistic views. Further any form of Justice is largely based on the hardened code of Justice, that is for Justice Lawyers, Judges, Courts, Law Clerks, and Constitutions and more important Laws and Law Schools will all be more important to Justice than the Justice of a given individual circumstance. Hence the reason why you will some times find Justice taking the side of criminals or the side of political righteousness, as that might well be more important to show how secularized Law and Justice truly are, that is to say that some execution of justice is a justification of same.
Idealism is thus the least possible of all truths and the least real, far les real that mythical truth, there can be witches and leprechauns that is far more possible than that there is a perfect god, the problem, I think you can see it already, the problem with the perfect god is that it is idealistic, however religion is saved from its idealism by one incredible factor its followers continue to sin and through sin personalize religious truth.
And because of that fact, that when people personalize something it becomes more credible we can reach the conclusion that the truth of the real world that we have today, a world of 6 billion people, a world where millions starve to death, a world where there are millions of aborted babies, and millions of displaced, a world where 3 percent of the overall populace lives with great wealth and impunity, a world in which the great number toil while a few serve as the professional servants of the system, a world where religions have become monopolies and where the construct of the flow of capital has become the dominant theme, that world where the metaphysical has been killed by scientists sporting only provable truths, only empirical and axiomatic truths, that world where health care is an option, that world where nutrition is not part of the general diet, that world must be the most real incarnation possible of a real truth based on the all encompassing compromises imaginable, that is the truth that has been to the greatest degree personalized and accepted and thus has reached the maximum mass tolerant appeal possible under the gripping circumstance of the overall construct of reality which no one in particular may grasp, including how the metaphysical and the material and the unknown and the known and ultimately with the nothingness where all these coalesce in regions of extreme obscurity for us to manage or regulate, all come together in a sinew permissible in hell.
That however does not mean that we are doomed to a preordained destiny, deterministic outcomes are those that the scientific world predicts, but unfortunately as not everything is controlled by science and its physics the reality overcomes those limitations, there isn’t a deterministic universe because no one entity has absolute control of the variables and the potential is constantly reengineering itself to produce any number of possible outcomes all of which get washed away every pico second and recombine to make yet something completely different possible, the causality of existence is thus total and absolute, we have ended in this possible reality and we have been part of the bricks that concretize it, but equally the amount of time in existence that you can expect of this reality could be equally insignificant in the context of all and everything.
Further we can not discount Quantum truth from the equation and its uncertainty principle which basically turn scientific proof into a fancy of observations, and I am willing to accept that kind of fanciful truth as it allows us to doubt ourselves indefinitely and substantially; still I am aware that the truth of self doubt is equally inherently unstable and worse it is cynically stable, so we should always endeavor to believe in something as that has a greater degree of observation but equally we must be aware that to not believe in something in particular does create a Quantum truth of uncertainty and doubt, what you see is what you get.
Now since we have contrived this truths and the truths then acquire a life of their own, and mind you that when we say we have contrived these truths, we mean along with everything that is not us and how that has equally contrived these truths, then you have your obtained reality and its changeable potential, thus we have the ability to impact upon any truth by mere process of belief and by the process by which we convince others and coerce the environment to adopt our truths, the success of Einstein has more to do with his ability to present the argument in convincing terms than in any truth inherent within the proofs that he offered, and of course he didn’t offer any proofs but was more arrogant than that, he knew we would convince ourselves because frankly relativity is very likable, but more important and less kind towards Einstein, the world had already inherited the truth that he merely read out.
Which brings us to a terrible and difficult aspect of these truth things, and that is that since we cannot stress the reality beyond the potential constructs that have formalized its believable structure, we come to the truth that matters most, the moral truth, and it matters most because it is wholly and fundamentally personalized to our emotive species and being constructs, and the moral truth tells us that there is something wrong with the world, tells us that some how the world is not in order with our endemic truth, or that our endemic truth is contradictory in how it manifest itself in the construct of world, into the civic and social and even across species interdependencies and relationships, and so you have a magnificent proof that there is a truth that is pure to you and reaches contradiction when you touch the material or even the metaphysical world, and that truth cannot reach harmony in this world and certainly not as the manifestation that you are in it!
Still there is a certain buoyancy factor that should and ought to stabilize to a greater degree your relationship with universe because the universe seeks congruence through energy simmerings and moral simmerings and civic and international simmerings so that all things may coalesce with the working parts that they share in their inherent evolution from pure constructs, which though different may in fact have communality in spirit, of course that is a misuse of the word spirit but sometimes one has to be abusive to speak the truth.
As a result it is possible to imagine that all things are trying to find a similar truth, even if that truth is as boring as a further simmering, and that that truth is defined by communality and not by discrepancy and thus the fact that there is discomfort for all in the context of universe means that we are still struggling and that the truth as currently defined condones that struggle and that an alternative truth is equally being thought by all the things being and non being that are observing, touching, feeling and interacting with one another as part of today’s fatal truth. And we know this not just due to the incongruence between the environment and ourselves, we know it more for the divisions and stresses that mince between emotive same species and species at large.
Thus all this mean that there are no objective truths? That is to say truths that don’t depend on us? Truths that exists outside of us? Truths that are so independent that they don’t really care if they affect our lives? For one thing is clear Justice and Knowledge and Religious truths care about how they effect our lives, that is what makes them fundamentally subjective but are there truths outside of us, truly autonomous to our whims and wants and desires?
Unfortunately the answer to that is yes!
There are more truths that don’t care about us and don’t need us than there are truths that care about us, in fact there is nothing that makes us supreme or special in the universe, the universe could well do without us, our race to the finish is to make the universe dependant upon our ideals and values, we don’t much care about anyone else’s idea of the universe, and thus it is so that we are aiming to encrust and to harden our ideals in the context of universe so that all those other truths that do not favor us will cease to exists or have to warm up to us. We are one of a kind truth in the universe, we are a compact sort of truth, but we are not the only kind of truth that the universe harbors, and all the other truths are technically hostile, though we might have our endeavor to survive and to express and to have an emotive and conscious existence, that is not the same as to say that we have shared interests, we don’t, the fact that it is so difficult for us to travel to another galaxy or that it is so difficult for us to survive in a basic material existence, that is our longevity is short, those are signs that we are not and cannot survive in the truly objective truth, all objective truths by definition do not support our existence, they don’t care about us, that is precisely why scientific obsession with truths outside of our emotive reality are so harmful to us, science is asking us to believe in things that are wholly independent of us, this even as science and its practitioners are wholly dependant on us believing them.
ricardo
posted by Ricardo Correa at 1:25 PM
<< Home