MJA
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Dec, 2007 11:27 am
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:


How relative is 1+1=2? What is it relative to? For something to be relative, it must be relative to something. If truth is relative, and the truth of 1+1=2 is relative, what is this logical truth relative to?



= is a truth that stands for the unity or oneness of all.

=
MJA
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Dec, 2007 12:13 pm
@dpmartin,
dpmartin wrote:
Kennethamy
if I may say in agreement:

The Truth is the Truth no matter what the Truth is.
Whether all mankind is aware of it, or not. It is still the Truth.


It is only because mankind is aware of it that there is a truth. People do not decide what reality is but the truth is a social concept. Remove the social and there is not concept. They decide what is true. They give truth meaning. What did Jesus say: Man was not made for the law, but the law was made for man. We are the only guys in town with a gun. As long as we can stay awake we are the law.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Dec, 2007 12:15 pm
@MJA,
MJA wrote:
= is a truth that stands for the unity or oneness of all.

=
MJA

Great. That sounds spiritual. What does it mean?
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Dec, 2007 12:31 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Fido - I didn't ask about life. I asked how far you take your statements; from your response, I take it you find my questions to be of little value.



How relative is 1+1=2? What is it relative to? For something to be relative, it must be relative to something. If truth is relative, and the truth of 1+1=2 is relative, what is this logical truth relative to?


The Problem is one of predicate, if you will, or Axium if you prefer. The axium is identity conservation. You might say 1 + 1 equals 2 if you can prove that one equals one. If you can prove that this one equals that one then you have to prove that each is the equal of every subsequent one in your equasion. Since no two examples of an quality concept are equal, no third thing can be the equal of any other. If this one and that one equal two, then this one and any other one will not equal two. And so one. One and one are only equal in math, so as an abstract of reality I owe it no consent when reality teaches me otherwise.
Quote:



Then impossible has no meaning. The obvious bit is that impossible does have meaning, and there are impossible things. If nothing is impossible, physically leave physical reality. Obviously, this is impossible. Do we do impossible things everyday? Such as. Tell me something that man is not capable of doing, that man does.

Reality has no meaning, but a being. We give to reality all the meaning we wish to concede to it, or that it demands of us. Impossible is a degree of difficult that does tend to reach toward an absolute, and never reaches it.
Exactly as in your example, men define the impossible by what they can do. As we used to say in my (monkey) business: the difficult we do right away, and the impossible takes a little longer.
Quote:

To express any given truth, we have to use relationship - relationships of concepts and ideas. If we have mutual understanding of those relationships, of those concepts and ideas, then we can produce true statements which can be understood and agreed upon.
Even if we do not agree on those relationships, those concepts and ideas, our lack of agreemtn has no influence upon the truth.

Our lack of agreement has no effect on reality, but it has every effect imaginable on the truth.

Quote:

If I say a frog is green, and you are ignorant of frogs and the colors green, the frog still may very well be green and a frog despite your ignorance.
0 Replies
 
MJA
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Dec, 2007 04:53 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
Great. That sounds spiritual. What does it mean?


Is = Spiritual?

= is a mathematical symbol that unites obvious differences like 1+1 and 2.
= makes things we percieve as different, equal, or one and the same.
= is also nature's most powerful simple truth.
= is the most simple solution to any equation.
Their are those who don't know that difference is also equal.
In those cases they wouldn't know the truth of equality either.
And there inlies the root of mankind's troubles, problems or equations,
the problem is inequity or difference.
= is self evidently the solution and entirely up to you.
Amen!

=
MJA
0 Replies
 
dpmartin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Dec, 2007 05:42 pm
@dpmartin,
Fido

"It is only because mankind is aware of it that there is a truth. People do not decide what reality is but the truth is a social concept. Remove the social and there is not concept. They decide what is true. They give truth meaning. What did Jesus say: Man was not made for the law, but the law was made for man. We are the only guys in town with a gun. As long as we can stay awake we are the law."

What is perceived as true by mankind is not necessarily the Truth.
Since your going to refer to Jesus;
Jesus also said: I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
He also said: Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

What does the Truth have to do with the societal formation of law?
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 11:09 pm
@dpmartin,
Quote:
One and one are only equal in math, so as an abstract of reality I owe it no consent when reality teaches me otherwise.


Are you saying that reality has taught you that when you have one dollar bill, and someone gives you another dollar bill, that you do not have two one dollar bills?
One and one are always equal - the truth is in the abstract, that one X added to one X, equals two Xs. To have two of something is to have one of that thing and to have another one of that thing. 1+1=2 and 2=1+1. In reality, these truths express that having one hat, and being given another hat, leaves you with two hats. Hat, or anything else.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 06:34 am
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Are you saying that reality has taught you that when you have one dollar bill, and someone gives you another dollar bill, that you do not have two one dollar bills?
One and one are always equal - the truth is in the abstract, that one X added to one X, equals two Xs. To have two of something is to have one of that thing and to have another one of that thing. 1+1=2 and 2=1+1. In reality, these truths express that having one hat, and being given another hat, leaves you with two hats. Hat, or anything else.

I am telling you that dollars are a contrived value. We all agree as part of a form of relationship that this dollar equals a dollar. Now, the price of things changes all the time. Does their value change, or the value of the money? Does their value in relations to the dollar change? If you want your money to have value, have debt. The dollar cannot be refused to pay debt even if you have to force people to accept it for a loaf of bread. It is paper, and paper is worth nearly nothing. We agree what it is worth, having little choice but to agree.
Now, show me two atoms that are identical. Show me two apples that are identical. Show me two dollar bills that are identical. If we say we have two apples it is not because one is the equal to the other. We are not counting apple equalities but rather, a general apple quality. If you count a crate of apples, each as one, it is not because each is the equal of the others, but only generally equal, or conceptually equal. So, if equality is granted it can be denied. Math works because everyone agrees to its rules without ever thinking about them. Pity me. I think about everything.

Now, your appeal to identity is meaningless. X is X is an unproven axium of all logic. In fact all reasoning from childhood up depends upon identity conservation. All our concepts are forms of identity. Every word in the dictionary is a form of identity. At its basis is an unproven axium whose acceptance is at the bottom of every conversation of reality. I am under no obligation to accept it, and neither are you. If we cannot agree on the first thing we will not agree on the last, and that is that. There is a reason math works. There is something that math is good for. But when people do not realize that math is built, not upon one plus one equals two, but on the common acceptance of an axium that cannot be shown true in reality that one equals one, then math becomes more powerful than they. All sorts of non sense can be predicated upon mathamatical truths, that, while generally true to reality, are at their base unproved, and in fact proved wrong. They are not exactly right, but generally right.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 07:03 am
@dpmartin,
dpmartin wrote:
Fido

"It is only because mankind is aware of it that there is a truth. People do not decide what reality is but the truth is a social concept. Remove the social and there is not concept. They decide what is true. They give truth meaning. What did Jesus say: Man was not made for the law, but the law was made for man. We are the only guys in town with a gun. As long as we can stay awake we are the law."

What is perceived as true by mankind is not necessarily the Truth.
Since your going to refer to Jesus;
Jesus also said: I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
He also said: Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

What does the Truth have to do with the societal formation of law?


If I may remind you, Jesus is said to have said that man was not made for the law, but the law for man. He was continually pointing out how those in charge of the law did not follow it. He said do as they say, and, not as they do. But at the heart of the Jesus Myth is something far more beautiful and poignant. He was talking about a psychological relationship with God, and not a formal relationship of laws and sacrifice. He said justly that God knows what is in our hearts, that sin is in the mind, and not only in the act. What was he doing when called upon to judge the adulterous woman? He was not chiseling words in Granite, but writing in the dust. If people could have the sense of what Jesus was getting at, written on their hearts, there would be world peace, and there would be no churches, or armies or poverty. The Jews had, and have yet, a strict and strictly formal relationship with God. Jesus was asking for people to accept a personal relationship with God where each does God's will and accepts God judgement on earth. It is foolish for men to judge God. It is foolish for the rich man to judge God good, or for the poor to judge God harsh when each shares the same life and the same needs. No man is punished with poverty who recognizes his power to do good. No man is rewarded with wealth if with out the sense to see it all as illusion without God, and -without following the command to sell all, and follow him. I do not mix philosophy with religion. Nor do I think the Gospels are the word of God. I can catch their meaning, and I follow that meaning; but I do not hang on every word. There is too much history in them and not enough fact.

Of the nature of God we cannot know, and in spite of the contradictory evidence in the Bible, we know that people are at their best, good, and grateful to God for life, and mercy, and bounty. Even if humanity is within the hand of God, God will never be in our grasp. If we sense God spiritually it is individually. What then is the truth of God? If God is Good and we are of God, then Good will by his Grace come out of us. But how many deaths have come out of our conceptions of God? How much wealth has been piled away and how much misery justified in the name of God? What is real, and what is fact is like God, and something we can only approach and never have. Our sense of truth is something each can have personally, but is discovered socially. Even your truth, the truth of the Gospels was revealed to you by another. The truth is a form of relationship, but only if we agree.

Truth can also be a cause of death and war, but then death and war are the truth to anyone who would kill for it. If we say a form is a guide, or perhaps a template, then it is useless if it ever guides us out of our relationship, or makes our relationship meaningless. You think about what Jesus was talking about. Was it not always about how humans relate to humans? No man who abuses Lazerus can call on the mercy of God. If we know God in our minds, do we not prove our knowledge in our relationships? Look at the world of Jesus, -where one man would bring a lawsuit for anothers shirt, which one would have to pledge for breakfast for his children. Yet, when Rome took Jeruselem, it squeezed enough Gold out of the place to build the Colosseum, to say nothing of the human wealth in slaves. It is the same in our time, where the religion serves the piling up of wealth and supports its protection. It is no part of God.
MJA
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 10:29 am
@Fido,
=

For mankind, = unites the things we choose.
In nature, = unites all things.
The difference between man and nature then, is only what we choose.
The true differences in nature are none.
"Man is the measure of all things."
Yet man's measure has been found to have no certainty or truth.
What if man removed measured uncertainty from his life,
and made = his natural choice of truth?
That would unite us with nature,
and all would be truly one!


=
MJA
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 10:43 am
@MJA,
MJA wrote:
=

For mankind, = unites the things we choose.
In nature, = unites all things.
The difference between man and nature then, is only what we choose.
The true differences in nature are none.
"Man is the measure of all things."
Yet man's measure has been found to have no certainty or truth.
What if man removed measured uncertainty from his life,
and made = his natural choice of truth?
That would unite us with nature,
and all would be truly one!


=
MJA

No. Man is the measure of all meaning. We can hardly say what everything is. We can always say what it all means. As soon as we find out.
MJA
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 11:11 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
No. Man is the measure of all meaning. We can hardly say what everything is. We can always say what it all means. As soon as we find out.


Perhaps = is all we need to know!Smile

=
MJA
dpmartin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 05:46 pm
@dpmartin,
fido

One you assume a lot about that which I may believe or think. Two how can one take what you say seriously when in one posting you use what Jesus said to prove a point that sounds like it came from a video game, then the next posting you say that which you used to prove your point is a myth?

Also why would you complain about the wrath and injustice of man while exercising your wrath at that which you blame. You what to blame God, the world, mankind, religions for your life sucking. No one cares. Not even God.

If your life sucks so bad that you must blame others then maybe it's because you suck. (No offence) The Mercy of God is there through the Truth, Jesus the Christ, if you want it, ask Him for it, but don't wine at me.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 07:12 pm
@dpmartin,
dpmartin wrote:
fido

One you assume a lot about that which I may believe or think. Two how can one take what you say seriously when in one posting you use what Jesus said to prove a point that sounds like it came from a video game, then the next posting you say that which you used to prove your point is a myth?

Also why would you complain about the wrath and injustice of man while exercising your wrath at that which you blame. You what to blame God, the world, mankind, religions for your life sucking. No one cares. Not even God.

If your life sucks so bad that you must blame others then maybe it's because you suck. (No offence) The Mercy of God is there through the Truth, Jesus the Christ, if you want it, ask Him for it, but don't wine at me.

Certainly a myth! You have conflicting evidence, different meanings in the same mouth, then the take of Paul, and then the deliberate destruction of the gnostic gospels. We can still sort of get the picture of what Jesus was getting at. There are points of agreement. But it is just testimony of people who perhaps did not expect anyone would take Jesus to be God.

You are right, no one cares. I don't even care. If any one starts caring about inessential bushet it gets to be no fun. I think Jesus was right, and it does not matter if you think he was God, or a prophet, or a philosopher. If you are going to reach God, you have to do so by abandoning the finite and reaching for the infinite, and we have only one way to show that we have done this, and it is to serve the finite needs of people. We do not need God to be good. We need God to justify the most evil of acts as his will. For this reason, I do not justify. I fight evil, but I fight no one. It is impossible to use the weapons of evil against evil without being corrupted by them. If God put our kind in the way of knowledge, and we all suffer that lot then I am going to enjoy my suffering fully, and learn as much as I can.

Yep. I guess that is all I have to say about that.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 07:13 pm
@MJA,
MJA wrote:
Perhaps = is all we need to know!Smile

=
MJA


Sumpen equos sumpen. Details at eleven.
0 Replies
 
dpmartin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Dec, 2007 07:14 pm
@dpmartin,
Fido

"We do not need God to be good"

Good for what?
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Dec, 2007 07:38 pm
@dpmartin,
dpmartin wrote:
Fido

"We do not need God to be good"

Good for what?


Not good for. Good to! Good to each other specifically. No one has shown where believers in God of any stripe were ever better than non believers at kindness, sympathy, and mercy.
0 Replies
 
dpmartin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Dec, 2007 11:44 am
@dpmartin,
The creature is nothing more then dirt and water that can think do breath and feel. No more then any other creature in the flesh. Not acquired of it's own will or doing. Therefore how can I do, think, feel correctly without the proper instructions from that which has given me what we call life. And that which has given me life must have the knowledge and the Truth of Life for it has the power to give me life, and has given me the ability to seek the Truth of it. For the creature to tell the power that has given it life to stick it, it is not needed. Could expect when the will of that which has given life is revealed, despite it's refusal to know when breathing , (as in all in the grave yard know the Truth about Life with no doubts) may tell the creature the same.

So to be good for that which does not give life no matter how good it makes one feel, which only takes it and or consumes it, or maybe returns the favor , would be good for the result that which is of the ground. For if one loves after that which does not give life, because it may make one feel right, the result is still the same. No matter how many variations there are presented. There is only one source of Life and the rest is not.

It's the giver of Life that is High and Mighty, that has Mercy to the creature. That the creature may know and have the Creator's, Life, Truth and Way. Not the wrath of man, not absents of the wrath of man, nor man's compassion for that which man loves of himself, or his own kind.

In other words, if all this should have a reason, you should not be the last to know.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Dec, 2007 12:18 pm
@dpmartin,
How about if I just concede that if you think you can't then you can't. Best wishes.
justinupitt
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 09:08 pm
@Fido,
dpmartin, do you think that the truth can be learned? or must one already know it to be certain. I think that if I could learn what the truth was, I could also learn that what I think is the truth, isnt, so I will always be somewhat unsure, unless of course I also know that I know everything there is to know.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 11:44:20