Mr. Sammi

dostf,

you are being unfair to the respondents, I am enquiring of you if you are being untruthful in any way shape or form.

Finally, was your post a collection of truths, OR was it a collection of possible truths? If they were possible truths, then who turns the possibilities into reality?

Sammi Na Boodie ()

TooBad

But at least you've managed to liberate yourself from the confining bonds of logic, and are therefore free to contradict yourself as the fancy takes you.

dostf

Adrian Selby:

Thanks for your "constructive critique".

"truth is you and me".

The idea here is that all of us ascribe many falsities to ourselves that do not exist. This is done through our education, uprbringing, experiences, etc. You have been raised, educated, and have experiences that you define as yours. Taken together they constitute what you or i might describe as "Adrian Selby". I have my own unique experiences etc. which taken together constitute "dostf". This separates us. There is really no "you" or "me", but for communication purposes i state it that way.

This statement is also made to point out that the "truth" is not "out there somewhere" waiting to be found. The human being IS the truth- only as i stated earlier we always think we are "something" we are not. (husband, women, carpenter, doctor, agnostic, french, etc.)-all labels we accept and are very proud of in some cases. They are however not true.

Be seeing you...

Morgan

Dostf: Are our lives any the worse or any the better for accepting these lies? No, they remain the same. Any lies big enough to matter we will notice, eventually.

Truth is simply a tool of language and logic. If both did not exist, neither would truth and so truth is limited to these two concepts. Beyond this, it has no meaning.

[ August 07, 2002: Message edited by: Morgan ]</p>

WJ

Dostf!

I think your intentions might be good and don't mean to ignore you, but I believe we are way too far apart for me to even offer a rebuttal. Just one example, how you arrived at truth not being completely dependent upon time is beyond me...

Take care.

Walrus

Adrian Selby

don't make me laugh.

how is it not true i am a husband if i'm married!
or are you suggesting i'm not completely a husband but i'm other things. well, duh. however, i am still a husband and it is true that i am a husband

dostf

Keith Russell:

Here are some thoughts in response to your critique.

. Truth is not: expressable in words.

--And yet this is exactly what you are trying to do: to express in these ten sentences your view of what 'truth' isn't. (kr)

-You are correct.-however language is the medium we use to communicate, therefore i use it- it is however incomplete.

5. Truth is not: "outside of you somewhere".ie. separate from the human being.

--So, if truth is 'within' us, what word/concept should we use to refer to that which is outside of us? (kr)

-There are serveral angles here.
Firstly, the idea is that "truth" is not found "somewhere"- (some monastery, a book, etc.)
Any "part of truth" that is expressed is expressed from the human being.
-Secondly and more difficult to express is the notion of "inside" and "outside" of "you". Without a detailed explanation I would contend that a human being(truth) is a WHOLENESS. There is no "inside" or "outside" there. We are always "seeing" in "parts"- hence the "outside" "inside" illusion.

6. Truth is not: related to anything else.

--What else is there but truth? (kr)

- truth is only "found" in the human being

7. Truth is not: "achievable" by any religious, philosophical, logical, or scientific "path".

--Then, by what method did you arrive at these twenty-one statements?(kr)

- by living them for myself or verifying that they are not contary to my reason.

1. Truth is: a wholeness that may be defined as the human being.

--Which part of 'the human being/truth' is then 'true': our minds, our bodies, our actions, our beliefs, our values, our fears, etc.? (kr)

- the statement stands as written. Human being is a wholeness not "a body" "a mind" etc. They are all parts of the whole.

2. Truth is: a living- not a "feeling" "understanding" "idea" etc.

--A living what?(kr)

- Truth is lived as opposed to "known", "felt", "believed" "understood" etc.
-one does not "know" the truth -one lives it

3. Truth is: progressive-as is the human being.

--When something is described as 'progressive', it is seen as 'progressive' only in relation to something else; something earlier, or simpler, etc. Yet, you said earlier that truth is not related to anything else...and yet here you say it is progressive. These two statements are contradictory.(kr)

- I will clarify this if possible.
- as humans progress so too does our understanding , relating, and living of "truth". The idea here is "truth" is not stagnant, it is evolving as is the human. This is why religions are dead.
- the statement "truth is not related to anything else" was meant to convey that it is not necesary to behave, worship, live, or believe in a certain manner in order to live "truth".
- "truth" and "human" are the same. One could then draw a comparison or relation to prior humans i suppose. So your point is taken.

4. Truth is: in one aspect relative to our individual "situation".

--So, if truth is relative, what do we mean by the word/concept relative? Something is usually seen as relative only in relation to something that does not change. If 'truth' is 'relative', then what (if not truth) remains unchanging or unchanged, in order for you to be able to recognize 'truth' as being 'relative'? (kr)

- by this statement I am not meaning to convey that truth is "relative" to anything else.
- nothing in the universe is unchanging and this includes "truth"
- The idea here is depending on our "individual perspective" what may be "true" for you , may not be so for me- and vice versa. This is also so for ourselves if we are progressive human beings.
- For example by reading, studying, talking, etc. we eliminate many "untruths" we once held as "true".

6. Truth is: explained by a "reason based on science".

--And yet you said that "Truth is not: 'achievable' by any religious, philosophical, logical, or scientific 'path'." This is a clear contradiction of your earlier statement, above.(kr)

- the EXPLANATION should be by a reason based on science. ( without any belief or faith required whatsoever)
- this is different from the living of truth

8. Truth is : " a natural living".

--A natural, living what? (kr)

- the idea here is that it is not necessary to live in a monastary, do years of "exercises", renounce anything,- in order to live truth
- on should live naturally (have a job, family, etc.)

9. Truth is : "past the stage of love" - but is dependant on it.

--So, there was no truth, before there was love?(kr)

- Love between 2 humans is the "key" that allows us to pass ("our false self"). Without this step one can not live truth.

10. Truth is : a word used to describe "a living".

--Again, a living what? The word concept 'living' is an adjective; adjectives are meaningless unless they describe a noun. So, what noun does your use of 'living' describe?(kr)

- Again the idea here is to present truth as a living as opposed to something you know, learn, read, understand etc...

11. Truth is : you and me -if only we didn't think of "ourselves" as "something we are not".

--I disagree. A is A. Or, as Popeye said, 'I yam what I yam.' If we are what we are, then even if we think of ourselves as something we are not, that--too--is part of what we are.(kr)

- The idea here is that we are constantly categorizing ourselves by profession, gender, age, experiences, and many other things. Worse we are often very proud of them. Taken together we then say that all these are "me". i state this is not true and is not what we (the human being) is.

Thanks for your reply
Be seeing you...

dostf

Morgan:

Are our lives any the worse or any the better for accepting these lies? No, they remain the same. Any lies big enough to matter we will notice, eventually. (morgan)

- I would say that our life is of a much better quality without "accepting" these falsities. If however one is content with oneself then changes are not required.
- by changing ourselves we change life

Truth is simply a tool of language and logic. If both did not exist, neither would truth and so truth is limited to these two concepts. Beyond this, it has no meaning.(morgan)

- you are correct to a certain extent
- however as we need language to communicate i use the word to represent a living experience

Be seeing you...

dostf

Mr. Sammi

you are being unfair to the respondents, I am enquiring of you if you are being untruthful in any way shape or form.

Finally, was your post a collection of truths, OR was it a collection of possible truths? If they were possible truths, then who turns the possibilities into reality? (Mr. Sammi)

- I certainly am not being untruthful, for what purpose?
- they are a collection of ideas related to truth as I "understand" it

Be seeing you...

dostf

wj:

I think your intentions might be good and don't mean to ignore you, but I believe we are way too far apart for me to even offer a rebuttal. Just one example, how you arrived at truth not being completely dependent upon time is beyond me...(wj)

- the ideas presented were meant to stimulate conversation, and present an understanding of the truth
- i am not sure how you concluded we are that far apart that conversation is not possible, as i have no idea what your views are

thanks

Be seeing you...