So far the thread has more confusion but it is to be expected. This will be a big block, fetch your reading glasses.
In the pursuit for truth we have to be aware of all the layers there are between us, and the world. Our senses with their limitations(bio-physchem), our perception with its trained limitations (the more you know, the more you see paradigm) – our thought mediators (language, previous axioms). Since this is a written discussion and we do not yet have the technology to plug into a collective intelligence with minds purely sharing ideas, with their full form and number of characteristics, we are stuck with language. In itself, each language, or the ability as a whole is problematic – for you can’t pick one idea with its thousands of connections and specifics and plant it in another brain. Each time you express something you make your best guess as to which are required to make this make sense in another mind. And then only include that, which is often the biggest mistake (as people find out in academia) – how did you get to that position/result/paradigm? In short, got to be aware of those things and give more context than each personally deems necessary. If people are missing premises, they will never get why something may be true, or not.
This introduction will make sense very soon. I definitely think that the whole truth exists, but it’s something that is out there—and we can only see fragments of it. We do, however, see those fragments, and nearly most of our statements have percentages of truth in them. That gives them value and credibility, but we know that they’re not perfect. They are, however, functional – as in you can test and retest gravity. The current formulation of the gravity law is a functional one but not a holistic one, as in it does not explain how gravity arises, but it does predict how it behaves to a great detail (up to a limit). So is it false or true? It’s true because it predicts, and proves true through every calculation (sending satellites out etc). Can it be improved to be more holistic and connected with the world (aka truth) – yes. Furthermore once it is expanded (like chemistry being expanded by quantum physics) – it becomes more useful, and true-er.
I could go on with alternate examples but the reality of the matter is quite simple. The whole universe is the whole truth. The whole universe is a complex system that is connected, having effects in flux throughout itself – that constantly changes it. Increasing our understanding of it, increases our understanding of the truth. But we’re not sure – about which parts of some of our axioms/statements we should get rid of or improve. So for the time being, truth is only somewhat relativistic – and better formulated as a truth. Because it’s a fragmented understanding of the universe- existing on it’s own and in an alien to the universe form—usually static instead of dynamic (everything in the universe is in constant flux, but that’s impossible for us to grasp).
That’s all for now!
Needless to say Great Question :)
Composing members:
0
Composing members:
0
