Truth and reality
Pure truth can only come from your own heart, your own mind, your own soul or whatever you want to call it. Noone else’s words can ever change that. They may help form your own kind of truth, but as long as you believe in your heart and don’t take others’ truth for granted, there is no greater, truer truth than your own. Truth is relative, not absolute, and truth shapes the reality you choose to live in.
How would you define truth? How would you define reality?
I believe these are both extremely subjective terms. We hear the words “reality” and “dream” used as if they are mutually exclusive but why? Is it because dreams are not influenced by the material/physical world? That doesn’t make them any less real. Dreams evoke fear, joy, and inspiration just as strongly(and sometimes stronger) as waking life. So the word reality is a tricky and confusing one, completely open to different interpretations.
Truth is just a subjective belief that you believe so much that you won’t doubt it. Reality is what surrounds you, this is also subjective and comes from your beliefs. There is an objective reality (the source,) but a human being can’t really percieve it, only bits of it at a time. We all see different realities because we have different filters (opinions, thoughts, beliefs etc).
The source contains everything, what you believe decides what parts of it you will partake in.
A dream is the reflection of reality, where all your physical senses are gone and instead being emulated by the inner sense. This is more open and less subjective, because your thinking mind is disconnected. Reality and dream intertwine and affect eachother. Experience something and you will dream about it, dream about it enough and you will experience it, it’s a loop.
^^Very well said.
For me it’s really just the way things are. Truth is relative always. Since it’s subjective. The reality that I see is subjective, but reality in it’s true form isn’t subjective it just is.
I strive to become objective. I know it’s since what’s objective to me will always be subjective since it comes from me. But it’s worth a shoot anyway and you learn a lot more from your surroundings if you are objective. Allows you to take in to much information.
Truth for me isn’t objective enough to me. 1+1=2 isn’t a truth it’s a fact.
You can’t become objective, because you still have a body and an ego, and you can’t be everywhere all the time. Thus it’s impossible to be objective.
And if you were objective, you wouldn’t be a person. It’s impossible. If you try to live your life as objectively as possible, what will your life be? Your human life would be rendered to nothing, and you would never do anything but sit and meditate til you die.
Isn’t that a waste of your life? Not to mention that it’s impossible for your thinking mind to ever be objective. The thinking mind is all about thoughts and everything that consists of thoughts (like beliefs and opinions) and thoughts are never objective. The soul is always objective, it’s its purpose. The mind’s purpose is to be subjective and desire stuff. Your mind will always be subjective, use that to make life better, that’s why we have a mind.
Follow your heart and adhere to your own truths
You say truth is relative, yet you think of reality as not?
Example: 1+1=2. Yes, this is a fact among all people who use numbers as a tool for mathematical problems, which today is pretty much everyone. But it’s still based upon the rules of a numerical system, and has to be percieved by humans to be “true”.
Like Manimal said: It’s impossible to step outside of your own mind/perception and state facts/truths/reality to others. Everyone is different.
PS: 1+2=pi, am I right?
@Haakon. Taking that one step further, there are many ways to prove that 1+1 does not equal 2. It isn’t always 2, and most people don’t get it. Truth is subjective just like everything else, and it will always be subjective because we are all individuals with different time/space references, thoughts, emotions, brains, situations, etc. The common ground we find between most people isn’t grounds to say something is real or fact.
Could you please provide examples of how a proof can state that 1 + 1 does not equal 2?
Well the easiest way would be to throw in zero’s on both sides of the equation, however you can form many many equations such as let a=1 and b=1
Also 0/0=1, 0/0=2, 0/0=infinity. 0/0=n. Math breaks down.
The fallacy with that is if a = b, then a – b = 0; you can’t divide by zero. Do you have any others?
Let me ask you, why can’t you divide by 0?
Well if you take an apple, and you divide it by 2, you got 2 parts. Tell me, what do you get when you divide by 0?
You have any number which you want, however you completely didn’t answer my question. You have 2 apples, and you take away 2 apples, do apples not exist anymore? Two raindrops fall down a windowpane and converge, does 1+1=1?
You seem to still have this notion that dividing by zero equals any number. This is false. Zero divided by zero equals any number you wish. Any number divided by zero equals infinity.
Okay, we agree there. 0/0=n, 1/0=infinity. based on such logic, math breaks down, and you can always argue that 1+1=1. We see it around us all the time too. Things merge, things divide, things multiply.
I don’t really understand how math “breaks down”. Could you elaborate?
But when you speak of two raindrops “merging”, it is clearly not enough to just state: “1+1=1″. A raindrop is a cumulation of molecules of two parts hydrogen, one part oxygen (among other bits of debris) that happen to be held together by the principles of viscosity.
Well, however many pieces you want to break it down to, n+x=1 where n, or x does not equal 0. Still, no matter how you want to look at it, one raindrop, merges with another, and becomes one whole. You can divide anything into however many pieces you want, so in reality you could argue there is no concept of 1 at all. Different cells make up our body, yet it creates one whole person. We look at math too literally, and rationally to fully comprehend it.
As an extension to my last post, I’m saying a raindrop is a system built of various subsystems. And I define that as raindrop(a). If raindrop(a) happens to meet raindrop(b) and create raindrop(c) due to the principles of viscosity and the nature of liquids, then you could in fact argue 1+1=1. But that is elementary and indeed taking it too literally to fully comprehend it. Perhaps you do in fact look at math too rationally to fully comprehend it.
No, I believe looking at it too rationally leads to us ignoring that 1+1=1 sometimes. We just say, “well, that doesn’t make sense” ignore it and continue on. Further, isn’t every system built of various subsystems?
Johannes Davidsson, you say that truth is relative always. What about the truth of logical tautologies?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.