- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Because truth is not a physical property of an object, but a descriptive category. That is, the truth is contained not in the things themselves, but in our statements about them. Actually, when it comes to reality, the truth “hits it” like a dart on a target, and is not in it like a secret pirate treasure. Therefore, it is not final and absolute. After all, tomorrow we can formulate a truth that will even more “fall” into reality — in general, Thomas Kuhn's research work led him to see the history of science as a sequence of such alternating “truths”, models about reality or scientific paradigms.
In fact, the ultimate and absolute truth can exist only where we can set its criteria. That is, in the model. For example, philosophical, as in the case of Marxism, which sets practice as a criterion of truth, or, as in the case of empiricism, which sets experience as a criterion.
Reality “corrects” the models, showing that each concept of truth has its own catexamples. At the same time, in order to say something about reality or somehow interact with it, we need models-that is why ancient (and not so) people have mythological thinking, which is a way to somehow structure the world around them. After all, it is much clearer what to do in the world of gods, atoms, matter, microbes, states and societies than in the unknown reality.
A bit of plagiarism. I have a hell of a headache today, and that's the absolute truth. Note that this is not a subjective value judgment, but really the truth. Damn her!
Because most truths are banal. And the world is changing.
For example, the word “sugar”has five letters. Now this is a banal truth, but a little more than a century ago this statement would have been false, and it may become true again.
And we were also lucky with the example, most banal truths do not live longer than moths. Do you have a light on in your room? Now, now, don't lie to me.
Non-banal truth is most often a statement that contains multi-level concepts. For example: “Perpetual motion is impossible.”
If you understand these words in a scientific context, you have to start from the physical picture of the world that exists at the present time. The statement is true – but the picture is changing.
The concept of perpetual motion through “impossibility” is connected with a higher level of generalization, which is incomplete.
Therefore, any brave engineer who does not want to spend his time on smaller tasks can try to get energy from the vacuum. You never know.
By the way, Google it. You will almost certainly find a similar device at a similar price (banal truth). Save on electricity.
And if out of context?
Whether it is possible to understand something out of context is a separate question, we will not worry. As for eternity, too, it doesn't seem to be the point (otherwise we'll start checking its fundamental possibility).
That is, agree to read and accept the default that the eternal engine from us does not cause problems, it's all clear (and who does not, in fact, there Yandex, telepathy, or, in extreme cases, Google, otherwise he would not have lived). Let's focus on the opportunity.
What does “impossible” mean?
It is intuitively clear that this concept is of a higher order than all possible engines, including eternal ones. It is one thing to distinguish any engine from any other object, and quite another to distinguish the possible from the impossible.
Here, try to give the most general definition of an engine. Did it work? Excellent (in extreme cases-Google). Now identify the opportunity. Naturally, without using the same root words.
The higher the level of generalization, the more difficult it is to define concepts. The higher the generality, the harder it is to distinguish. At the same time, any distinction is based on a meta-level (higher generality), which is usually not even reflected.
Therefore, our statement, repeatedly proven by science, in the course of its development, out of context, ceases to be true at all. And the point is not even that “everything is possible” (the new paradigm), and not that “everything reasonable is real” (Google), and not that God can show the world a miracle at any time just for fun. Everything is much simpler.
You can refute this truth yourself, practice =))
Of course, there are truths that at least claim to be absolute. You may know some of them. More precisely, they are comprehended by you (fame is the level of the banal; in the previous phrase I tried to joke).
What are these truths?
From the above, it is clear that every absolute truth is based on a higher level of generalization – which, accordingly, is either absolutely true too, or is directly a source.
Until you reach it, you don't have an absolute foothold. No matter what anyone says, any knowledge is still doubtful for you.
And if you have reached the source, why do you need to absolutize words?
The truth is in what is; that is the beauty of it. “…The truth cannot be given to you by anyone. You must discover it; and to discover it, the mind must be in a state of direct perception…” Truth – – – is something that must be directly experienced at every moment. It is an experience that you desire – then it is just a sensation. Only when we can go beyond the idea-which is a mind with partial or complete continuity-only when we can go beyond that, when the thought is completely silent, then there is a state of experiential knowledge. Then we will know what truth is. With respect.
Etymologically, truth is agreement with the objectified representation of Another about some object in speech. If a Roman agreed with what the other said, he said it was true. That is, etymologically, truth is an axiological category, a characteristic of the attitude of the consumer of information to what the source of information says.
Today, truth is not a characteristic of the subject's relationship to knowledge or a property of knowledge, but knowledge itself. Truth is absolutely reliable objective and objectified knowledge! Truth is always only absolute and final. There can be no relative truth! Logically, relative truth is false. If the knowledge is not absolutely reliable, then it is false. And it does not matter at all whether it is 99% false or only 1%. Even if by 0.0001%. Knowledge about an object may not be complete (and it always is), but what is known must be reliable.
All the problems started with classical German philosophy. With Kant's unknowability of the object and Hegel's identification of being and consciousness. Both are nonsense. The object is knowable, and the object and the representation (knowledge) about it are different essential phenomena.
A statement (judgment) is not knowledge. The judgment can be correct or incorrect, i.e. formed according to the rules (logic), or in violation of the rules. Knowledge – data about the parameters of an object or phenomenon that is alienated from the subject and encoded in certain symbols. Absolutely accurate data is the truth.
Any statement is derived from experience. If we conduct any finite number of experiments and all of them show the same result, then the probability that the next experiment will have the same outcome as all the previous ones is not 100%, but the number of experiments divided by the number of experiments plus one. So that no statement can be considered an absolute truth.
And then there is the problem of the identity of the experimental conditions and the possibility of going beyond the limits of applicability.
The truth is the TRUTH, because it is ALWAYS final and absolute.
For TRUTH IS THE COMPLETE CORRESPONDENCE OF THE SPIRITUAL AND THE REAL (SPIRIT AND MATTER).
Let's remember the Gospel, -⁴”Man will not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.“Matthew 4: 4
© The Bible Online, 2003-2021.
This Word that comes from the mouth of God is the TRUTH.
If anything is not final and absolute, it is the TRUTH.
Because the truth corresponds to reality only in this relation or in a limited set of relations.
The truth is final and the same for everyone.
Anything that is not final or absolute is not the Truth, but something other than the Truth.
This is easily proved by any example of a non-final Truth.
Because cognition(awareness)as a form of reflection of reality-the material world in general: nature, history and consciousness (thinking),it lags behind the movement of these forms of being in a natural way: it is a secondary product-a reflection of this material world,and not its very existence.Consciousness exists in a derivative way from being.
It may well be, if we are talking about finitely differentiable systems.
For example, you are 3m in a room. And you can say that there is only one girl among the three of you (if it is true) and it will be final and absolute.
But if we can't iterate through all combinations of possible system states (which is most often what happens) then we are no closer to finality.
Aristotle put it something like this. “There is only one truth. And reasonable disputants will eventually come to her. And there are a lot of stupid things. And if even one of the disputants is a fool, they will never come to an agreement. So a straight line always coincides with other straight lines. And the curve does not coincide with either a straight line or other curves.Fortunately, there were no non-Euclidean geometries at that time.)
Because the word TRUTH is not interpreted correctly.
As a rule, Researchers perceive the word TRUTH as some absolute knowledge or some absolute truth.
In fact, the word TRUTH should be understood as giving information without deliberate distortion, without lying.
Peace To All.
Because any truth is derived from premises, both explicit (explicit) and implicit (implied).
Take the statement that 2 + 2 = 4.
What are the obvious prerequisites here? It is defined what is the number 2, what is the number 4, the addition operation and the equality operation are defined.
What is the implicit premise here? The implicit premise here is that both the person who wrote this and the person who reads this statement understand the definition of these operations in the same way. In addition, the second implicit assumption is that these notations and operations are not overridden.
Meanwhile, the addition operation can be reassigned in any way (for which – this is a separate conversation, here I just state the fact that this can be done), as well as the equality operation.
Both natural language and any other sign systems are largely coventional things (that is, what has developed as a result of implicit public consent / acceptance). If you start redefining conventions, you can turn many truths upside down.
Whether it is necessary to do this and whether we will play too much in this case is a separate long conversation…
What did you decide wasn't?
Moreover, most often-
And when not more often? you write -More often- . According to the logic of the question, it means that there is something that is less common – but there is. The question is not correct. And it is not clear at all who and what answers your question? … Bots or something…….
The truth is only in God (the Creator), whom many do not want to recognize or believe (the impression of Him, it must be admitted, has been spoiled by many religions, exposing God as a punishing monster for sins).
Most people create illusions for themselves… something like' this ' is good, but 'this' is bad. For example, for some people, perfection means becoming rich, and when they reach a certain level, they think that they have achieved everything in life.
Falsehood, greed, theft, cruelty to living beings-all this will disappear when people will have true spiritual knowledge. For all human vices are caused by a lack of knowledge (it is important to preach true spiritual knowledge — starting with morality and humanism and learn to live in accordance with it, and not with the morality imposed by false pastors and criminal “authorities” of various scales, and whoever undertakes to teach others and speaks the right words, but does not fulfill what he said in his life, devalues the teaching).
The mass of human vices is a manifestation of the pathologically overgrown “lower self”. This-greed, the desire to appropriate someone else's property, arrogance, pride and vanity, resentment, anger, vindictiveness, jealousy, narcissism, attachment to objects of the material world, a tendency to selfish desires — these are all vices of the soul, from which the complaining soul must get rid.
It is necessary to raise the question: if there is a God, the Evolution of Universal Consciousness, what is my place in it and what exactly I need to do. Almost no one has this understanding now.
So, in India, at present, the favorite “folk god” is the fabulous (in other words, fictional) Ganesha: a man with an elephant's head, allegedly born in Heaven from the copulation of other “gods”.
In the “Christian” world, they say that our God is Jesus Christ, and the Muslims, they say, have another, of course, false God-Allah. Although Allah is a literal translation into Arabic of the word God the Father. And it was love and aspiration for Him that Jesus Christ preached to us.
At present, most “Christians” have lost both God the Father, Who occupied the main place in the sermons of Jesus, and Love, without which people have no chance of getting closer to their Creator…
A reasonable person is required to learn for himself to see the difference between true Christianity as the Teaching of Jesus Christ — and, on the other hand, those versions of its understanding by people who exist under the same name. And among them, you can recognize the degree of distortion up to complete perversion, complete “vice versa”.
What should those who consider themselves Christians do? They must study and follow the Teachings of Jesus Christ!
In order to facilitate this task, firstly, the Teaching should be systematized according to the topics under consideration and, secondly, there should be a methodology for its implementation.
…God does not guide the unbelievers to Himself. These are the words of the Qur'an.
And the direct Path to It is the Path of Love: love for people, for all living beings, for the Creation and the Creator. This is the Path to It as a properly understood Goal. This is the Way to purify oneself, as a soul, from everything that is not Divine: including rudeness, violence, and any form of egocentrism — with the replacement of egocentrism with God-centrism. And it's all real! The path of love is the Truth!
If you could just once embrace the unincarnated Jesus who appears in human form and feel His Divine Love, Refinement, Tenderness-combined with the boundless, conditioned Fusion with the entire Universal Consciousness of the higher aeon of Power and Divine Wisdom — then it would immediately become clear what God values in people, what He wants us to be!
But to be worthy of such Embraces, we must come closer to Him — not physically, but in the quality of our souls.
One of the possible answers to the question “What is Truth?” is as follows::
“There is an evolution going on within the Body of the Absolute.
Our Goal Is the Creator. Our task is to become a part of the Absolute — a part of the Creator, enriching Him with ourselves.
To do this, we must become a strong, wise, and refined Love to the level of Primordial Consciousness.”.