Okay, so maybe this is irrelevant. *shrug*
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
Insulting?
Yes, people like to feel appreciated... especially when you've requested something (I'm not denying that both parties are invested, I'm only saying that the dance is to the benefit of all parties involved).
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
So from these experiences I have adapted, and learned that when one asks thoght provoking questions that have a subtle answer, people tend to pull their heads out of what ever orephous it was in, and think before they speak. Not to a large extent, but a more acceptable one....
Sound enough, but your method can seem somewhat condescending... I don't care, but it's not particularly constructive. Not trying to make a deal of it, so I'll drop it now.
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
I think a better word is "hope" in reason.
I exactly disagree, for in "hope" for reason lies weakness. Faith gives us strength.
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
Truth is in fact another conjured entity.
It is NOT if you have faith that the truth is true. Why shouldn't it be? What's the difference? Knowledge is tentative anyway. What evidence (I'm not asking for it, I'm just wondering if you truly think you have it, or have just gotten lost at the bottom of the philosophical chasm) do you have that the truth isn't true? Are you sure you aren't just misinterpreting it?
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
For in order for there to be truth one has to define truth, yet in order to define truth one must use reasoning, consequently, reasoning requires a defintion of truth. Hence truth can only be assumed to exist, or decreed to exist it cannot, as so many other things, be proven to exist.
Maybe I can help you. I too was at the bottom of the chasm when I was about 16. At that point I found faith, but it took me about 12 more years to figure out what my faith IS, and why it's important. For me, I got stuck because I couldn't comprehend the point of existence (yes this IS going somewhere, pardon for the digression). After a long period of internal weirdness it came to me. The point is what I make it. Maybe it's a smoke, or a sunset... maybe it's great sex... but it's dynamic and it's as exactly as I think it is, regardless of the correlation with reality. In a sense now, I see that this experience correlates directly with you falling through the bottom of logic.
If you are a shark, do you not feed? Does 1 + 1 = 2? Why? It does because you make it so. If you choose not to make it so, it won't be.. but at the cost of correlation with your perception. Sure, you can alter your perception.. but we're a social species. Alter you perception to the point that it is so out of correlation with your stimulus that you cannot relate to the other humans.. and you'll basically run yourself right out of the species.
Nonconformance is of great value but it comes at a cost. The more nonconforming, the more the cost. Reward is a "sweet spot" in that relationship. Not enough non-conformance and you are a pointless lemming, too much and you're cast aside. Almost everyone has a "sweet spot" in between. You seem to be casting yourself aside because you're reshaping your input to match your madness.
Let me ask you this: Do you know how to count? If I hold up two fingers and asked you how many there were... would you respond "two"? Why?
If I ask you: "what is truth?" what would you say? Would you call it circular?
A circular definition of truth is necessary such that we might codify a contrasting relationship between it and its complement. It is nothing more. It's a label. It means that "in this context, this seems to be what IS". Note the term "seems". To me, this seems to be where you're hung up. Do you know why?
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
But, why??
Good question. It is because that is how we define it. It's a label. Why is blue blue? This creates a "common ground" such that we might seem to be communicating. I'd say that what keeps me from being insane is that I realize that "seems" is all we ever really have. I'd be worried if I thought "seems" was invalid.
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
Why does our very method of reasoning, and perception have so many flaws?
Simply, because it does. Why do you expect otherwise? Why do you expect that there is a 'why' to begin with? It's always right now you know. Why is technically irrelavent. One might add that there is a plausible argument that everything is exactly perfect, thereby nullifying the question. I might ask... is everything in the universe exactly performing its function... right now? If the wheel fell off the truck, was it not its function to do so? How could it have been otherwise when there is exacting evidence to the contrary?
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
What purpose do these invented anomalies such as numbers, and logic have??
Purpose is a resultant of will. You speak to the will of god? I would not. I know of no such will. I can only guess at the will of mortals (including myself). IMO however, it's this aspect of it that is so inspiring of humor and love.
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
And who invented them?
Interesting question. Personally, I think they are properties of "abstract space", discovered and abstracted. The pure form exists.. but by definition of subjectivity cannot EVER be corrupted or conceived. All that can be known to consciousness IS abstraction, thus we are permanently segragate from truth. I think this is the relationship responsible for what most people believe to be god. At least this scenario is a spectre of the reasoning regardiing it. SO they were not invented... they were discovered. Why do they exist? Because apparently the probability of it being so is greater than zero.
Man I was all over the place. Pardon, it's late and I was feeling "preachy". No offence intended.
I was really trying to get to the point of why it's FAITH in reason.. rather than hope.. but honestly I'm out of motivation juice... but maybe you can figure it out for yourself... or maybe I'm just full of shit. *shrug*