Re: Truth (was Re: virus: Language)
Kristee (kjseelna@students.wisc.edu)
Wed, 25 Mar 1998 20:19:41 -0600
I can see how truth can exist in mathematics and science, but the
problem is that they can exist ONLY in within the parameters of math and
science. It's a contained process, and anything outside of it (which is
Everything, the Universe) cannot be true, and therefore there is no such
thing as 'Universal Truth'. Once you start including conceptions like math
and science in "reality" (whatever that it) they begin to fall apart.
For quite some...er...time, I've been a firm believer that there is
no such thing as Time. Yes, we exist in this day-to-day little pocket of
reason that we call 'reality' in which things actually make sense. Outside
the realm of reason and rational thinking, you have chaos (which I think is
closer to actual reality, that itself being a questionable term) in which
there is no 'tool' called time.
I know that anarchy would result if time was abolished in our
world, and that time is as useful and practical as gravity, but once you
try to integrate a 'universal truth' like, "There is no time." into a
system like mathematics which has definate truths, you'd destroy it. Math,
Physics, and Science rely on all these equations and porportions, and time
is a factor. If you eliminate time, you couldn't solve any problems (like
finding distance) and nothing would be true anymore.
This reminds me of the concept of Original Sin, which I also
scrictly denounce. If you eliminate Sin, which supposedly exists
everywhere at once and I think doesn't exist at all, you are pulling the
rug out from under all theology. We have Sin so that we have the need for
salvation and redemption, without it, practicing religion would be
meritless, and therefore pointless. If you take out the fundamental
element of Sin that is ingrained in people, you have effectively destroyed
the basis of religion.
My whole point is that today I was thinking how much every kind of
system we have depends on time, esp. science, and that none of these could
exist without it. Since I don't believe in time, this would force me to
conclude that none of these REALLY exist. (????) Well, at least I can make
the claim that none of them involve such a thing as Truth (depending on how
you look at it.) That's it-depending on how you look at it; nothing is
True, yet everything is.
~Kristee
~Time is of the essence; well I'm not so sure about that...~
>Nice try, but still insufficient. I would say that mathematics is our way of
>describing, as accurately as we have been able to, the way the Universe
>appears to function, but the "map is not the landscape" Mathematics and
>science are not the Universe, they are tools devised by subjective creatures
>incapable of not being subjective. I do hold science and math as the best
>tools yet devised, but certainly not absolute. Think of it this way
>
>less likely <-gods exist----------I exist-------water is "wet"------Universe
>exists--> more likely
>
>but no "real" object or time ever actually is at either end of this scale. I
>would like it to be otherwise, but so far, havn't seen it. AS you follow into
>quantum mathematics, it gets even worse.
>
>Sodom
>Ask not for whom the flourescent lights hum
>
>Bob Hartwig wrote:
>
>> Sodom,
>>
>> A claim is true if it can be independently, rigorously, repeatedly
>> verified. If there were no claims of this nature, science and mathematics
>> could not exist. Therefore, I hold science and mathematics as evidence
>> that there is "truth".
>>
>> At 01:35 PM 3/25/98 -0500, you wrote:
>> >Out of curiosity, what would lead you to the idea that there is "truth"?
>> >
>> >Sodom
>> >
>> >Keith Elis wrote:
>> >
>> >> Why do you think there is no truth? Or do you mean there is no truth
>> >> that is recognizable by consciousness?
>> >>
>> >> Keith
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >