Truth and Belief

[perplexity]

Originally Posted by Isa

And if there are an infinite variety of realities, then it is all fiction, so what meaning does "myth" have?

"Myth" alludes to a concern with deities or demigods, associated ritual and the justification of a social institution:

Myth - Definitions from Dictionary.com

[perplexity]

Originally Posted by boagie

There are as many realities as there are subjects.

"I could be bounded in a nutshell, and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams."

(Hamlet: Act II, Scene II)

---

[Isa]

Hi Boagie,

Originally Posted by boagie

Subjective meaning can be about truths or falsehoods, it is a value judgment about the physical world, a value judgment about a relationship between subject and object, between you and object.

It seems from this statement, that truth does not reside in the object nor does it reside in the subjective meaning, but rather it resides in the relationship between subject and object.

Originally Posted by boagie

The first part of your statements, subjective experience does indeed come to some conclusions, it is only the physical world as object which by itself has no meaning because no one has given it any meaning.

The initial subjective experience (simple sensory perception) does not have a conclusion, only when one attends to and makes an inference about the perception is there a conclusion. When reading a book, and attending to the reading, you still perceive the light coming off the pages. You may make conclusions about what you are reading, but not about the light that is simply a sensory perception. Once you are attending to the light, you may attempt to make some inferences about some property of light, and then conclusions come into play.

Originally Posted by boagie

People discern for themselves what is true or false about the relationship they have with the physical world as object. Try to look at it this way, the physical world as object is potential, potential meaning to a subject/person. The physical world without a person/subject would remain nothing but potential. Only the person decides meaning, true or false up or down, good or bad it is the property of humanity as subject.

Let's use an example from Descartes: an individual is cut off from all sensory perception with only thought left (and has never known anything other than this state); what can this person discern for them self as to what is true or false about the relationship they have with the physical world as object?

It seems that though meaning is given by the subject, whether this meaning is true or false depends on how the subjective meaning corresponds to the relationship with the objective reality. So it seems that truth, at least in part, resides outside of the subject.

[Isa]

Originally Posted by perplexity

"Myth" alludes to a concern with deities or demigods, associated ritual and the justification of a social institution:

Myth - Definitions from Dictionary.com

Myth alludes to an imaginary or fictitious thing or person.

Myth - Definitions from Dictionary.com

[boagie]

Originally Posted by Isa

Hi Boagie,



It seems from this statement, that truth does not reside in the object nor does it reside in the subjective meaning, but rather it resides in the relationship between subject and object.


The initial subjective experience (simple sensory perception) does not have a conclusion, only when one attends to and makes an inference about the perception is there a conclusion. When reading a book, and attending to the reading, you still perceive the light coming off the pages. You may make conclusions about what you are reading, but not about the light that is simply a sensory perception. Once you are attending to the light, you may attempt to make some inferences about some property of light, and then conclusions come into play.



Let's use an example from Descartes: an individual is cut off from all sensory perception with only thought left (and has never known anything other than this state); what can this person discern for them self as to what is true or false about the relationship they have with the physical world as object?

It seems that though meaning is given by the subject, whether this meaning is true or false depends on how the subjective meaning corresponds to the relationship with the objective reality. So it seems that truth, at least in part, resides outside of the subject.

Hi Isa,

You sure are getting a handle on this! The individual that you pose here, cannot have known no other state, with complete sensory deprivation one would self-destruct. In total sensor deprivation, the relationship with the subject is cut off from object, the individual or subject would not be able to discern anything, and kept in this state would perish. The material experience of the objective world you might say is the fuel of the mind, without any experience whatsoever there could be no thought process.

"So it seems that truth, at least in part, resides outside of the subject."quote

This is the finer point, a true or false conclusion on the part of a subject is a conclusion about his relationship to object, it is hot, hard or small depending for the concept of hot, hard or small relative to the temperature of the individual, the permability of the individual or the stature of the individual. There is only large or small by comparison, there is only hot and cold, soft and hard by comparison too the subject, and/or the subjects judgement between two objects.

You are correct though. A judgement is tested by testing again the subjects relation to the objective or physical world, if it does not aline with what has been concluded by the first impression then it is false, but it is false again by a subjective evalution of the relation between it/subject and the object. The objective world is the touch stone you might say, for both the first impression and the double checking with the objective world for assurance.-------still not infalliable! The KEY to understanding really is to realize the bases of all reality is relational, relation is reality, subject and object, you and the world. Subject and object stand or fall together. Subject relation object = reality

[Isa]

Hi Boagie,

Originally Posted by boagie

You sure are getting a handle on this! The individual that you pose here, cannot have known no other state, with complete sensory deprivation one would self-destruct. In total sensor deprivation, the relationship with the subject is cut off from object, the individual or subject would not be able to discern anything, and kept in this state would perish..

It seems that modern medicine would be able to keep this individual alive, at least for some time, on life support. Surely sensory deprivation will not cause this individual to spontaneously implode. And it would not be unreasonable to assume that some thought would take place before this individual would perish.

But the fact that an individual would deteriorate without object experience, again seems to indicate that subjective experience requires the relationship with object reality. So too, it seems that subjective meaning cannot be entirely independent of the relationship with object reality.

Originally Posted by boagie

"So it seems that truth, at least in part, resides outside of the subject."quote

This is the finer point, a true or false conclusion on the part of a subject is a conclusion about his relationship to object, it is hot, hard or small depending for the concept of hot, hard or small relative to the temperature of the individual, the permability of the individual or the stature of the individual. There is only large or small by comparison, there is only hot and cold, soft and hard by comparison too the subject, and/or the subjects judgement between two objects. .

"Is this rock hard enough to break this egg?" Is the term "hard" relative to me as the subject, or between the two objects?

.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by Isa

Hi Boagie,



It seems that modern medicine would be able to keep this individual alive, at least for some time, on life support. Surely sensory deprivation will not cause this individual to spontaneously implode. And it would not be unreasonable to assume that some thought would take place before this individual would perish.

But the fact that an individual would deteriorate without object experience, again seems to indicate that subjective experience requires the relationship with object reality. So too, it seems that subjective meaning cannot be entirely independent of the relationship with object reality.




"Is this rock hard enough to break this egg?" Is the term "hard" relative to me as the subject, or between the two objects?

.

Isa,


The material experience of the objective world you might say is the fuel of the mind, without any experience whatsoever there could be no thought process.

Subject and object are mutually dependent, take away one and the other disappears.

Isa, the answer is both.The rock is obviously, relative to the eggs, hard enough to crack them, and it is the subject, not the rock or the eggs which has discerned this.


"So it seems that truth, at least in part, resides outside of the subject."quote

No the truth does not reside outside the subject, truth is a concept, and all meaning is subjective, things of themselves just are. Without a subject there is no meaning, without a subject indeed there is no object. Again, subject and object are interdependent, take away one and the other disappears/ceases to exist.

[perplexity]

Originally Posted by Isa

Surely sensory deprivation will not cause this individual to spontaneously implode.

Sensory deprivation is otherwise known as death, a notoriously difficult experiment to monitor in terms of the eventual outcome, unfortunately.

[linux_user]

"Death" gives to "Life", as life gives to death - each repeating the other sequentially.

Each is the other - therefore "death" is an illusion, as is life.

Neither exists.

Our Senses Mightily Deceive.

[Isa]

Originally Posted by perplexity

Sensory deprivation is otherwise known as death, a notoriously difficult experiment to monitor in terms of the eventual outcome, unfortunately.

Perhaps that is why philosophy is ethically limited to thought experiments.

An unfortunate limitation