What is your definition of truth? Mine is “what is consistent relative to what you observe and experience.” Does this mean everything outside of your observation and experience has to be a lie? In a sense, your truth can never be the same as someone else’s truth because your experiences are your own.
With that said, what is real or fact? Fact/Real is what really is regardless of opinions, objective. But how can you know what really is? If you can only know what you have experienced, which is relative, what is objective or real?
“Who cares” isn’t really a good way to express that other perspective. I don’t really know what your implying from just those words. Are you implying that if everything is subjective and we can never really know what is or if anything objective exist, what is the point of getting others views about their own definition of truth? My answer to that is to evolve your own understanding of your truth. If you disagree with someone about something, the truths you have about whatever is in disagreement are different from the other person. Trying to see and understand the world as other sees it, allows you to better define your own truth.
Me asking for people to define truth, allows me to compare my definition to theirs. Its expanding my understanding of things. Plus, makes for good discussion. I pretty much agree with @splashartist :)
To deny that truth cannot be defined, at some level, doesn’t it have to be? What would you be denying that cannot be defined? I think we are thinking along the same lines when you say truth defines us. Your experinces are defining you, but those experiences are relative to you.
I’ve thought about “nothing” as being real, or nothing as being something. To acknowledge nothing, that would make it something.
A person can’t deny that gravity isn’t objective if they have a physical body to experience the impact of a fall. I see. But if someone never experiences a fall or something falling, how can gravity be apart of their own truth? Hmm. Everything that is experienced can be questioned. At what point does an answer to a question become objective regardless of our opinions about it? If the answer stays consistent, does that make it objective?
I love discussions that expand and make me think about my own understandings :)
@monkeyzazu, Truth is in a series of questions; What do you want? Do you want to be happy? What does it take to be happy? Is happiness a frame of mind or is it found in material indulgences? Once you have happiness can it be lost? How do you prevent yourself from losing that happiness? Do you want your loved ones to be happy also? What does it take to get them that happiness? What does it take for them to keep their happiness? Do you have to choose between your happiness and the happiness of others? Is happiness a renewable or infinite commodity? Can everyone possess happiness if given the opportunity and the right mind to recognize it? Will happiness be enough? Do we acclimate to happiness, become desensitized to it so that we then need to find another source of happiness? What does happiness cost? What does it cost you or the world? If the price is so great, is there a more economic alternative that has a satisfactory result? Does anything mean a damn if you never enjoy life or find happiness?
That is what it comes down to for each of us. This world functions on that pursuit and this world is torn to hell in that pursuit, all the human induced pain that is so abundant is due to this pursuit, or rather our misunderstanding of what it is exactly we are pursuing.
@monkeyzazu, Then the body could be found, at some level to have gravitational forces within itself. Since all forces in the universe unite all things (regardless of how negligible the effects are) their ‘truths’ or existence are constantly there.
There is the objective, physical universe.
There is the wholly spiritual (what the fuck IS ‘spiritual’ stuff anyways?)
And somehow, we are somewhere in the between.
art is a truth. outlet’s of loving energy in many different aspects of life is a truth in our hearts, we dont know much outside of feeling like whatever we are doing is absolutely worth it
@monkeyzazu, I did’nt say truth cannot be defined. Of course it can be defined, just like any other word we choose to use. Let me rephrase my first sentence: “Ultimate truth is not to be defined”
In ultimate truth and ultimate reality, things are not defined because there is no space in which to outline them definitively. This is the purpose of using “ultimate” as a sure indicator that we are speaking of the truest truth or the most real reality. Since we cannot perceive such concepts within duality, we must take them as a matter of principle. We can, however, experience these truths and realities as long as we recognize intuitively that conceptualizing merely complicates matters.
I’m confused. What does any of that have to do with defining truth or questioning what is real? Everything you said sounds like peaceful warrior talk to me. I hear what your saying and I have some views about happiness, but how does this relate to truth? Am I missing something? In all honesty though, I don’t really know what happiness is. Haven’t come up with my own definition for it.
But that first part of your post looks like it relates to truth. Are you saying we define our truths by questioning our experiences?
@monkeyzazu, As far as truth goes, what is relevant? What is practical? There is a pursuit of happiness, beyond basic survival that pursuit is all that is relevant. What are you looking for? Something profound beyond that? You will not find anything because that is all there is.
Why do you pursue wisdom and insight? It is fundamentally related to your happiness and/or your enjoyment of life, your peace of mind. What truth is there beyond that? It motivates all according to each our interpretation.
We seek something so simple then get side tracked, we lose sight of that simple pursuit, how and what we define as happiness is truth, is real, then we forget that goal or we do not recognize it if and when we have it. We absorb someone elses definition, we are conditioned away from our own vision.
“Peaceful Warrior”? You are confusing the issue. That is the ultimate mistake and the most common mistake, you seek meaning beyond what is simply relevant, you emphasize the complex as superior in relevance.
Man. I had a nice, organized reply to this last night, but then when I clicked the reply button it logged me out, erased my post, and wouldn’t let me log back in. So ticked…
Anywho, what I was saying or what I was about to reply, I don’t think there is any way to “know” without a doubt that there is an objective physical universe or objective anything. If people can’t know anything but their observation or experiences, how can they know that something exist outside their observation and expereiences? I really am trying to picture and objective physical universe but my logic always sees differently. One could exist, but I could never know whether or not it does. Like right now I could say that there is a…. portal to another dimension outside the observabal universe, but without any observation or expereince of it, I would only be guessing it was there.
I think of spiritual as metaphysical experiences. Not everyone is intuned with there metaphysical senses like we are with our physical senses, so alot of it is up for grabs.
To experience spiritual things, you have to raise your vibration. Raising your vibration or your conscious frequency is alot like raising your elevation on earth. Pretend like you could fly or you could levitate. Right now, your at ground level so you are aware of some of the things that are happening around you. If you were to fly up above your house, you would be aware of stuff that’s happening around your house. If you would to fly up above your city, you would be aware of stuff that is happening in the whole city. The higher you go, the more stuff on earth you become aware of. Raising your vibration is the same thing, but your raising your spiritual awareness of things. People with higher vibrations observe and experience more metaphysical things than people with lower vibrations.
So yea, I think we are somewhere in between the physical and metaphysical. Some people are just more aware of metaphysical things compared to others.
@monkeyzazu, I think the physical universe exists in or out of experience. Even before any conscious experience evolved, the universe existed. But it didn’t manifest in the spiritual, since nothing could see it or experience it.
Only once consciousness began (or the gradient of it) did the physical universe begin to have subjective form, and interactions with the spiritual.
Man I think this is cool! I just came up with this now and want to think about it
This put a smile on my face :) Thanks for clearing that up. Your words are wise. Peaceful Warrior is a book and a movie about someone teaching someone else about life, to put it simply. He implies that life is all about happiness and tries to teach this kid how to obtain true happiness regardless of what happens. Hehe :)
My happiness comes from learning more about the things around me. To learn more about the things around me, I question and try to come to my own answer because my own answers are the only things I can know. But how do I know that they are the only things I can know? To know, I have to question “knowing” in and of itself.
@monkeyzazu, That is the thing, we have this fundamental drive, the danger of absorbing knowledge is that it can pile up on top of our original vision, blurring it. The best example is how a Christian will start with the simple “Love each other as I have loved you…” scripture, but then keep learning more and more from the Bible, pretty soon there is a long line of people they despise. People confuse righteousness and judgementality, the same is true in your pursuit of wisdom/happiness. You may learn things that you inappropriate place too much importance on and it can make you miserable, countering the very point of your search.