 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
The Whole Truth,
And Nothing but the Truth
So Help Me, You.
In order to make sense of an upside down world it occurred to me to challenge my own sense of logic concerning a few matters that were handed down to me from external sources. Having done so with more than slight effort and with greater discipline than what may accomplish an uncomfortable chore I have arrived at a perspective that makes sense easily, rather than by force of effort or rationalization.
God can be seen as truth and that is enough of that since I am not God and I am not capable of The Truth, The Whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth even if I try real hard. I can work at it with help. Where the help originates from is subject to my human propensity to err, so the help may come from God, yet – how would I know?
I am not God.
Help arrives from outside of me. I am in charge of belief. I am in charge of what I allow myself to believe and I do need help. The problem that has continually impressed me as being a very powerful problem is something that can be called falsehood. The powerful enemy of truth can also be called deception. The important discovery I’ve found in reference to this powerful foe is the truth concerning who has the power to decide what is believed to be true and what is suspected as being false.
I have that power.
I can try to give that power away, yet that is false; or so I’ve come to believe.
As the story proceeds a measure of falsehood inevitably finds its way into the process known as thought. Once falsehood does find its way in there really isn’t any way to get it back out, without help. This is true, or so I believe, because falsehood makes a person believe, or trust, falsehood. Now, you know, this can seem like something, or someone, is confusing. Who is confusing? What is confusing? If you do not know, then you may want to entertain the idea that falsehood has entered the thought process and that you may be infected or you can ignore the fact that you do not know who is confusing and you can ignore that you do not know what is confusing. You can blame me. What you cannot do, even while you believe that you can, is to claim that you are ignorant of your ignorance while you know that you do not know. That may appear to be a confusing from your viewpoint. That has been said before, perhaps by someone trusted. Once you know, you know, and it is false to claim that you do not know while you do know.
Perhaps someone who has studied scripture can quote a more eloquent phrase to explain the relationship. Once a person becomes aware of something, a lie or crime for example, the person cannot claim ignorance without resorting to deception. Something known can be forgotten if it is forgotten. Being aware of something is being aware of something. Ignorance about something previously known is forgetting. It is factual. I forgot. What I am pointing out is a certainty of knowing a condition of ignorance. You cannot claim to not know that you are ignorant once this fact, of ignorance, is known – without relying upon falsehood or provide the facts.
Example:
I know that morality is objective, factual, and based upon the physical requirements of life. In other words; it is immoral to injure life or reduce the physical requirements of life while it is moral to nurture and increase the physical requirements of life.
I can claim now that I am ignorant of knowing my propensity for human error in this case. Does that claim erase knowledge of my own ignorance? Does the claim enable me to escape from error? Can I claim now to know the truth?
The answer is clearly: no. I cannot pretend to know that morality is objective – absolutely. I can propose how morality is objective as morality functions to nurture and increase the physical requirements of life. I can reserve my observation of knowledge and render it to be subjected to further scrutiny. That does not necessarily make my observation false or subjective. Morality is objective, factual, and based upon the physical requirements of life. The proof is found in living. The proof is earned while living, among people and being human – being free from falsehood.
At this point I have a chore to accomplish and I need a lot of help in perfecting the idea. The idea is to communicate an exposure of a particularly insidious lie. Many people are infected with this lie and I may live out the rest of my life without ever finding another person capable of defeating it – the lie. I can present the lie as I see it and do so in the way that I am able – with words. Then a requirement exists for you to understand the nature of the phenomenon that I describe and if you please you can comment upon its validity, accuracy, or logic. Is it a lie?
Before describing the lie it may help in communicating the lie to say a few words about the people who originally created the lie. These liars are criminals. These people who have created this lie destroy life with this lie. They do so because they can and I really can’t say, for sure, that any other reason inspires the continued use of this lie by those criminals. The other possible reason, other than to destroy, is profit. I can’t confess here since I do not construct this lie and I do not further or use this lie – at all. Criminals use this lie to destroy and, perhaps, to profit from their victims – at their victims expense.
The lie, as I’ve already stated, is insidious. It is criminal. It is destructive. It is evil. It supposes that politics and economy are amoral concepts that are free from or divorced from moral considerations – like math. If this, goes the lie, than that occurs like one plus one is two. That is a lie. Politics and economy are moral concepts that intend to further life. Crime is immoral. Sloth, apathy, carelessness, indifference, science, and math are amoral. Politics and economy are moral concepts. The lie, and it is a big one, supposes that politics and economy are amoral concepts.
I decided to place this viewpoint right here in this thread because Blackwater does relate to politics, economy, and free market competition.
How?