Who's truth is it anyway ?

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
ovi
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 3:06 pm

Re: Who's truth is it anyway ?

Post by ovi »

Arjan Dirkse wrote:
ovi wrote:
Arjan Dirkse wrote:Subjective truths are "mere" opinions, and there are many of those. Objective truth is unknowable, or at least unverifiable.
Then it's irrelevant. However, there is nothing subjective in a rock falling to the ground, subjectivity and objectivity actually mean something.
Of course we can assume with a fair degree of certainty that rocks do fall to the ground occasionally, that does not mean we know objective truth. We filter the world through our senses, intuitions, biases, and knowledge. That makes everything we think or feel or perceive subjective.

There is an objective truth "out there" (and in here), and our subjective truth ideally strives to approximate objective truth. But they are never the same thing. Objective truth is reality, subjective truth is its interpretation in our mind.
Again, objectivity refers to something being true outside of your own biases, perspectives etc. What you are saying is not about objectivity and subjectivity. You can't prove scientific theories, they are empirical, only mathematical theorems can be proven, however, that doesn't make them subjective. What you take scientific theories to be is another matter entirely. One interpretation, instrumentalism, is that they don't explain reality, but predict it. You can be pretty sure from past observations that if you throw a rock, it will fall to the ground. Another one is scientific realism, that they describe the real world. However, this doesn't really matter, at least not right now. The perceivable world is not separate from the universe, sentience is an ability of the universe. Furthermore, not being able to learn more because you don't understand everything is a sure way to halt any progress. Plus, these things have nothing to do with the three marks of existence. There is no self essence that can be found regardless of all these interpretations. The mind creates concepts and you learn to go beyond conceptualization. Also, don't forget the words of the Buddha: I have taught one thing and one thing only, dukkha and the cessation of dukkha.
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21906
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Who's truth is it anyway ?

Post by Grigoris »

ovi wrote:Then it's irrelevant. However, there is nothing subjective in a rock falling to the ground, ...
Of course there is: (rising) up relative to (falling) down, ground relative to sky, rock relative to stone, etc...

Then you have to observe the rock falling to the ground in order for there to be a rock falling to the ground.

You have to identify rock and ground. You have to identify 'falling".
...subjectivity and objectivity actually mean something.
Only in relation to one another. In reality they are both empty.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
muni
Posts: 5559
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Who's truth is it anyway ?

Post by muni »

http://www.dharmata.org/teachings/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
.............around 2.25...............

I must learn some English curses, better than to be bound on my truths.
A truth which binds how can that be truth? And such truth which can be divided what truth is that? A truth who has an opposite what truth is that?

I think all truths are fine as long as there is no boundage, then they all are free in truth. Or when truths make truth revealing, truth revealing from itself.
Post Reply

Return to “Lounge”