Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M
If there is not one true one then does that mean that all hold equal validity?
|
No. I'll get back to this point later in this post.
Quote:
|
People do experience different.. in fact complete opposite effects from the same belief/groups of beliefs? or do they? Under the assumptions of the scientific method it is found that someone can believe they are getting morphine when in fact they get sugar and yet still experience the effects of Morphine. One could then deduce that the difference between each belief is dramatic to say the least. Its significance ripples across the fleeting conscious minds of the universe. It says to me that clearly what i believe has a massive effect. on my perception of reality. I can then further deduce from that.. if im aware enough of what beliefs are formed within my localized mind i can use this directed awareness to affect their formation and taking it a step further.. removing them after formation.
|
Yeah, what I perceive and what I know are interconnected. My worldview and my apprehension are interlinked, meaning that, because I can alter my worldview, I can alter the way I perceive my own reality. I've been studying this stuff for years now... To me, it's the most interresting stuff there is.
A distinction between faculties of the mind and mere thoughts has to be made, though. Although applying our previous experiences to our present experience is a faculty of the mind, the beliefs and ideas projected within that faculty are not. Likewise, judgement itself is a faculty of the mind, while the judgements being made are not. The faculties of the mind are shared by all humans (maybe more creatures, I don't know), the beliefs and ideas contained in those faculties are not. This is important, since the faculties themselves can't be really changed, while the contents are pliable. Here's where the problem starts though. Since what is a faculty of the mind, what is a tool of thought and what is an idea? If there isn't a clear distinction between those very different mental phenomena, then defining what part of our mind (reality as we perceive it, in a 1st person perspective) is pliable remains rather mudled... Knowing what parts are mental phenomena and what parts are ideas show us that some tools of thought
aren't mental faculties at all, mere specifically applied ideas, memories etc.
Like the notion of 'ego' for example: there really isn't a notion of 'who I am' constantly present in my awareness. Though when someone happens to ask, I just think about some properties of me I just randomly remember on the spot; the notion of 'ego', of 'who I am' is a tool of thought, not a mental faculty.
This also holds true for judgement, leading to your first point. All judgements are tools of thought, the medium is thought, applied in a specific manner. Judgement itself is not a mental faculty. In this sence, there truely isn't a 'good' without 'evil' or a 'high' without a 'low'; this duality is a property of the specific application of thought. Not of thought itself, but of the operation being performed
with the medium of thought.
Now, 'truth' holds a special spot among judgements, since it's not just a one-way judgement.
I judge about an idea weather it's true or not, but reality judges about weather my judgement is correct. Reality acts like a monitor on my ideas, regarding reality itself. If they are not congruent with my perception of reality, either the idea must be false or my perception is false... Since most people aren't hallucinating all the time, and most people see a very similar reality (Slight physiological differences can create slightly different sensory phenomena; think slightly damaged hearing through loud music, for example...), I think it's fair to say that if the ideas wich are held to be true (partially true, believed in, whatever) aren't congruent with the way reality is normally perceived through the senses (not the common beliefs, the common sensory perceptions), then the ideas are most likely false. Ideas about reality wich can't be checked through the senses or inferential reasoning (If the inference is valid) are outside of the domain of the human judgement, since there isn't an intentional object to judge. I just postpone judgement on those matters.
Quote:
|
I now see clearly the tools of the trade for the manipulation of my reality.
|
Manipulation of subjective reality is what philosophy and religion, all over the world, are all about. Religion (or any dogmatic ideology, like most political systems) delivers a pre-programmed worldview, while philosophy gives one the tools to operate ones own programming. Why no one cares is beyond me.