When people to claim be experts, we expect them to be knowledgeable and reasonable concerning their area of expertise. It is presumed (generally speaking) that a doctor actually wants and intends to help you, a statesman (as opposed to a politician!) seeks the good of the country, a salesperson wants to sell the best product they have for you, (If they are a Mike Lindell type), and that faith leaders want to better both their lives and your life.
Now we have all seen charlatans in all these areas, especially when a crisis hits.
Comparing Dr. Scott Atlas' recommended approach to handling the COVID 19 Crisis to Dr. Anthony Fauci's is an enlightening study in itself, especially in light of Fauci's history. But Dr. Fauci's history was covered up, he was portrayed as a hero when a close look at facts and logic proved him to be a villain. This is why we need to convince people not simply to believe us about these matters, but to reason for themselves. This is the purpose for this post.
The first place to start is the nature of truth: (Norman Geisler points this out in I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist, which he co authored with Frank Turek) Here are some truths about Truth, from his book.
-
Truth is discovered by men, not invented by them. Truth exists independent of our knowledge of it, e.g. Gravity existed before Newton's discovery of it. The same applies to the Laws of Thermodynamics, and other truths.
-
Truth Is Trans- Cultural - From 2 + 2 = 4, to the Earth is a sphere, truth is truth where ever you are, regardless of what your culture might have to (or even might still!) say about it.
-
Truth itself is unchangeable, though what we believe about it may change. At one time, many believed the world was flat -- but it has been a sphere all along.
-
Beliefs do not change the truth, no matter how sincerely held. Many sincerely believed the earth was flat, only to be proven wrong. For a more recent example, many believed that Fauci's recommendations were correct, we are seeing the devastating consequences already. This reminded me of the old chemistry warning in poem form:
Johnny went and took a drink,
Now Johnny is no more,
What he thought was H2O
Was H2SO4
-
Truth is not affected by the attitude of the one professing it: An arrogant person telling the truth doesn't make it any less true. A humble person telling what is false doesn't make what is false true.
-
All Truths are absolute truths: even those that appear relative are really absolute. (e.g.) "I. Frank Turek, feel warm on November 20,2003." may appear to be a relative statement, but it is actually absolutely true for everyone, everywhere that Frank Turek had the sensation of warmth on November 20, 2003."
In Short: Contradictory beliefs are possible - Contradictory truths are not.
This causes us to arrive at the Law of Non-contradiction:
If A is true, then non-A cannot be true at the same time and manner.
-- Ayn Rand
"To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one's thinking; to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one's mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality"
-- A.R. also
Username checks out
(I am sure I've observed this before)
Thank you!
Great post! The Law of Non C is foundational to logical thought and conversations. It should be required learning for elementary students.
<tooting my own horn>
I sat under Norman Geisler tutelage at Southern Evangelical Seminary. What a treat that was. Turek was an instructor for a few classes there, too.
I HIGHLY recommend anything written by those two gentlemen.
Geisler was the CS Lewis of our time. Thats not hyperbole either.
I read this book and really enjoyed it. So did my brother.
Agreed. I disagree with him on some theological issues, but this was so well stated in the book that it had to be a major part of this post.
Well done. Sticky
Thank you. didn't expect that!
I will be posting some of the theological and historical implications of this later.
Well stated thank you!
I like your In Short phrase. Very true.
You will find relativism (non-truth) at the root of the attack on truth. People speaking "their truths" enabled the dismissal of objective and absolute truth. Vulnerable people are now encouraged to believe they can change their sex and force others to participate in their lie.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/888620.The_Ominous_Parallels
And particularly
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27793.Explaining_Postmodernism
Happy to see this post which gets pretty close to the heart of things.
To further things we need to explore the relationship between contradiction and paradox.
While fundamental contradiction is not possible unresolved paradox is.
Telling the truth is easy. Being believed can be dang near impossible.
Thank you!!!
The way I heard it . . .
"Here lies our friend, dear Jerry
With us he is no more
For what he thought was H20
Was H2SO4"
. . . but that was over 70 years ago.
nice.
me being a techie and take what you say coupled with the Ecclesiastes i think things like wifi, cellular, microwave, radio. Light being transportation for information.
it was already existing before it was. 2 plus 2 is always going to be 4 even before it was said so. This is also true about technology. We credit those who created things, but it was already capable of being there before they created it.
to take a little bit further down this logic. if all this was already created. In a sense all mankind is a communicating device just as man creates AI, we are what God created. Does this make us Artificial Intelligence compared to God? We have an over an air comms going on with God directly that cannot be hacked.
what more can we create that has already be here waiting for us to discover?
now what the lying MSM likes to do is speak the truth but do a magic trick and project it onto what is not. They also like to magnify and pull out a narrative from the whole picture and use magic to convince their truth.
Ecclesiastes 1:9 KJV The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
We conflate creation and discovery
it can happen. not all believe in God. my father-in-law was an emergency room Pediatrician before he passed away. He had a very high IQ and did not believe in God or Christianity.
He loved to argue with Christians and defeat them with knowledge.
I call it different levels, and this is one reason it is better to be quiet.
For me i knew God existed by default. Yet to argue with such a man as he did not do any edification. Balance. My stepdad was a cattle rancher and we had thousands of cattle and acres. He too was very intelligent and not a Christian.
on his death bed i did ask him to ask for forgiveness, but out of love.
for one to see how things conflate they have to be opened to the idea that God has allowed us to be able to create. This is very difficult for many and many will never understand while alive.
To me i volunteered to be in the military, just as i volunteered to acknowledge i do not know everything and yet understand there is so much that has been done..
Yet i struggle with my oldest being autistic and worry about him being independent.. heck i think i might be undiagnosed.
i have always blended faith with reality. it might be in my dna. lol.
Too many 'educated' and not enough leraned expeets.
Thats why its up to us with logic and reasoning capabilities to hammer those people with questions until they realize they paid for a degree in foolishness.
That is the book that made me give my heart to Jesus Christ.
Glad to hear this ! The more the merrier!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVGf16zZxxs Crumbacher- Life Of The Party
The thought into this post is why I enjoy reading great minds at work ! Great post !👍🇺🇸
I've been wanting to post along these lines for a while, but have not had the time to do it the way I wanted. Honestly, I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist gave me pretty much the whole structure of the post, which is why I would have been horribly negligent to not mention it.
Keep Digging Patriot ! Truth is for the finders !
Here is a list of logical errors that can be made in arguments
Thank you!, You might want to make this a post of its own.
Here is a more fun way to learn it!
http://fallacydetective.com
The Truth is whatever it is, but logic and reason cannot possibly tell us what it is. They are designed to lead us closer to the truth, but they don't always succeed. There is no way to know (logically prove) if any step forward towards the Truth is really a step forwards. It could be a step sideways or even backwards depending on how flawed the premises turn out to be.
Let me elaborate this by looking at some of your examples:
Gravity is an idea. This idea may not have anything to do with Reality. Indeed, Newton's concept of gravity was that there existed an instantaneous force acting between two massive bodies at all times and in all places. Einstein came along and said, "not so fast" (literally). He said (parphrasing) "Gravity doesn't act instantaneously and it can only act within any objects lightcone (sphere of influence). In fact, gravity isn't a force at all, but a consequence of the geometry of spacetime."
Of course both Einstein's and Newtons' "gravity" are nothing more than models of reality. They are logical extrapolations from observations, with the math based on premises that are completely unproven. Indeed, it is in no way controversial to say that Einstein's General Relativity is either incorrect or incomplete since it can't account for all observations.
All observations on the non-celestial scale (and the model based on them called "quantum field theory") suggests that what we think of as "physical" is almost certainly an emergent property of something very different from our macroscopic concept of it. Even the concept of space and time may be emergent properties of the actual (fundamental) Universe, thus our models of the Universe may be so completely incorrect that it's laughable. Calling these ideas "the truth" may be correct, but physics doesn't suggest that they are.
Similar arguments can be made for the "Laws of Thermodynamics" ("physical law" is a ludicrous word all by itself). The Truth is, the Universe does whatever the fuck it wants, no matter what our ideas are about it, or how good our models are at prediction.
A mathematical (or logical) "truth" is not The Truth. Logic is a formal language, and math the broader language of logic. These languages and formats are consistent, but they are incapable of telling us "the truth.". There is a clear distinction between the Truth (which is whatever it is), and something that is logically true (self-consistent, but based on unproven and/or unprovable premises).
Prove, with absolute certainty that the Earth is a sphere. I don't mean convince me, I mean show it so completely that no one can ever possibly dispute it. Don't get me wrong. I can and have made numerous arguments, but if we don't even understand how the universe works in any meaningful way, and we don't even know if there is such a thing as a "dimension" in the Fundamental, how can you possibly prove that the Earth is a sphere?
Answer: you can't.
We don't know enough. What I can do is provide very compelling arguments that within the scope of our understanding, of our perspective of the universe, the Earth is spherical as opposed to flat. I.e. I can make a much better case that the Earth is a sphere than that the Earth is flat. But in truth, I don't know that the Fundamental even has such concepts. These ideas of geometry are likely emergent properties of something far outside the scope of our ken. In other words, if we understood the Fundamental better, perhaps a better case could be made for flat than sphere. I'm not saying that's the case or that I think it is, I'm saying we have no fucking clue.
The point is, you can't know the Truth about these things by the methods you are espousing. Science, logic, reason, etc. aren't "Truth givers," what they are, are the best methods we have available to get closer and closer to the truth. They can never make statements of The Truth because that is completely outside their design parameters. Sometimes these methods lead us in the opposite direction from a larger understanding of What Is.
Once you "know the truth," you become incapable of seeing evidence to the contrary. I suggest we stop worrying about "what is true" and embrace our ignorance. In knowing that you know nothing there is the greatest wisdom. The eyes of a child can often see far more than any "expert."
Let go of the need to know the truth and you will become a truly great investigator. Hold on to that need, and you will always remain stuck in The Matrix. It is that need, and a false faith in reason as a "truth giver" that is the primary driver of The Matrix's hold on the Minds of Men. it is this false belief that holds all people in Controlled Opposition, each side "knowing the truth," all being given little pieces of it, all ignorant of the Larger scope, and indeed, that these methods of reason can't ever tell us the Truth at all.
That's the entire point of the book.
The less evidence you have for your position, the more faith you need to believe it (and vice versa).
Oh for crying--it's called a metaphor. I am autistic and I can see that.
You haven't read the book. If you had, you would've learned the easy counterpoint:
Why should I listen to YOU? You don't have the truth.
You should listen to me only if you want to. However, I provided a counter argument to the main premise of the OP on how we "know the truth" and you didn't address a single point I made (even if you think you did).
I'd respond, but it doesn't seem you want to listen, and since you didn't actually address anything I said there is nothing to respond to.
Maybe you should try re-reading what I wrote without thinking of it as some sort of attack. I don't think you understood the fundamental premise of the argument. That may be my fault, but without you actually addressing what I said, I can't tell how to better state it.
So you don't have the truth. Bye.
What kind of epic faggotry is this
He does this everywhere he goes, taking "what the definition of IS is" to its logical conclusion.
He will poke at every word, every syllable, so he'll never have to actually argue.
I really think he's crazy.
He's not exactly an Objectivist, that's for sure
The $25,000 Pyramid
Archaic; The second person singular object pronoun, equivalent to modern you; the objective case of thou
Preposition; Intermediate to, in time, quantity, or degree
Golf; A small wooden, plastic, metal, or rubber peg from which the ball is driven, as in teeing off
Archaic; The second person singular subject pronoun, equivalent to modern you (used to denote the person or thing addressed)
Noun; One's life (living) and its moments of time (process of dying). "At this stage of his career the sands are running out."
One who provides a service for a child (living) providing such with a humanoid incapable of moving (process of dying)
Noun; A pile or heap of wood or other combustible material
That's how you sound
Each one within perceivable sound perceives differently, hence being able to express resonant (need) or dissonant (want) reactions.
Therefore; if one perceives sound as dissonant, then one chose to ignore to resonate with it, which happens when one consents to the suggested words by others.
How about this? Does one shape words out of sound; or sound out of words? If it's the former, then why use temporary words to label ongoing sound?
The lack of self-awareness is staggering
a) staggering (doubting) the lack of self awareness among others implies ones own ignorance of further growing self awareness, hence by oneself...not by judging others.
b) can you describe the difference between decoding "Q-drops" on GreatAwakening and brushing off what others write as unsound, convoluted; lacking awareness etc.?
Stop.
No one talks like this.
No one lives like this.
You have convinced exactly 0 people to approach their lives in this manner.
Is this how you approach every single conversation offline? Do you speak in the most obtuse manner possible, ignoring the plain meaning of words to focus on what each individual syllable SOUNDS like, and extrapolating a true meaning from there?
How do you pay for things at the grocery store?
How did you approach your education?
You put so much effort into these phonetics, over AT LEAST TWO YEARS, that I think this is how you really do conduct your everyday life.
You are deaf to how the real world works.
You are the deaf phonetician.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
You're insane.