Posted by Doctorate M on August 23, 2000 at 10:09:10:
In Reply to: Re: Dana posted by Seamus on August 23, 2000 at 08:10:37:
: : : : : : : So while we are on the subject of 'Truth'......
: : : : : :
: : : : : : : Truth is a point, the subtlest and finest; harder than adamant; never to be broken, worn away or blunted. Its only bad quality is, that it is sure to hurt those who touch it; and likely to draw blood, perhaps the life blood of those who press earnestly upon it.
: : : : : : : (Walter Savage Landor)
: : : : : :
: : : : : : ~~I'm not afraid of the Truth. I believe Someone touched it for me. (Just revieling my path a bit.)
: : : : : : :
: : : : : : : Truth is mighty and will prevail. There is nothing wrong with this, except that it ain't so.
: : : : : : : (Mark Twain)
: : : : : : ~~Ol' Sam never was a patient sort, was he?
: : : : : : :
: : : : : : : Whatever satisfies the soul is truth.
: : : : : : : (Walt Whitman)
: : : : : : ~~I balked at this one right off, then I remembered the Balm of Gilliad.
: : : : : : :
: : : : : : : The truth is rarely pure and never simple.
: : : : : : : (Oscar Wilde)
: : : : : : ~~Not through our human eyes, anyway.
: : : : : : Thanks, Huggy! Now that were in agreement on truth and unity, maybe we can start working on the rest of that Pax Paper. Anyone feeling open-minded and in need of a good probing?:)
: : : : : : Dana S.
: : : : : *****
: : : : : *me!* *i do! i do!*
: : : : : Actually, Dana, I'm not sure there was agreement on truth & unity. Most seemed to say truth is unchanging & there can be but one; others felt truth is flexible & there can be many. The distinction between perspective & truth wasn't unanimous.
: : : : : Unity; well, I think it was never really examined on its own merit. The discussion became one of 'how do we achieve this unity?' without defining or weighing it or considering its cost.
: : : : : Dana, you have NO idea how much I enjoy your enthusiastic expressions (even when made within the safety of self-threads!).
: : : : :
: : : : : Elaine
: : : : ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: : : : I couldn't agree with you more Elaine. For someone who professes to have difficulty posting......I think our Dana has a marvellous knack for getting to the heart of things in a coherent and intelligent way (which is more than she does in her emails to ME!!!)
: : : : As far as Unity goes, here is my question to you.......is it possible to be 'united' with someone whose way of life is fundamentally different to yours?
: : : : And on the subject of Truth, I would be interested to hear from someone who can explain to me how there can be more than one truth?
: : : : Sooooo.......there is something for y'all to get your teeth into!
: : : : Adele
: : : Good morning, Adele!
: : : It is quite possible to have more than one "truth", as well as quite common.
: : : "Truth" is a perception. What I perceive to be the truth, may not necessarily be what you see as the truth...........for instance, when two people witness an event, each may see it entirely different from the other. Therefore, when questioned on what happened, each may have a different story, and each believing their version to be the truth. This fact of life is borne out in courts every day........thus you have more than one "truth".......and each one quite often is correct. I deal with that little problem almost daily............
: : : .......and that's why there is Instant Replay and appeals in the NFL!
: : : Seamus
: : ~~~~~~~~~~~~
: : Ah, but you see Seamus, this is where I beg to differ. I believe that there is only one 'truth' - everything else is perception - and the two are not the same things at all. We confuse ourselves by talking about 'telling the truth', but sometimes it is not the truth, it is only our perception of the truth. For example, if I witnessed an accident, I could go in to court, lay my hand on a bible and swear to tell the truth. I then tell the truth, but another witness comes forward, also telling 'the truth' and offers a different story of events. So what is the truth? The truth is what REALLY happened, not what people saw, or remembered, or didn't see - it is the whole event, and that is something that no one person could possibly know. The best we can do, is take all the pieces of information about what happened and try and construct a picture of the truth. (I am not sure this is all making sense, but I am doing the best I can!!). I guess that I am trying to distinguish between the truth, as in being honest, and the truth, as in indisputable fact or actuality.
: : We had a superb tv advertisement here a few years back which illustrates the point perfectly. It was for a leading broadsheet newspaper and it showed two pieces of film, the first piece showed a skinhead looking hostile and running towards a businessman, he then tackled the businessman to the floor. It then fades to black. (I could go into court and truthfully say that the skinhead charged at the businessman and knocked him to the ground). The second piece of film shows the same scene but with a wider angled lense. The part that is missing from the first piece of film is that, above the businessman, some bricks are starting to topple from the roof above the businessman, and that the skinhead actually saved the businessman from being crushed beneath the bricks. The slogan for the ad incidentally, was something along the lines of, 'get the whole picture'.
: : Does this make any sense?
: : Adele
: My point exactly........truth is a perception. That is why we have courts.....to decide what is the truth. (...and now for the disclaimer... OJ...need I say more??)
While my beloved alter Doc M sleeps it off under the pool
table at Bumppo's, after being unceremoniously being
ejected from the House of HooHa, I'd love to get in
on this thread since I missed it the last time. I am
more drawn to certain concepts of Eastern religious
thought. I am NO expert, having just begun reading
and thinking seriously on the subject. Something I
came across recently fits in perfectly here, I
think. Truth vs Goodness according to Buddhist thought:
1. Do not take anything as true under any condition
2. Understand what is good, rather than what is true
3) Use your own judgement. Scripture is only an aid to
4) Good acts result from a good state of mind, which means
that cultivation of a good state of mind is the way
to the good life.
5) One who cultivates the mind this way does not have to
worry about the next world, or depend on external
According to Buddhism, truth and falsehood are concepts
derived from logical thinking. Though what is logical
is considered "true", we tend to decide our beliefs are
true based on something other than logic. Often we take
a statement to be true not because we know it is true,
but because we like it, or our family believes it,
or because it's in a holy book -- not for any "logical"
reasons. We become emotionally attached to our beliefs
first, then use logic to justify them.
When we personalize beliefs this way, the result is
conflict and disharmony. When we cling to a viewpoint
and say "This is my viewpoint, this is truth," we are
in conflict with those who do not believe it, leading
to disharmony and quarreling. This is why the Buddha
advises his followers not to accept anything as "true."
Instead of seeking truth, seek goodness.
Post a Followup