The topic of this thread is one's favored attitude toward the apprehension of truth. In order to acquire an understanding one would imagine they would have to take an apprehensive attitude toward the task, however this may also create a mental situation in which the attentional system is focused narrowly within it's existing framework. In the same way our attention focuses narrowly on familiar regions of our environment when looking for a familiar object. We may be in a state of complete receptivity, but the moment we go looking for something we narrow our range of perception to a set of criterion within which we expect the object to be found. It may be no different for the pursuit of knowledge, we begin looking in the most familiar regions of our perception and consequently find only what we already knew.
It is unpopular to speak in terms of personal experience, however for the purposes of clarification I feel doing so might be the best form of representation. Foundational to my pursuit of knowledge was an introductory textbook to developmental psychology which may have seemed appealing given my personal childhood. Consequently, I continued to search for answers within academia and in particular psychology, I gradually branched out to physics and to a synthesis of the two in neuroscience. My interests eventually expanded out to encompass philosophy and religion, but for the longest time I was utterly convinced that the answer lied in some physical explanation. I engaged in endless debates with others who contended that physical reality was merely a perception of mind, to believe them was a complete contradiction of what I thought metaphysically. Unalterably I am implicated in reality, so my metaphysical beliefs define who I am, to change my beliefs is to change who I think I am. This was a boundary which I had to overcome by submitting myself to truth. It was quite an astonishing moment. I suspended my judgement for a brief time and I began spontaneously synthesizing all of the "conflicting" viewpoints with the viewpoints I already held. Whatever conflicts seemed to exist washed away almost instantaneously. There was no real conflict, it was merely my attachment to institutional science which created the perception of conflict and fundamentally distorted my perception of my opponents beliefs. Not to say that they weren't fundamentally deluded, just that their descriptions of reality weren't in conflict with mine, only different, perhaps more simplified but not completely wrong.
I also began to find many of the simplified concepts with which I disagreed far more applicable once I began to entertain them. Indeed, they seem to be completely validated from the perspective of science anyway. Something very dramatic changed in me which made me far more accepting of truth and open to other terminology and thought-structures. And that change came about in full force when I stopped feeling like I possess the truth and began pleading for truth to possess me. Pleading, metaphorically speaking, I simply let go of my grasp of it.
However, it is possible to completely let go of truth without falling into delusion? The submission to truth implies a seeking of truth at the same time, so it is submission for the purpose of acquiring. Yet, it must always continue to take the character of submission so as not to ultimately end in error.
Thoughts?
A Submissive Attitude Toward Truth
-
Kelly Jones
- Posts: 2665
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: A Submissive Attitude Toward Truth
I don't understand what the boundary was.Unalterably I am implicated in reality, so my metaphysical beliefs define who I am, to change my beliefs is to change who I think I am. This was a boundary which I had to overcome by submitting myself to truth.
...
-
Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
Re: A Submissive Attitude Toward Truth
Animus,
A certain amount of submission is needed, but not without a degree of dominant action. There needs to be dominant action agaisn't the ego, which eventually causes a sort of submission into reality, the mind falls deep into the abyss of reality. And one can lose the truth by losing sanity through illness or lapses of emotion or what have you.
A decent thought experiment that helped me years ago was an act of dominant action that resulted in submission. I began questioning all the perceptional assumptions that shaped the self's perception of reality. I began with the notion of "inside" and "outside" the mind. And moved onto "me" and "the world" Basically, any divisive terms I thought set up a barrier between reality and the mind because I wanted the two to be experienced as one. Then I began listening and being attentive to reality, I realized that involuntary cognitive activity occurred in the background, with all the sights and sounds in reality, then it came to me, all those movements were one, nothing was separate, the mind chatter was caused by past experience, and the noise within reality vibrated into the very core of what I was. This is when I realized that free will was an illusion, and the self was an artificial construction, a fiction used to navigate through the world. And I finally understood what all these sages were talking about when they said things like, you are the universe or you are the world...
An interesting thought experiment for anyone...
A certain amount of submission is needed, but not without a degree of dominant action. There needs to be dominant action agaisn't the ego, which eventually causes a sort of submission into reality, the mind falls deep into the abyss of reality. And one can lose the truth by losing sanity through illness or lapses of emotion or what have you.
A decent thought experiment that helped me years ago was an act of dominant action that resulted in submission. I began questioning all the perceptional assumptions that shaped the self's perception of reality. I began with the notion of "inside" and "outside" the mind. And moved onto "me" and "the world" Basically, any divisive terms I thought set up a barrier between reality and the mind because I wanted the two to be experienced as one. Then I began listening and being attentive to reality, I realized that involuntary cognitive activity occurred in the background, with all the sights and sounds in reality, then it came to me, all those movements were one, nothing was separate, the mind chatter was caused by past experience, and the noise within reality vibrated into the very core of what I was. This is when I realized that free will was an illusion, and the self was an artificial construction, a fiction used to navigate through the world. And I finally understood what all these sages were talking about when they said things like, you are the universe or you are the world...
An interesting thought experiment for anyone...
-
mensa-maniac
Re: A Submissive Attitude Toward Truth
Animus wrote:The topic of this thread is one's favored attitude toward the apprehension of truth. In order to acquire an understanding one would imagine they would have to take an apprehensive attitude toward the task, however this may also create a mental situation in which the attentional system is focused narrowly within it's existing framework. In the same way our attention focuses narrowly on familiar regions of our environment when looking for a familiar object. We may be in a state of complete receptivity, but the moment we go looking for something we narrow our range of perception to a set of criterion within which we expect the object to be found. It may be no different for the pursuit of knowledge, we begin looking in the most familiar regions of our perception and consequently find only what we already knew.
It is unpopular to speak in terms of personal experience, however for the purposes of clarification I feel doing so might be the best form of representation. Foundational to my pursuit of knowledge was an introductory textbook to developmental psychology which may have seemed appealing given my personal childhood. Consequently, I continued to search for answers within academia and in particular psychology, I gradually branched out to physics and to a synthesis of the two in neuroscience. My interests eventually expanded out to encompass philosophy and religion, but for the longest time I was utterly convinced that the answer lied in some physical explanation. I engaged in endless debates with others who contended that physical reality was merely a perception of mind, to believe them was a complete contradiction of what I thought metaphysically. Unalterably I am implicated in reality, so my metaphysical beliefs define who I am, to change my beliefs is to change who I think I am. This was a boundary which I had to overcome by submitting myself to truth. It was quite an astonishing moment. I suspended my judgement for a brief time and I began spontaneously synthesizing all of the "conflicting" viewpoints with the viewpoints I already held. Whatever conflicts seemed to exist washed away almost instantaneously. There was no real conflict, it was merely my attachment to institutional science which created the perception of conflict and fundamentally distorted my perception of my opponents beliefs. Not to say that they weren't fundamentally deluded, just that their descriptions of reality weren't in conflict with mine, only different, perhaps more simplified but not completely wrong.
I also began to find many of the simplified concepts with which I disagreed far more applicable once I began to entertain them. Indeed, they seem to be completely validated from the perspective of science anyway. Something very dramatic changed in me which made me far more accepting of truth and open to other terminology and thought-structures. And that change came about in full force when I stopped feeling like I possess the truth and began pleading for truth to possess me. Pleading, metaphorically speaking, I simply let go of my grasp of it.
Mensa says: "When I stopped feeling like I possess the truth and began pleading for truth to possess me" Animus these are powerful words you are saying here. These words of yours are highly influential words, they caught my attention like no other, as I relate totally with them, because they are words of truth!
Let me explain, "When I stopped feeling like I possess the truth" is like accepting others have their own truths too. Excellent observation Animus! "And began pleading for truth to possess me" is like opening yourself up entirely and inviting and accepting other truths in. This is such a premium observation of yours Animus, I'm so impressed with your growth. Keep up the great work Animus!
However, it is possible to completely let go of truth without falling into delusion? The submission to truth implies a seeking of truth at the same time, so it is submission for the purpose of acquiring. Yet, it must always continue to take the character of submission so as not to ultimately end in error.
Thoughts?