Where can the truth and reality be known to exist?
- Thread starter Tercon
- Start date
Temujin
Well-known member
Whereas everyone else is waiting for you to recognise that there is no barrier to things existing without being known to exist.
There are items in my sock drawer that only I know to exist. If I suddenly drop dead, those items continue to exist, even though no-one knows that they exist. Your assertion that there must be an over-arching mind that knows of everything that exists, is just that, an assertion. You have not shown any requirement for it.
Temujin said: Whereas everyone else is waiting for you to recognise that there is no barrier to things existing without being known to exist.
Tercon response: Do you really believe “that there is no barrier to things existing without being known to exist”?
Temujin said: There are items in my sock drawer that only I know to exist. If I suddenly drop dead, those items continue to exist, even though no-one knows that they exist.
Tercon response: Do you even know how the truth and reality is known and experienced? Hint: Is it true in reality that YOU “suddenly drop dead”? And if it isn't true, then is that reality? You cannot make up crap and then pretend that it is somehow the truth and reality silly.
Temujin said: Your assertion that there must be an over-arching mind that knows of everything that exists, is just that, an assertion. You have not shown any requirement for it.
Tercon response: Sure I have, the truthfulness of my logical argument attests to an archetype mind that must have always existed that hosts the truth and reality, because we are not able to know or show otherwise about the logical truth and reality. And if you are able to think that a “mind independent reality exists”, then you are doing nothing more than demonstrating for all to see your own self-deception.
Tercon response: Do you really believe “that there is no barrier to things existing without being known to exist”?
Temujin said: There are items in my sock drawer that only I know to exist. If I suddenly drop dead, those items continue to exist, even though no-one knows that they exist.
Tercon response: Do you even know how the truth and reality is known and experienced? Hint: Is it true in reality that YOU “suddenly drop dead”? And if it isn't true, then is that reality? You cannot make up crap and then pretend that it is somehow the truth and reality silly.
Temujin said: Your assertion that there must be an over-arching mind that knows of everything that exists, is just that, an assertion. You have not shown any requirement for it.
Tercon response: Sure I have, the truthfulness of my logical argument attests to an archetype mind that must have always existed that hosts the truth and reality, because we are not able to know or show otherwise about the logical truth and reality. And if you are able to think that a “mind independent reality exists”, then you are doing nothing more than demonstrating for all to see your own self-deception.
Temujin
Well-known member
Such a barrier is not known to exist.
For someone who uses the word "if" such a lot, it is odd that you apparently don't know what it means.
Not at all. Your argument is neither true nor logical. There is nothing preventing a mind independent reality from existing. It is true that we don't know that it exists, but we don't know that it doesn't exist either.
So you believe that there is no barrier known to exist between "things existing" and things "being known to exist”?
Why don't you think I know what "if" means? Do you know what a logical argument is?
Why can't you show what I said to be untrue and/or illogical then?
I know without a doubt that we cannot know anything about "a mind independent reality" existing. For once why don't you just stop and try thinking about what you are saying here? If you require a believing mind in order to know anything true about reality, then how is it possible to know anything about "a mind independent reality" existing silly?
Will you ever learn to stop phrasing your question in this ambiguous manner?
If you are asking for a place other than a mind, where the knowledge of reality can exist, then there isn't one. No-one is saying that knowledge exists outside of minds.
But if you are asking for a place other than a mind, that we can know of, where reality can exist, then that has been provided to you many times already: MIPUST - the mind-independent physical universe of time and space.
Bob Carabbio
Well-known member
Yup - the Holy Spirit can, and blow away all your false beliefs in the process. He's the ONLY one who can. EVerything else od just "Man's Wisdom" SIGNIFYING NOTHING.
Simple as that.
Strawman and not ambiguous at all, as they refer to and denote exactly what I meant; God is reality.
If no "knowledge of reality" can be known to exist without a mind and no "knowledge exists outside of minds", then the ONLY place left that the truth and reality can be known to exist is in and by a believing mind.
No such way or place exists independent of minds. But if you THINK they they do, then please be so kind as to explain how YOU can KNOW about this "place" without the benefit of your own believing mind silly?
If you are referring to the "Spirit of truth" when you say "Holy Spirit", and all truth still requires a believing mind in order to be known and experienced, then you have said nothing to refute this truth Bob.
I just proved the ambiguity by spelling out for you the two very different ways it can be read. The answers differ depending on which of the two questions you were intending to ask.
As I explained, no-one is suggesting that the knowledge could be anywhere other than in a mind. But reality itself need not be located where the knowledge of it is located.
That MIPUST is mind-independent doesn't mean it isn't known by any mind. It just means it does not rely upon any mind in order to exist.
Whatsisface
Well-known member
Thistle
Well-known member
Well, this believing mind thinks not.
Irrelevant, as if it is MY argument, then it is I and only I who gets to say what MY argument means and not you at all. You just get to rebut it, but you don't get to say what I meant as well silly.
Well, if reality is to be known, then it cannot be known to exist or be "located" somewhere else outside of a believing mind and the truth and reality still be known and maintained silly. Like get a grip man.
If "MIPUST is mind-independent" and all truth and reality requires a believing mind in order to be known and known to exist, then "MIPUST" cannot be related to the truth or representative of reality PERIOD. And if you cannot show how you know it exists, then you also cannot give any reason why it exists.
Well, if that "believing mind thinks not", then it knows not as well.
This is about your question, not your argument. And you are of course welcome to clarify which of the two meanings you intended. Last time I asked, you said you meant both, which confirmed the ambiguity - using one set of words to ask two different questions.
If reality can be known in my mind while existing in God's mind, then why can't it be known in my mind while existing in MIPUST?
I get to stipulate what I mean by "mind-independent", and I am saying that MIPUST can be known by minds but does not rely on any mind in order to exist. That is the alternative hypothesis I am giving in answer to your ambiguous OP question. Again, can you disprove this hypothesis or not?
Thistle
Well-known member
Don't take this wrong, because it sounds like I'm a philosophical skeptic, and I'm not, but I think I do know that.
Hypatia_Alexandria
Well-known member
What is reality? What is truth? These are huge philosophical concepts.
https://plato.stanford.edu/search/search?query=Reality
Search (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
plato.stanford.edu
Whatsisface
Well-known member
Just about everyone who has answered this question.
However, if truth and reality can only exist in minds, how do you account for all the disagreement that exists between minds? If one person believes that the Earth is an oblate spheroid, and another thinks it flat, then we have at least one mind who's beliefs can't be right. So we have an example of a believing mind who's beliefs cannot be truth and reality.
Temujin
Well-known member
That is not what I said. I said that you have not shown that there is a barrier that prevents things existing that are not known to exist.
Scientists have recently realised details of some 25 planets which are more suitable for life than earth. They are over 100 light years away, so it is only recently that any human mind came to know that they exist. You claim that they can only exist if they are known to exist by a mind. You have not shown that this is logically necessary. They existed for millions of years without a human mind knowing about them, as indeed did our own earth. You have not demonstrated any requirement for another, non-human mind to be aware of them either. It is much more likely that existence is independent of minds, even though minds are required to discover what exists before it can become known.
You are right of course that we cannot know about things without our minds believing that they exist. However, we can speculate, hypothesise and discover things that we do not yet know, yet which do exist. Human beings have done this throughout history. It is a demonstrable fact that humans have discovered things previously not known to exist. This happens at the individual level also. We all have our little bubble of reality, things that we personally know to exist. As we go through life the bubble expands and we get to know more, but we never get to know everything, nor is there any reason why we should. Just as there are things that exist that neither you nor I will ever know of, there are things that exist that no-one will ever know of.
Can they be known to exist outside of a believing mind?
