[1324] in Central_America
New quotes for Sun Mar 5
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Sun Mar 5 01:32:27 1989
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 89 01:34:04 EST
From: Initializer.SysDaemon <root@CHARON.MIT.EDU>
To: ca-mtg@bloom-beacon.mit.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
capsalad (Dave Schulman):
I just had a meaningless feeling. Aw, now it's gone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
celine (Adam Weishaupt):
On absolute knowledge:
What does one mean when one speaks or writes of 'absolute
knowledge'? For that matter, what is knowledge in general? The best
definition given in the standard dictionaries is "the fact or
condition of apprehending truth or fact". So knowledge is the
recognition of what is true. Not what is believed to be true, but
what IS true. The question is thus reducible to a question of truth,
because once truth is recognized, a simple cognizance of this truth is
sufficient for absolute knowledge. But is it possible for humans to
know truth? Now it is important to differentiate between distinct
definitions of the word truth. The distinction I want to make is
between objective truth and subjective truth. It is my contention
that the former is impossible to verify, and the latter is useless to
this discussion. Objective truth is defined as "[that which is]
conformable to an essential reality" or "a transcendent fundamental or
spiritual reality". This essential or spiritual reality is not the
physical and intellectual reality in which we are steeped, because, as
we would freely admit, many of the ideals to which we hold are subject
to doubt. It is my contention that this essential reality is not
subject to verification.
The real problematic concept in our entire notion of truth is
that in order for things to be absolutely true they must be publicly
true. But this is pivotal to the whole idea of absolute truth. Every
man that would claim to know the truth (for as it was semantically
demonstrated, only truth can be known) is asked to prove this
knowledge to others. If it is impossible to demonstrate this truth to
others such that they too could recognize that it was true, then it is
impossible to differentiate it from subjective truth. The mystic
achieves nirvana, and some say absolute truth, but how can we believe
this? It is no more reliable than someone on the street telling us
that everything is hamburger. Before I go on, I should say something
about subjective truth, especially since I am stating that it is in
fact not possible to differentiate objective truth from it.
Subjective truth is defined as 'the body of things, events, and
facts believed by any given individual. Thus subjective truth is
something that can only be understood as it applies to the individual.
I look at the grass and say that it is true that the grass is green, a
colorblind person looks and sees grey grass. The truth in this case
is what each individual defines to be true. But if each individual
defines truth internally, then it can't be used to deal with
interpersonal transmittance of thought. In this sense, it has become
philosophically useless.
Now as to why objective knowledge, if it can indeed be
individually known, cannot be differentiated from subjective belief:
There is no unique way of relating thoughts such that one can tell a
true thought from a belief that may or may not be true. The way
humans use to arrive at subjective knowledge is through reflection.
If objective truth is indeed arrived at reflection, how will the
individual be able to tell this from objective truth? And even
assuming this were possible, it could not be communicated to others
in a way such that they could tell it from subjective truth.
But this is making the assumption that objective truth is
obtainable through reflection. This assumption is either false, or
not useful, because even if it were the case that objective truth is
obtainable through reflection, it couldn't be discriminated from
subjective belief. Assuming that it were obtainable from some other
means, the one thing we can say about it is that it is incommunicable,
because this communication would necessarily be through
internalization and reflection on information. So to conclude on
objective knowledge, if it is knowable at all, which I haven't
established (and cannot), it aparently could not be imparted by others
in the form of external information and recognized for what it is.
NEXT TIME: On Belief
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
jik (Jonathan I. Kamens):
Looking at a really good chocolate chip cookie today at lunch, I said
(trying to be funny :-):
"But soft, what chip in yonder cookie bakes?"
To which Andrew (Greene) responded:
"It is the yeast...."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
splunge (Nigel from Hell):
From an article by Gordon Letwin in rec.music.misc:
>There have been numerous studies that have shown the same thing:
>there is a strong link between sex crimes and pornography.
Yes, I've seen those studies, shocking! It turns out that 80% of sex
offenders have read pornography!
But, even more shocking, friends, is a soon to be published story that
proves that nearly 99% of sex offenders have EATEN BREAKFAST, most of
them nearly every day! And worse, the same numbers hold true for
murderers, and for communist double agents! Yes, and those serial
killers like our friend Bundy - breakfast every day, without fail.
Yes, we can thank God that we've finally routed out the cause of
all evil: Breakfast!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
techie (Edward J Ouellette):
{From system: This user's .plan file is not world readable}
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
tron (Andrew H Cytron):
1
Awake! for morning in the bowl of night
Has flung the stone that puts the stars to flight:
And lo! the hunter of the east has caught
The sultan's turret in a noose of light.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
wisner (Bill Wisner):
"You mean, you put down your rock, and I put down my sword, and
we try to kill each other like civilized people?"
--- End of Central America ---
