That which conforms to reality. It can be tricky to sort out the details, but there are some things we can confirm are not true, for instance, I have not won a billion dollars
I don't think I need to define it. I think you agree that "Swensson has won a billion dollars" is not truth (I mean, I guess you couldn't know if I have, but rest assured that I have not, I can pick a less believable example if we want to). I don't think I have to work out the finer details of truth to establish that that statement is in fact not true. If we're going to be nitpicky about the definition of truth, we could just as well be nitpicky about what you think is pleasant.
And that's because you simply can't. You are also in the world of the unknown and that world has no reality or truth. The "won a billion dollars" thing is not an argument or a rebuttal. Basically, you can't define truth because you can't define this reality. We both don't know < simple reality and the TRUTH.
It seems to me there is a distinction between 1=1 and 1=2 that I am warranted in acknowledging. I don't know if you'd say that I made that distinction without a definition, or with only an incomplete definition, or with some undeclared definition, but I don't have a problem with acknowledging the distinction. Besides, I don't think this thread it married to any cartesian-level certainty, there seems to me to be a very practical way in which believing that I have won lots of money is false and unconstructive.
Seems to me that you are unable to dispute simple truth and reality, but prefer to distract to non comparative 'example'. That truth and reality is that you simply have no idea. < Makes us in the same boat.
If you think my examples are a distraction, then perhaps you have misunderstood what I'm trying to say. What is it you say I have no idea about? So if we're in the same boat of having no idea, what basis do you have for refusing to believe that we simply cease to exist when your physical body dies?
I think you examples are a stretch. No misunderstanding other than you and I don't know. Sorry, but that's reality and fact. Your examples are kinda dumb really, sort of a reach.
I think the examples highlight that there is a difference between true and false. I'm not even arguing that we have access to knowledge about true and false, just that such a concept exists and your beliefs may or may not conform to them. I would agree that we don't know, I'm asking why you go against that to things like "I am Galactic energy". Do you know that any more than I know 1=1?
RE: I Can NOT Be Killed. SUBTOPIC: What is Knowledge? ⁜→ Swensson, et al, BLUF: This idea of the concept of knowledge is a challenging aspect of the discussion. (COMMENT) The idea of "TRUE" (T) and "FALSE" (F) is critical to what is sound and valid determinations. It appears that you both see that any deductive reasoning leads to a sound and valid conclusion based on TRUE premises on any question. (COMMENT) "I am galactic energy." → I'm not sure what that means. IF energy (the capacity to do work) meets this simple definition (reduced to the simplest perception) everywhere in the Milky Way, THEN yes, your body is related to "galactic energy." Having said that, we must remember that this is a probability-based determination from what we see as an internal observer at a distance. However, the statement "I know 1=1" is a completely different question. Is "mental thought" work? Does it take any more effort (P=IE) to think than it does breathe (P=IE)? Another question is the nature of "information." Can "information" be destroyed? IF I fall into a black hole is everything I know - lost? Because there is a relationship between information, storage, and retrieval → and "knowledge." What we understand about "knowledge" is shallow. Most Respectfully, R
RE: I Can NOT Be Killed. SUBTOPIC: The soul...? ⁜→ Giftedone, et al, BLUF: This is an interesting ongoing investigation. (COMMENT) The question of the probability of an "immortal soul" presupposes that there is such a thing. Is there such a thing as a "soul?" If so, what is the proponent agency? Most Respectfully, R
Source? What access do you have to knowledge of the probability of the soul's immortality? Us not knowing the probability of something is not the same as the probabilities being equal/similar (if you disagree, I'd like to play cards for money with you). I would have thought not having access to information warrants us saying "we don't know", not making fanciful assertions. If I flip a coin, am I warranted in believing that it will come up heads? Or would that in fact be unwarranted (although with a decent chance of being true by accident)? Besides, sort of the point of my question was to challenge the fact that Hey Now didn't include any consideration of probability/likelihood/believability/similar, he only pointed to what he wanted to believe. In fact, my guess is that he did some undeclared probability assessments (possibly with flaws in the reasoning, although I don't want to accuse him of that without confirming), and then proceeded to back-justify his conclusion.
exactly, like mosquito's attracted to the light, the light of life very hard to step off the treadmill of life and death
Yes you can be killed. Whether or not you will be is the question at hand. But, under the context of your Christian referencing, it is noted in Revelations that those souls not found worthy of the new Heaven or the new Earth will be cast down into the pit of fire to be forever destroyed. And no matter how strong your conviction is that you have fulfilled all the requirements to be saved, there are many sects of Christianity who will claim that you have not, and, likely, you as a Christian have claimed that there are those whose claims of being saved are not actually.
There is a passage in Revalations that indicates that all who have passed "wake up" when it is time for all the souls to be judged. So given that, it is likely that when we die, again under that Christian context, our next moment of awareness is when we are on our way to be judged. It may be moments after our death, or thousands of years for some. But there won't be a noted interval.
Who says it's a secret? Does a child growing up know everything? Does an adult for that matter? Point being, as parents, there are many things that we either don't tell or actively hide from children until they are ready for it. Why would this be any different?
I really don't think any of this is relevant to what I've been saying. It seems to me this issue can be discussed with a common understanding of knowledge, like "I know my shirt is red, I can see it"/"I don't know what I'll have for dinner tomorrow". The discussion laid out in the OP and in the post I replied to does not seem to rely on cartesian-level knowledge, or an understanding of the concept of knowledge. We've been perfectly able to talk about knowledge in a normal sense for most discussions, shoehorning it in here seems like a deflection. We don't need a full laid out understanding of knowledge to know that "I want this to be the truth" is not a good reason to assume that it is in fact the truth. I don't think it's productive to side track every question with cartesian doubt. I don't think this is what Hey Now was referring to as energy. In particular, you talk about the "body" being related to galactic energy, whereas my understanding is that Hey Now was referring explicitly to energy/otherwise not fundamentally bound to the body (for instance in an immortal soul that could survive the body).
First off... thanks for using a term I had not heard of "proponent agency". Now to the soul .. how does one define a made up construct ? Given that .. I am going to slightly move the goal posts right off the hop and define the soul as awareness of one's existence. " I think therefor I am" or " I drink therefor I am" depending on how much Monty Python one has watched. I wil further claim and prove that existence is eternal. The one thing we know for sure is that Matter and Energy (ME) came together in some configuration that gained awareness of itself. Proof - We exist. - or at least we think we do - either way it matters not. What is the probability that this unlikely event could happen again - ME come together in the same configuration as "YOU". While this event is quite unlikely - since it happened - there must have been a probability that this could happen prior to it happening. Assumption - "Time is infinite" In an infinite amount of time - anythig with a probability of happening ..will happen - not just once but, and infinite amount of time. Thus - existence is eternal - and what ever that soul thingy that arrives with existence is eternal as well.
