The Paradoxical Stable Truth About Not Knowing: It"s The Only Acceptable Hand At the Poker Table
MODE of Cosmic Therapy Esoteric Psychology: Dealing with What May Not be
How can we really know if and what we think we know is true? We may believe a lot of things, but to know if our beliefs are true and grounded is quite a 'horse of another color'.
Knowledge is very different from belief. Knowledge may not meet the necessary criteria for being recognized as truth unless it can undoubtedly be established as not false; moreover, knowledge must be supported by sufficient verifiable evidence.
Still, it is furthered questioned since we can only know what we know under certain parameters, conditions and circumstances. In other words, our 'supposed' knowledge has defining limits, constraints, reservations, and restrictions.
We all live in and around certain accepted beliefs.
We WANT to believe the majority of them. We are comfortable with the well-conditioned ideas we have grown accustomed to. Our identity is somewhat based on these ideas no matter how faulty or thin their premise of actual fact may be.
It's almost as if someone were to question or challenge our 'home-grown' belief system, we would rise up in defense, anxiety and bitterness assuming we had been in some manner insulted or debased. Not the case at all.
In order to know what is true, [IF, in fact, we could ever know for certain] we must hold for ourselves a certain drawer of curious skepticism. In order to know and grow, we must invoke a healthy suspicion to all that is presented.
That is not to say that we cannot and should not entertain faith but just remember to separate the two emotions into two entirely divergent categories. One may be, for example, an impossible supposition, while the other maintains a hint of more than unending annoyance.
In other words, it takes time, patience and effort to learn something new; but, more importantly to push back the walls of confining, limiting and restrictive walls of solid familiar preference to allow the water of uncertainty to flow in.
Faith and skepticism will be at odds for a while, no doubt. Yet, the search for the illusive truth may require the biggest leap of faith after all, since one will have to stand unattended too without convictions IF he is to find any merit of value in expansion of his sphere of influence.
We can only know what we know through our five senses.
These physical senses relay all experiences though the brain for verification, interpretation and authentication. Now, here's the biggie: no matter the how the brain will tabulate, incorporate, demonstrate, evaluate in the final computation, it's simply (complex) brain controlled spinal cord induced emotionally induced perception. In other words, an electrically specifically coded DNA manipulated version of charged nitrogen based neuron-firing.
We all possess undeniable mental representations formed through these elaborately electrically charged transported appearances. We THINK (key word) what we see and experience is real, true and solid. But, is it?
Again, keeping a open mind just long enough to challenge the reality of things would call for you to use some of that drawer full of curious skepticism. If we are formed by and through a conglomerate of colorless gases, then how rock-solid are we? {Not a good allusion, for even rocks are composed of molecular gases.}
Plunging a bit further, we must admit that there is a definite difference in the things themselves as opposed to our specific ideas we have about the things.
What I may feel about one specific thing is based upon many factors; first, my colored identity with the object because of my association with it through memory or from experience or having no knowledge of it all. You will have entirely different associations. These two factors, alone will warp the reality of our so-need fully invented illusions.
We tend to build, base and structure our lives around the various assumptions we take to be true.
And, worse yet, we don't want our illusions disturbed by 'no' man! "Don't bother me with the facts; I simply want to eat my dinner and watch the game," becomes the predominant mind-set. Do we need to set about to discover and destroy faulty revered opinions? That is entirely up to you. Not my call, at all.
Doubt is a very good thing! It implies that there may be no relatable hope. And, if there be no hope in the present situation, one may have to scrutinize more closely and examine further other viable options. I think it's in 2nd Kings' Verse 7, if my memory serves me right, one of my most favorite biblical sayings, "Why sit we here until we die?"
In other words, now is the appropriate time to doubt for hope can blind fully be used as an escape not to evolve.
We also have a vague feeling, more so in some than others, that our senses can and do deceive. It all depends upon factors beyond our control. Something as simple as what we've had to eat during the day could affect a sense related matter.
With a certain amount of prudence, do we learn not to believe what has misinformed us before. This does not fall under the prelude to paranoia by any means; it simply suggests 'when the hot stove burns your hand, you won't be as willing to touch it again'.
As with formerly burned hands, unless stupidity or laziness enter the picture, we will have been forced to move in another direction away from the hot stove.
This may or may not serve our needs later but for the time being we will stay with the arduous reality that a hot stove will and does burn. Again, back to our nebulously defined search for what is true: it remains a point of hoped-for recognition but not yet sustained.
We must continue with our lust filled desires to know for certain what is and what is not.
And IF what is Not is the inseparable companion to what is all, that too be our celebrated victory. In the process of learning (waking up) we will be free of idealized convictions that bear no resemblance to reason and carry no toil of divinity's soul in search of raw, rarified earth experience!
How can we really know if and what we think we know is true? We may believe a lot of things, but to know if our beliefs are true and grounded is quite a 'horse of another color'.
Knowledge is very different from belief. Knowledge may not meet the necessary criteria for being recognized as truth unless it can undoubtedly be established as not false; moreover, knowledge must be supported by sufficient verifiable evidence.
Still, it is furthered questioned since we can only know what we know under certain parameters, conditions and circumstances. In other words, our 'supposed' knowledge has defining limits, constraints, reservations, and restrictions.
We all live in and around certain accepted beliefs.
We WANT to believe the majority of them. We are comfortable with the well-conditioned ideas we have grown accustomed to. Our identity is somewhat based on these ideas no matter how faulty or thin their premise of actual fact may be.
It's almost as if someone were to question or challenge our 'home-grown' belief system, we would rise up in defense, anxiety and bitterness assuming we had been in some manner insulted or debased. Not the case at all.
In order to know what is true, [IF, in fact, we could ever know for certain] we must hold for ourselves a certain drawer of curious skepticism. In order to know and grow, we must invoke a healthy suspicion to all that is presented.
That is not to say that we cannot and should not entertain faith but just remember to separate the two emotions into two entirely divergent categories. One may be, for example, an impossible supposition, while the other maintains a hint of more than unending annoyance.
In other words, it takes time, patience and effort to learn something new; but, more importantly to push back the walls of confining, limiting and restrictive walls of solid familiar preference to allow the water of uncertainty to flow in.
Faith and skepticism will be at odds for a while, no doubt. Yet, the search for the illusive truth may require the biggest leap of faith after all, since one will have to stand unattended too without convictions IF he is to find any merit of value in expansion of his sphere of influence.
We can only know what we know through our five senses.
These physical senses relay all experiences though the brain for verification, interpretation and authentication. Now, here's the biggie: no matter the how the brain will tabulate, incorporate, demonstrate, evaluate in the final computation, it's simply (complex) brain controlled spinal cord induced emotionally induced perception. In other words, an electrically specifically coded DNA manipulated version of charged nitrogen based neuron-firing.
We all possess undeniable mental representations formed through these elaborately electrically charged transported appearances. We THINK (key word) what we see and experience is real, true and solid. But, is it?
Again, keeping a open mind just long enough to challenge the reality of things would call for you to use some of that drawer full of curious skepticism. If we are formed by and through a conglomerate of colorless gases, then how rock-solid are we? {Not a good allusion, for even rocks are composed of molecular gases.}
Plunging a bit further, we must admit that there is a definite difference in the things themselves as opposed to our specific ideas we have about the things.
What I may feel about one specific thing is based upon many factors; first, my colored identity with the object because of my association with it through memory or from experience or having no knowledge of it all. You will have entirely different associations. These two factors, alone will warp the reality of our so-need fully invented illusions.
We tend to build, base and structure our lives around the various assumptions we take to be true.
And, worse yet, we don't want our illusions disturbed by 'no' man! "Don't bother me with the facts; I simply want to eat my dinner and watch the game," becomes the predominant mind-set. Do we need to set about to discover and destroy faulty revered opinions? That is entirely up to you. Not my call, at all.
Doubt is a very good thing! It implies that there may be no relatable hope. And, if there be no hope in the present situation, one may have to scrutinize more closely and examine further other viable options. I think it's in 2nd Kings' Verse 7, if my memory serves me right, one of my most favorite biblical sayings, "Why sit we here until we die?"
In other words, now is the appropriate time to doubt for hope can blind fully be used as an escape not to evolve.
We also have a vague feeling, more so in some than others, that our senses can and do deceive. It all depends upon factors beyond our control. Something as simple as what we've had to eat during the day could affect a sense related matter.
With a certain amount of prudence, do we learn not to believe what has misinformed us before. This does not fall under the prelude to paranoia by any means; it simply suggests 'when the hot stove burns your hand, you won't be as willing to touch it again'.
As with formerly burned hands, unless stupidity or laziness enter the picture, we will have been forced to move in another direction away from the hot stove.
This may or may not serve our needs later but for the time being we will stay with the arduous reality that a hot stove will and does burn. Again, back to our nebulously defined search for what is true: it remains a point of hoped-for recognition but not yet sustained.
We must continue with our lust filled desires to know for certain what is and what is not.
And IF what is Not is the inseparable companion to what is all, that too be our celebrated victory. In the process of learning (waking up) we will be free of idealized convictions that bear no resemblance to reason and carry no toil of divinity's soul in search of raw, rarified earth experience!