There is no truth...

To perceive something and take such perception as fact, is to close ones mind off to the potentiality that something is different than it appears to be on the surface

I agree. Perception is all we got unless you rely on intuition a lot and I do but some would say intuition is just a type of perception which I think is true as well.

I think one really shouldn't be too sure of ones self and keep you mind open to other/all possibilities.

We are limited creatures in an unlimited universe.

Rickie The Grey wrote:
Nephilim wrote:
but perception does not require the truth.

I agree but where can you go with that? Perception is deception?

Perceptions can indeed deceive. Case in point the phenomenon of optical illusions. These are perceived but they deceive us. They are not as they appear, so they misrepresent themselves. The statement Truth requires perception means exactly that. All things MUST be perceived. Once we perceive something we must then analyze it, and apply logic to it. If the perception can withstand this scrutiny and still stand on it's own merits, one can identify it as truth.

Ah, epistemological nihilism my old friend! :silly:

I don't know if I agree that there is NO truth. I do, however, find that its nigh impossible for humanity to grasp or even find ultimate truth in the universe.

Quantum mechanics teaches this. Life is all about perception. Once you read a book or just watch a few videos on Quantum Mechanics you will understand. Particles change based on the way "we the human" observe it. This means, if you can tap into different levels of observation, you may very well be able to manipulate the particles. The key here is "it is how you decide looking at what you are doing that determines your performance and understanding of that".

So what are the basics of observation?
first rules are to understand that life..."reality" (at least that which we are experiencing now) is nothing but linguistics and ideas. An idea that someone came up with, developed and then attached a word to it and gave it a definition, then distributed its concrete basis to societies. This is what makes a reality. The energy of thousands of people thinking that one thing is so. In that "thinking" is perception, it is how you think about it that your observation is based on. Obviously the more educated you are in more subjects the more ability you have with observation. Thinking and observing is a practice, you have to practice doing these things.

this thread is wow

WOW is NOW upside down - absent one line, in print anyway

AND

"Key 4: Once something is joined, it is always connected, whether it remains physically linked or not."

The Divine Matrix by Greg Braden

Mareeka wrote: this thread is wow

WOW is NOW upside down - absent one line, in print anyway

AND

"Key 4: Once something is joined, it is always connected, whether it remains physically linked or not."

The Divine Matrix by Greg Braden

Please tell us more.

This is a wonderful thread topic, highly enjoy it... Great points all around fellow jedi! :woohoo:

The perception of truth is subjective
the perception of reality is objective

Although my perception of the true reality is neither subjective, nor objective, but both, truth just is, as is perception, and perception changes, yet truth is unchanged, the only constant is change... Therefore... Que the music
Krs one drops some info about it in this track...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvvDvGtMt9k

Truth is the cause
Perception is the effect...
I think I thought too much about this, time to meditate on it... If anyone can build further, please do... Here is a good music video for those who care for hip hop mash ups...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZH5iU7TlgY

Rza's verse nails what truth is, imo... PEACE, and thank you for allowing me to be in this discussion :lol:

May the force be with us, always...

Orion Seraphim wrote: Quantum mechanics teaches this. Life is all about perception.

Sorry, you will have to actually draw that line first. That is what popular science authors (not popular authors on science but authors on popular science rather) may be throwing all around, along with scammers and artists who just replaced their "spirits" or "stars" with "quantum theory" without changing another word, but there is no way to draw that connection from the science. Yes, our instruments and interactions with objects affect them in a minimal way and the more sensitive the object you observe is to such minimal interactions (they get virtually totally dependent when you get down to the quantum level), the less definite statements you can make about them, or rather, the more weird behavior you actually expect to observe, which is why quantum mechanics are so incredibly hard to comprehend - which ironically makes it all so much easier to abuse as that "weird science nobody understands so we might as well call it magic".
That does not mean nor imply that reality as a whole or as any significant portion of it is subject to human perception. If it were, not much unlike Dr. Lanza tries to argue, the enterprise of science itself would be impossible. If we cannot rely upon reality being more or less as it is, then we can have precisely nil knowledge about it whatsoever. Not only does the fact that we do know a few things about reality suggest the opposite notion, above that, there is no way you could go about testing the notion if you wanted.

Thank your for your attention to my little rant against people abusing the name of notoriously difficult to grasp areas of study to make a case for cattle excrement.

[/non-read-only-mode]

@ Gisteron...

Speaking of truth and quantum mechanics…
Have you heard that entropy isn't what it used to be?

Murphy's Ten Laws for String Theorists:

(1) If you fix a mistake in a mathematical superstring calculation, another one will show up somewhere else.
(2) If your results are based on the work of others, then one such work will turn out to be wrong. (3) The longer your article, the more likely your computer hard disk drive will fail while you are typing the references.
(4) The better your research result, the more likely it will be rejected by the referee of a journal; on the other hand, if your work is wrong but not obviously so, it will be accepted for publication right away.
(5) If a result seems to good to be true, it is unless you are one of the top ten string theorists in the world. (By the way, these theorists refer to their results as "string miracles".)
(6) Your most startling string-theoretic theorem will turn out to be valid in only two spatial dimensions or less.
(7) When giving a string seminar, nobody will follow anything you say after the first minute, but, if miraculously someone does, then that person will point out a flaw in your reasoning half-way through your talk and what will be worse is that your grant review officer will happen to be in the audience.
( For years, nobody will ever notice the fudge factors in your calculations, but when you come up for tenure they will surface like fish being tossed fresh breadcrumbs.
(9) If you are a graduate student working on string theory, then the field will be dead by the time you get your Ph.D.; Even worse, if you start over with a new thesis topic, the new field will also be dead by the time you get your Ph.D.
(10) If you discover an interesting string model, then it will predict at least one low-energy, observable particle not seen in Nature.

In summary, anything in string theory that theoretically can go wrong will go wrong, but if nothing does go theoretically wrong, then experimentally it is ruled out. :woohoo:

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Albert-Einstein-Quotes.htm#Einstein.Metaphysics.Philosophy