Everything is Made of Energy Stuff

Rickie The Grey wrote:

No spiritual mumbo-jumbo, much less any fiction can ever compete in beauty with the magnificence of the true universe as it is.

I'm not minimize science or logic. I do feel there more ways to know and understand that goes beyond them and we have to be more semsitive/receptive to experience them. If it "makes me feel warm and fuzzy" I'm OK with that.

Excuse me, could you please point out how this quote pertains to science at all? All I see is somebody making the statement that truth is paramount in every regard and makes one feel warmer and fuzzier than any non-truth could ever hope to. I don't see anything about science in that quote.

LALL is more of a tolerance of other people and their views thing. I wasn't making a learning statement but I am learning more about you.

Gisteron wrote:

Rickie The Grey wrote:

No spiritual mumbo-jumbo, much less any fiction can ever compete in beauty with the magnificence of the true universe as it is.

I'm not minimize science or logic. I do feel there more ways to know and understand that goes beyond them and we have to be more semsitive/receptive to experience them. If it "makes me feel warm and fuzzy" I'm OK with that.

Excuse me, could you please point out how this quote pertains to science at all? All I see is somebody making the statement that truth is paramount in every regard and makes one feel warmer and fuzzier than any non-truth could ever hope to. I don't see anything about science in that quote.

Science is one way of learning and I feel there is learning that can takes place in addition to the scientific process.

If you don't want to believe that it's OK and if I want to believe that that's OK as well.

If what I feel is truth makes me feel all warm and fuzzy them good for me. You don't have to accept that and that is OK.

If you don't know what I mean by "live and let live" then what do you think of....

"I'm OK, You're OK"

Rickie The Grey wrote:

Gisteron wrote:

Rickie The Grey wrote:

No spiritual mumbo-jumbo, much less any fiction can ever compete in beauty with the magnificence of the true universe as it is.

I'm not minimize science or logic. I do feel there more ways to know and understand that goes beyond them and we have to be more semsitive/receptive to experience them. If it "makes me feel warm and fuzzy" I'm OK with that.

Excuse me, could you please point out how this quote pertains to science at all? All I see is somebody making the statement that truth is paramount in every regard and makes one feel warmer and fuzzier than any non-truth could ever hope to. I don't see anything about science in that quote.

Science is one way of learning and I feel there is learning that can takes place in addition to the scientific process.

If you don't want to believe that it's OK and if I want to believe that that's OK as well.

If what I feel is truth makes me feel all warm and fuzzy them good for me. You don't have to accept that and that is OK.

Again, could you please, please point out to me where the initial quote was about science at all? I really, seriously don't get it.

You brought up science I didn't?

No, science was not brought up by anyone but you.

Other than my response to Psyddhattha, in which he/she brought it up, I suppose if we want to be anal about it.

It wasnt really the focus of anything though, and nothing to do with Gisteron

Then things got a little convoluted because my OP had nothing to do with science.

So... "I'm OK, You're OK"

Gisteron wrote:

Adder wrote: Different people might get different things from questions, what is 'truth' is best described as whatever helps that person progress closer to moving forward in whatever areas of their life they seek improvement. Doesn't mean we have to ignore the facts in that process.

So what if there is a proposition that is not factual but does help the person in the sense that you suggest? By your definition it would then still be truth. So while truth doesn't necessarily conflict with reality, it can, by your standard. Now do you yourself find that an appropriate standard? I suppose this comes down to semantics anyway. Surely there may potentially be partially beneficial things that are in conflict with reality, its just that I couldn't label them as "true" from that point on, because my definition of truth is one that does require conformity with reality.

I think growth is the drive of human learning, so its sort of in that context. In complexity 'correct' does not have to mean completely true, it can just mean movement towards truth.... depends on what is being asked I suppose. Not everything has empirical standards to be assessed by, but yes I think I understand what your saying - its why I tried to make a subtle differentiation by using two different terms, between truth (how I used it then) and fact.