Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Looking at the issue of free will, a response
I would say that yes we have free will, but within the confines of our box. Everyone lives inside a box. We certainly like the idea of thinking outside the box, but invariably that leads to dissatisfaction.
The box is society, family, nation, financial, education, fears etc. All the things that keep us in the cave. It is nearly impossible to 'think outside the box' unless there is a window on one of the walls of your box. You need that window to widen your frame of reference. And a problem is that YOU may think outsede the box but your associates do not.
I personally do not think that society as a whole has been going downhill. Our boxes are getting larger as societies interact with each other. The danger as I see it, is that truth in each society is relative, as you say, and as the truth of one society bumps up against the truth of another society there is social confusion. However, the portion of absolute universal truth that is in each survives as the more relative truths fall away. During this time there are victims and societies often do not survive without adaption of the higher universal truth. But greater societies emerge and come to the fore.
For example, today we have a clash of capitalism (individualism) vs socialism (group); Christianity (self-centered salvation) vs Buddhism (salvation for all); self-gratification 'me' generation vs mutually dependant society. This is a problem as there seems no viable 'mutually dependant society' counterweight to the 'me' 'I'm saved, to hell with you' society. Society is crying out for this balancing truth. History does show however that balance will come even if it means the destruction of the current empires.
There is an absolute truth and we are climbing out of the cave in search of it. If there were not, there would be no advancement.
The box is society, family, nation, financial, education, fears etc. All the things that keep us in the cave. It is nearly impossible to 'think outside the box' unless there is a window on one of the walls of your box. You need that window to widen your frame of reference. And a problem is that YOU may think outsede the box but your associates do not.
I personally do not think that society as a whole has been going downhill. Our boxes are getting larger as societies interact with each other. The danger as I see it, is that truth in each society is relative, as you say, and as the truth of one society bumps up against the truth of another society there is social confusion. However, the portion of absolute universal truth that is in each survives as the more relative truths fall away. During this time there are victims and societies often do not survive without adaption of the higher universal truth. But greater societies emerge and come to the fore.
For example, today we have a clash of capitalism (individualism) vs socialism (group); Christianity (self-centered salvation) vs Buddhism (salvation for all); self-gratification 'me' generation vs mutually dependant society. This is a problem as there seems no viable 'mutually dependant society' counterweight to the 'me' 'I'm saved, to hell with you' society. Society is crying out for this balancing truth. History does show however that balance will come even if it means the destruction of the current empires.
There is an absolute truth and we are climbing out of the cave in search of it. If there were not, there would be no advancement.
Monday, August 30, 2010
What is Truth?
In my philosophy: "Truth is not dependent upon “having to be true”, but neither is it necessary that "truth be induced by reason and confirmed with evidence" to be true.
Truth is absolute. It does not have to be true, nor is it dependent upon being recognized as being true. God could not exist without truth. Nor could science, reason, nor faith. Truth is the essence of "is".
For those relativists in the crowd: if something is 99.99% true - then it isn't truth.
For example: If you were on a rocketship and your destination were Mars; you set your course with 99.99% accuracy, would you land on Mars? No. Your course would not be true.
If the laws of physics were 99.99% true, what would happen to the universe?
Unified Field Theory.
Unified Field Theory requires absolute truth, otherwise it won't work. And so, absolute truth governs the laws of nature. It is then logical that it governs humans. If that is so, one might suggest that human misery rises in direct relationship to the further we are from that absolute.
I would have to argue that individuals have free will. We have never shown the predisposition towards the nature of ants, even when working in the most organized of groups. On the other hand, our relationships between other humans, individually and as a group, both require that we act with deference towards each other as well as lower life forms. To consider the needs of others. In other words, act within the confines of natural law. The more harmonious the natural relationship, the more smoothly life and feelings of happiness.
More and more in today's society we see discontent and environmental degredation. Why? We know naturally within ourselves that when we treat another human or animal with respect they are happy. When they treat us with respect we are happy. But something seems to be breaking down and more and more people are acting like rouge social elements. Individualism, self-centeredness, crime and discontent rises.
This is easier to see on a societal level but harder to see on an individual level. But just as Unified Field Theory would require things work in a certain way on the large scale, it would as well require that they work similarly on the smallest scale.
For example, my respect for others translates into my respect for myself. We know this esoterically, but seem to forget it in daily even hourly practice. If you need an example of this just look at the way some young people dress. They clearly seem to be crying out for recognition (ie: respect) because, fundementally they do not respect themselves. More and more youngsters are becoming socially alienated as they are able to amuse themselves cut off from the 'herd', away from the source of respect.
As a natural extension to this agrument is the Prime Mover. Is God, the creator, bound by his own laws? Can God suspend them as and when he so chooses? Was the universe created in six days? Were Adam and Eve created out of mud or is that Allegory? Did Moses part the Red Sea? Did God impregnate Mary or did Jesus have a father? Did he walk on water, do miracles or float up to heaven? Are these events true or are they discriptions of real occurances in fable form? Where does faith degenerate into hocus pocus losing all credibility? Does faith have to be about the unreasonable or just the unknown?
This argument can go on and on. I would say that it is one of the reasons 'positive psychology' has become so popular in universities.
Truth is absolute. It does not have to be true, nor is it dependent upon being recognized as being true. God could not exist without truth. Nor could science, reason, nor faith. Truth is the essence of "is".
For those relativists in the crowd: if something is 99.99% true - then it isn't truth.
For example: If you were on a rocketship and your destination were Mars; you set your course with 99.99% accuracy, would you land on Mars? No. Your course would not be true.
If the laws of physics were 99.99% true, what would happen to the universe?
Unified Field Theory.
Unified Field Theory requires absolute truth, otherwise it won't work. And so, absolute truth governs the laws of nature. It is then logical that it governs humans. If that is so, one might suggest that human misery rises in direct relationship to the further we are from that absolute.
I would have to argue that individuals have free will. We have never shown the predisposition towards the nature of ants, even when working in the most organized of groups. On the other hand, our relationships between other humans, individually and as a group, both require that we act with deference towards each other as well as lower life forms. To consider the needs of others. In other words, act within the confines of natural law. The more harmonious the natural relationship, the more smoothly life and feelings of happiness.
More and more in today's society we see discontent and environmental degredation. Why? We know naturally within ourselves that when we treat another human or animal with respect they are happy. When they treat us with respect we are happy. But something seems to be breaking down and more and more people are acting like rouge social elements. Individualism, self-centeredness, crime and discontent rises.
This is easier to see on a societal level but harder to see on an individual level. But just as Unified Field Theory would require things work in a certain way on the large scale, it would as well require that they work similarly on the smallest scale.
For example, my respect for others translates into my respect for myself. We know this esoterically, but seem to forget it in daily even hourly practice. If you need an example of this just look at the way some young people dress. They clearly seem to be crying out for recognition (ie: respect) because, fundementally they do not respect themselves. More and more youngsters are becoming socially alienated as they are able to amuse themselves cut off from the 'herd', away from the source of respect.
As a natural extension to this agrument is the Prime Mover. Is God, the creator, bound by his own laws? Can God suspend them as and when he so chooses? Was the universe created in six days? Were Adam and Eve created out of mud or is that Allegory? Did Moses part the Red Sea? Did God impregnate Mary or did Jesus have a father? Did he walk on water, do miracles or float up to heaven? Are these events true or are they discriptions of real occurances in fable form? Where does faith degenerate into hocus pocus losing all credibility? Does faith have to be about the unreasonable or just the unknown?
This argument can go on and on. I would say that it is one of the reasons 'positive psychology' has become so popular in universities.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
And You Remember How Badly THAT Turned Out! (for the Indians)
Do YOU want to be the new Indian in America?
Teaching English in Japan?
Should I or shouldn't I? That is the question. I have been teaching for five years part time with one of the fast food English Language chains in Japan. A pleasant enough experience once in a while. Helps fill the time and puts money in the pocket.
But alas, my patience, being saintly as it is, is wearing thin. This type of conversation 'school' is more a beauty and popularity contest and much less an actual educational experience. In fact, it could be refered to as talkingt to a wall and then expecting the wall to talk back.
Yes, ok, once in a while people do walk in who actually want to learn something. They are a pleasure to speak too and one can actually have an intelligent conversation which helps them to increase their skill. On the other hand you have a great many who are so emotionally immature that if you look at them sideways they fall apart.
It really is no wonder that instructors either leave soon after starting, or just decide they are talking to a wall and enjoy the wall paper. I have one friend who has a smile that looks glued on.
Ah, well ... what should I do next to stay entertained while living in this 'safety' country?
But alas, my patience, being saintly as it is, is wearing thin. This type of conversation 'school' is more a beauty and popularity contest and much less an actual educational experience. In fact, it could be refered to as talkingt to a wall and then expecting the wall to talk back.
Yes, ok, once in a while people do walk in who actually want to learn something. They are a pleasure to speak too and one can actually have an intelligent conversation which helps them to increase their skill. On the other hand you have a great many who are so emotionally immature that if you look at them sideways they fall apart.
It really is no wonder that instructors either leave soon after starting, or just decide they are talking to a wall and enjoy the wall paper. I have one friend who has a smile that looks glued on.
Ah, well ... what should I do next to stay entertained while living in this 'safety' country?
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Boycott Samsung!!
Samsung doesn't find satirical spoof amusing. Samsung shows its arrogance as former criminal, Chairman Lee Kun-hee convicted for tax evasion and bribing two former presidents, re-takes control of Korean chaebol, by suing British columnist for satiric Christmas story.
Samseong-eul Saenggakhanda. One wonders how you can be sued for damage to its reputation if the one suing has already damaged itself.
Samsung doesn't find satirical spoof amusing
Oh, and just so you don't think this is a one off thing" They've done it before many times: Samsung can't take a joke or real criticism, resorts to bullying: Samsung, the great vampire squid
And this: "'Isn’t this a comedy?' Mr. Kim, 52, said in an interview. 'I am challenging them to slap my face, to file a libel suit against me, but they don’t. They treat me like a nut case, an invisible man, although I am shouting about the biggest crime in the history of the nation.' 'Think Samsung': Corporate corruption and unethical government influence
And from 2006 - old but the phone isn't the issue, how they deal with the 'little people' is:
Samsung Lets The World Know Its Phones Are Breakable
And if you think it's bad for the customers - think about the workers of this chaebol corporate monster:
"While Samsung corrupt practices are being revealed, at the same time the dead left by Samsung's refusal to allow trade unions and to fully protect its electronics workers, are now coming to haunt him. Already 10 workers have died, of leukemia or other blood cancers, and a total of at least 26 have been known to have fallen ill. Most recently, former semiconductor factory worker Park Ji-yeon died at the tender age of just 23, after working only 3 years."
For more from the group of workers and victims who demand accountability from Samsung (SHARPS), see Samsung workers die on the job
More: Samsung Tries to Sue Its Way to Mohammunity
Samseong-eul Saenggakhanda. One wonders how you can be sued for damage to its reputation if the one suing has already damaged itself.
Samsung doesn't find satirical spoof amusing
Oh, and just so you don't think this is a one off thing" They've done it before many times: Samsung can't take a joke or real criticism, resorts to bullying: Samsung, the great vampire squid
And this: "'Isn’t this a comedy?' Mr. Kim, 52, said in an interview. 'I am challenging them to slap my face, to file a libel suit against me, but they don’t. They treat me like a nut case, an invisible man, although I am shouting about the biggest crime in the history of the nation.' 'Think Samsung': Corporate corruption and unethical government influence
And from 2006 - old but the phone isn't the issue, how they deal with the 'little people' is:
Samsung Lets The World Know Its Phones Are Breakable
And if you think it's bad for the customers - think about the workers of this chaebol corporate monster:
"While Samsung corrupt practices are being revealed, at the same time the dead left by Samsung's refusal to allow trade unions and to fully protect its electronics workers, are now coming to haunt him. Already 10 workers have died, of leukemia or other blood cancers, and a total of at least 26 have been known to have fallen ill. Most recently, former semiconductor factory worker Park Ji-yeon died at the tender age of just 23, after working only 3 years."
For more from the group of workers and victims who demand accountability from Samsung (SHARPS), see Samsung workers die on the job
More: Samsung Tries to Sue Its Way to Mohammunity
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)