~ TRUTH A BILLION SHADES OF GRAY ...Or ? ~

Ref. Post #1: A good place to start searching for the truth is found in Titus 1:14 (CEV) = "Don’t pay any attention to any of those senseless Jewish stories and human commands. These are made up by people who won’t obey the truth." https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus+1:14&version=CEV

 

I hesitated to add "and false" because even though it's more accurate, it's also more confusing the way I stated it. I just meant that probability is a collective a single data points that are either true or false. For example, if we have 100 apples in a barrel (100 points of data) how many of each are yellow, green, or red? You pull out each apple and ask, "is it red?" If it is indeed red, then you count it as red. It is true that the apple is red; if it is yellow or green, then it is false that that single apple is red. This is how we derive a probability statement of how many yellow, green, or red apples are in the barrel.

Quantum mechanics is dealing with an astronomical amount of data points, which seems to me the thing that makes it so unintuitive. Of course there is always a margin for error which will diminish with the more apples you have in the barrel. These astronomical numbers are something a person just doesn't have access to experience in everyday life. But the true and false statements of probability remain internally consistent and logical.

 

You bring an interesting discussion to the forum. First let me say this. When I was speaking about truth I meant philosophical truth ie what is truth? The kind of truth Paul was speaking to Titus about was everyday ‘physical truth‘, but with spiritual incinerations! Actually it was about circumcision that the Jewish higher-ups wanted to do on Titus! Ouch. Titus was like a son to Paul and he did not want Titus to receive the cut, because it would make the gentiles feel less close to God. Paul did not support circumcision at all.

Does that make sense to you? I am not saying you are wrong etc, maybe you have a differen opinion than I which is what learning from each other is all about. In any case let me know?

reva

 

Ok gotcha' Its SO difficult to write about these things in a forum sitting eh? Ok, now knowing what we know and after shaking everything out do you agree that an answer derived from quantum calculations can be true even if the answer from said quantum calculations are fairly devoid of logical assumptions and completely lacking intuitive expectgations ie thought?

Gödel (kurt) shook up the mathematical world by saying 'that a logical system of any complexity are by definition incomplete. That each of them contain at any agreed upon time more true statements than it can possibly prove according to its own set of rules! That’s his famous incompleteness theory even if the words are different lol. That IC theory has been used to argue a computer will never be as smart as a human because a computer has a fixed program but humans will always be able to use new information to can discover unexpected truths! Deep eh?


Gotta go walk the old fart...Bogie the basset (he is 14 or 15)..its 430 am but its raining....the things I do for his old butt...



reva

 

I am back from walking bogie...where did everyone go??? Its 9;40 and I and bogie become lost in a future warp bubble called fishing the watauga river, whats a little rain when rainbows and browns are running ? ...



reva

 

Nice to see ya around, reva.

 

I cannot disagree with you on the whole, but in the highlighted, you make a great assumption in that logical means mathematical. I don't think Godel meant to argue that mathematical assumptions lead to an internal consistency but rather an internal consistency leads to assumptions that can be mathematically verified outside of it's axioms...that can be confirmed. Godel didn't expel all contradictory evidence to the result of logical system, just because you can't account for all the axioms that prove a logical system. you cannot dismiss the logical systems as being based on only faith. Axioms are diametrically opposed to the concepts of faith. You can quantify Axioms, most of the time. But can't always quantify faith. Both have assumptions, one has more influence, usually. Whatever that means?

 

I personally am of the opinion that the near death experience of Bob Jones gives more insight into this question than 50 % to 80% of Christians might wish to admit at first.

http://www.thequickenedword.com/rhema/BobJonesTestimonyAugust81975DeathExperience.htm

 

Thank you my friend, its great to see you as well! I have a little free time for the PC. What have you been up to sister?

reva

 

My NDE was nothing like that! I suppose I got the short version. But it got the same job done about love. I will tell you I had no doubt who was talking to me, even though I saw nothing but darkness with what looked like water reflections, you know like those reflected on a wall or ceiling from a pool of water. but these were in the air, and not bright just a little less dark than the darkness. I felt like I was standing on a beam....I wasn’t scared but I was, um emotional...the rest is history. As I like to say I nearly lost my life but gained a better one.

reva

 

I saw a fascinating film last year asserting that there are only two forces in the universe...… 1. Love and 2. Fear.

I find it intriguing that so many near death experiencers are coming back with astonishingly simple explanations for what we human beings are being taught here in four dimensional space - time.


http://www.near-death.com/andreason.html#a04h

So it seems that we are free to descend down into many variations and forms of fear..... if we choose... but eventually we will be led back to love/ light... out of the darkness of fear..... in all of its many forms.

After experiencing some forms of fear here in four dimensional space time........ and perhaps even for a time in the fifth dimension.........… we are then capable of combatting fear in which ever other realm we feel drawn to.

 

I will check out the link soon. Let me expand on your spot on comment "simple explanations". Yes it does seem the more I learn in my attempt to define truth etc, the less important knowledge becomes. Take Near death experiences. I doubt that NDE's will be proven true or false in our lifetime. Yes the brain dying is a common exp as are other biochemical explanations. However how to prove that a NDE was an actual crossing over to the afterlife realm? We can not just as we (science) explain what happens in a singularity of a black hole.

Anyway, I am starting to believe that there are three realms. This one the reality we experience everyday. Then number 2 (maybe) the multidimensional one past the four dimensions, and lastly (#3) the realm of the dead, past all dimensions into the true unknown zone forever. (unknown to science).

So why hasn’t anyone communicated from the dead or come back to visit save for late night horror flicks? There must be a barrier that is similar to the singlujarity of black holes. Those barriers are called clothes, a singularity that has no clothes is called a naked singularity. The clothes protect the universe including we humans of course from information and ’everything that can be imagined and more’ from spewing out of it’s singularity. A naked singularity is one that we could observe and could be fatal to our reality. But I digress. If interested in these things Google these keywords; ‘black holes, hair, naked singularity‘. it’s a fascinating subject. In any case science has fortified my faith as well as instigated it in the first place! Quite the reverse of most students who begin college highly religious and leave less so.


reva

 

So you think that near death experiencers have an explanation for Type-2 Diabetes? #LosingIntellectualProperty

 

Even Dr. Ben Carson may have had that ....... but.......... the "experts" who are in the mentality of Dr. Devorit Samid and Dr. David Kessler, (pardon my spelling), of the Burzynski film series.........… are being paid serious bucks to ensure that the truth on such matters does not fall in the hands of the ignorant masses who worship their own doctors...… who.... are far less well informed than Dr. Ben Carson is and was?!

http://glyconutrientsarevital.blogspot.ca/2006/08/dr-ben-carson-glyconutrients.html

http://www.msm-info.com/#Diabetes

 

Extremely well said!


http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...elligent-androids-how-could-we-test-them.html

If we invent super intelligent androids... how could we test them?



Might we perhaps invent some sort of virtual reality holographic environment where the attitude and character of an android can be tested to see if they will behave in a manner that is altruistic and humble?

The analogy to Adam, Eve, Lucifer and his angels should be obvious!

 

Thanks Dennis. Um' I have wondered and have challenged anyone to come up with a test for sentience i.e. self-awareness and or a soul. I would settle for knowing if a AI in or out of a android has self- awareness! The holographic virtual awareness program is a good idea if the robot (robot is easier to type than android, lol) didn’t know it was in a virtual world. I doubt if there is any foolproof method to test fully self contained, self aware automaton. Because it can think for itself! How for that matter does anyone know anyone else is self aware? They may just be lying or running a program to fake self awareness! That is an old psychological talking point and I have seen several movies that play on that
subject.

It would make a cool movie!


reva

 

The Creator of the universe seems also willing to settle for some rather small things such as courage and truthfulness combined with genuine love.

RevAnarchist..... I have a challenge for you....... I am quite willing to do volunteer work for any company or film production cooperative/kibbutz that you could get together....... and I suspect I might just be able to help you to accomplish quite a bit over the next several years.......... This will give you a clue as to what I have in mind specifically.....


https://m.facebook.com/notes/dennis...cian-the-film-series-concept/310416062401072/

Canada's Worst Politician, the film series concept?!

 

Do you write this crap all day long? Navel gazing is a huge waste of time.

 

Personally I think that RevAnarchist is one of the most impressive posters on this forum!

You are good Margot2...… but a little too naive........... a little too unwilling to see the logic in a film like this one...…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddpLAt0KjVQ&feature=share

Rick Joyner "Confronting Chrislam" - MorningStar Ministries

 

Kudos, you have answers.

 

AI in its current state of affairs amounts to nothing more than the programmers input vs the AI instruments output. The output can never exceed the input. Can the intelligence ever be greater than the intelligence of God? Not likely. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that the 'awareness' of any AI program could be no greater than the awareness that was pre programmed into that AI unit coupled with the sensitivity of the sensing devices attached to that AI unit.

 

would you have elite scientists research the tooth fairy? how about leprechauns? or zeus? or vampires? but don't stop there, why not have scientists research things that don't exist? let us know how you think our scientists should proceed - especially on that last one.

 

I suppose your emotional need for a supernatural sky-parent is more reliable than reality based pragmatism and peer reviewed science?

 

you say this with certainty, so you must have evidence that there really is only one god. would you share it with us? if you don't have evidence, you might be better off saying "I hope there's only one god", or "I choose to believe there is only one god".

 

if you ask me, truth cannot be known by man in our current state of evolution. We hazard guesses based on evidence that lead us to that conclusion or we invent languages that previously measure some variable to some constant and for lack of some better explanation we settle for those. The concept of truth, meaning something that is regardless of us is an impossible one to grasp because nobody can be that objective.

How is that for philosophy?