Guest guest Posted December 15, 2003 Report Share Posted December 15, 2003 andy you say: *****The understanding that I function out of is that there is no universal truth; there is individual, personal truth, and that arises in individual entities through Its functioning, not by the individual's choice. The truth that one person experiences may, in fact, be congruent with others, but probably not with the entirety of humanity. There is clearly enough commonality of truth in the human species so that totally chaos doesn't result. But within that larger framework, there appears to be great variation on any alleged " truth. " Being embraced by this allows me to experience tolerance for other points of view without challenging the validity of those viewpoints. and then you add: After all, the holders of those differing viewpoints didn't choose them (just as I didn't choose what is here held to be valid). is that true? it seems like you are teaching neo about no-universal-truth, and that truth is indeed individual, but then you turn around and assume that it is true that we do not choose our viewpoints. maybe this is also only YOUR personal truth. it seems neo thinks that TFAH is the exception to no-universal-truth and you think having a choice is an exception. love andrea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2003 Report Share Posted December 15, 2003 > andy you say: > *****The understanding that I function out of is that there is no > universal truth; there is individual, personal truth, and that > arises in individual entities through Its functioning, not by the > individual's choice. > > The truth that one person experiences may, in fact, be congruent > with others, but probably not with the entirety of humanity. There > is clearly enough commonality of truth in the human species so > that totally chaos doesn't result. But within that larger > framework, there appears to be great variation on any > alleged " truth. " > > Being embraced by this allows me to experience tolerance for other > points of view without challenging the validity of those > viewpoints. > > and then you add: > After all, the holders of those differing viewpoints > didn't choose them (just as I didn't choose what is here held to > be valid). > is that true? it seems like you are teaching neo about no- > universal-truth, and that truth is indeed individual, but then you > turn around and assume that it is true that we do not choose our > viewpoints. maybe this is also only YOUR personal truth. > it seems neo thinks that TFAH is the exception to no-universal- > truth and you think having a choice is an exception. ******Ahhhhh, lass...you caught me! Hahaha!!! Hoist by my own petard. :-))))) The error arises from countless conversations with people, nearly all of whom, when they are able to stop and watch the arising and receding of " their " thoughts, almost to a person admit that they don't choose their thoughts. But you are correct. There are those, in the minority according to my count (clearly non-statistical in nature), who believe, feel, *think* that they do choose their thoughts, consciously, willfully. I've learned not to argue with them. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.