Quote:
|
Originally Posted by markings
Let's start with the definition of truth. There is no such think as personal truth. There is perception, opinion, notions, feelings, urges which are all personal but none can and should be elevated to the level of truth in any sense. To use truth for one's personal experience is to devalue it. That my experience is true does not make it "a truth". The difference is in the longevity of what is described. It may be true that right now I am angry. The truth may be that 5 seconds ago I was angry, but that anger of a while back is not "a truth" because it does not and cannot stand on its own.
There is only the Truth, and it is that which never changes. If it changes it is not Truth.
|
my sense of it is different. i intuitively believe that "Truth" is unchanging,
and i can reason to such a conclusion as well, and i agree with you on that
point. however, i figure that people can have "personal truths" (small-t),
and that we'd
ought to elevate them to Truth (within our own being),
in order to ascertain their validity for us. i'm imagining that "Truth" exists
within each of us, and that it provides the light by which we might see how
other ideas have value for us.
i'm probably 'out of my depth' to have entered into this discussion anyways,
(sorry,) since i'm unfamiliar with the quote which opened the thread, and i'm
thinking that the thoughts expressed there are somewhat 'worrisome'.
although i'm rather pleased to consider myself an "anti-intellectual", i don't
consider knowledge to be undesirable, nor a disease... i'd need to redefine
some words in order to get there.
Threaded Mode