How do we know we know?

[Davin]

I’ve been thinking about this for some time.  At first I thought it wouldn’t work because “nothing” would include “God isn’t”, but then I realized I was neutral when I asked God if He was real.  I didn’t care one way or the other, so I’m thinking neutral is the balance point between “is” and “is not”, where either is equally possible.

I wouldn't consider it a balance... there are probably millions of things that people believe in that don't exist and you don't know about. You're neutral on those things as far as belief goes. Not because you think the likely hood of them existing is equal to them not existing, but just that you haven't even thought of their existence at all. Like if I asked you if you believed in dancing waffles? Did you, before I asked, ever hear of such a thing?

Think really hard about what makes you believe in a god. Make a short list of the top three things that convince you that there is a god, then let me know.

1.  I met Him, when I didn’t expect too. (I was neutral)
2.  I’ve experienced instantaneous physical healings. (a.k.a. miracles)
3.  Everything He has told me would happen in my life has happened.

Good for you, unfortunately that does absolutely nothing for any one else. Unless: you can point out where he is, you have evidence of the instantaneous physical healings or you can prove that you wrote down specific events that would happen in your life before they happened... specific in that it could only mean one thing: "on February 12th 2005 at around 6pm, some one will tell you that you ate too much cheese the day before" and not something fortune cookie ambiguous like: "You will get a job that you will enjoy."

All three reasons are based on experience, but, like you, I don’t totally trust my interpretations.  So I find I must choose between faith and reason.  I don’t find reason superior, and I have found faith more beneficial.

I have never found an instance where faith was beneficial over knowledge, while I have found knowledge extremely useful.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin

At some point, the two always become mutually exclusive, but it is a biased mind that views one of the two superior.

Let's let you handle this one:

I don’t find reason superior, and I have found faith more beneficial.

Of course I'm with you when I think one is more beneficial, but I don't think I came to the idea that reason is more beneficial because of bias.
 

Your avatar looks familiar; is it a painting?

Peace - I/s

If you knew me, then you probably saw me draw at least one variation of it, but as far as I know the concept is fairly original. I call it Yetzer ha Ra from the ancient Aramaic belief that good and evil exists inside us and that we must all control the evil part of us. I can't get a direct link to it because where I have it is blocked from work but you can get it from my DeviantArt page.

[elliebean]

Exactly. Except it comes out all sticky and smelly.

He/she who insults the best wins?  Sophomoric Inteligencia.  How original.

What, you don't like my sassy sense of humor?

[idiotsavant]

I’m thinking neutral is the balance point between “is” and “is not”

I wouldn't consider it a balance... there are probably millions of things that people believe in that don't exist and you don't know about. You're neutral on those things as far as belief goes. Not because you think the likely hood of them existing is equal to them not existing, but just that you haven't even thought of their existence at all.  Like if I asked you if you believed in dancing waffles? Did you, before I asked, ever hear of such a thing?

Dancing waffles - interesting, but no, never crossed my mind.  But I still don’t get it.  Neutral is the state of what?  Inertia?  Nothing?  It feels like it should be “between” - like neutral in a gearbox, or the median of opposites.    I suspect I’m tripping on semantics here, but oblique is as oblique does...  "Nothing" feels more like a foundation, or maybe a neutral staring point, like a seed in the ground which grows both ways...  I'll keep working on it.

Good for you, unfortunately that does absolutely nothing for any one else.

Not true brother, many others have benefited from God's investment in me. Even as I have benefitted from His investment in you...

Unless: you can point out where he is, you have evidence of the instantaneous physical healings

Evidence?  Think about that really hard, and tell me three types of evidence you would accept.

or you can prove that you wrote down specific events that would happen in your life before they happened... specific in that it could only mean one thing: "on February 12th 2005 at around 6pm, some one will tell you that you ate too much cheese the day before" and not something fortune cookie ambiguous like: "You will get a job that you will enjoy."

I’ve only one with a time frame, and that’s about 12 years away.

All three reasons are based on experience, but, like you, I don’t totally trust my interpretations.

I need to add that my lack of trust is only in my logical mind, I innately trust my deep, it has an amazing track record, but my logic... not so good.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin

At some point, the two always become mutually exclusive, but it is a biased mind that views one of the two superior.

Let's let you handle this one:

I don’t find reason superior, and I have found faith more beneficial.

Of course I'm with you when I think one is more beneficial, but I don't think I came to the idea that reason is more beneficial because of bias.

Bias is an Ouroboros.  At some point “A” becomes more desirable than “B”.  After that, we lean.

I know I’ve seen your Yetzer ha Ra before, and the web sight looks familiar, I think I’ve been there before.  The image disturbs me.  I like that....

What, you don't like my sassy sense of humor?

Every time I read this I .  I must like it.  I dub thee “Sassy Lassie”.

Sophus hasn’t deigned to reply.  He may be an example of the “Atheist - Religion Mirror Syndrome”.  Law and Judgment fuel religion.  I don’t satisfy Sophus’ law and he judged me unworthy...

Peace - I/s

[Davin]

Dancing waffles - interesting, but no, never crossed my mind.  But I still don’t get it.  Neutral is the state of what?  Inertia?  Nothing?  It feels like it should be “between” - like neutral in a gearbox, or the median of opposites.    I suspect I’m tripping on semantics here, but oblique is as oblique does...  "Nothing" feels more like a foundation, or maybe a neutral staring point, like a seed in the ground which grows both ways...  I'll keep working on it.

I was talking about positive, neutral and negative assertions about the truth of something. Of course the possibility exists that one has no opinion at all, like my example of dancing waffles. Of course once you are presented with a concept you immediately form some kind of truth position on the matter, but as instant as it is, there is a lot that goes on even when being presented with my ridiculous example, likely: first you're presented with the concept and probably even have a flash of what a dancing waffle looks like, then you realize that waffles are an inanimate object in all cases you have come across, so then you come to the position that because waffles are inanimate they cannot dance on their own so the idea of them is tossed into your "not true (but probably silly)" basket in your head. And the only way you will even approach a belief that it's true is if you could see waffles dancing on their own. So in this example you go from no stance on the truth value, to a neutral stance to a negative stance in less than a second. This example is rather silly, but the point was to bring up something that you likely had never heard of to point out that you can have no stance on a proposition at all. Another reason is to show you that one should question why one would bring up the concept in the first place.

Good for you, unfortunately that does absolutely nothing for any one else.

Not true brother, many others have benefited from God's investment in me. Even as I have benefitted from His investment in you...

How does one know that whatever personal revelation one has is true (in the colloquial sense)? If I said that I now believe in god because he came to me and told me that everyone must give me millions of dollars so that I can create a space ship capable of traveling to another planet in order to avoid a world wide disaster that will wipe out all life on the planet, would you trust me because I fervently believe that god told me in person? I would hope not.

Unless: you can point out where he is, you have evidence of the instantaneous physical healings

Evidence?  Think about that really hard, and tell me three types of evidence you would accept.

Easy: demonstrable, verifiable and predictable.

or you can prove that you wrote down specific events that would happen in your life before they happened... specific in that it could only mean one thing: "on February 12th 2005 at around 6pm, some one will tell you that you ate too much cheese the day before" and not something fortune cookie ambiguous like: "You will get a job that you will enjoy."

I’ve only one with a time frame, and that’s about 12 years away.

Is it specific? Let us know what it is so that in twelve years we can all see this evidence come to fruition.

All three reasons are based on experience, but, like you, I don’t totally trust my interpretations.

I need to add that my lack of trust is only in my logical mind, I innately trust my deep, it has an amazing track record, but my logic... not so good.

Logic is what I do for a living, if I'm not logical then things don't work. Programming is purely a logical process... of course there are programmers that aren't very logical, but the fact that it won't work unless it's logical forces them to produce code that is, and you can generally notice the trails of code that go off where they don't need to go. I see the same thing in people when dealing with regular life things. So when someone tells me they have can't trust reason over their gut, I have a huge problem of trying to remain unbiased of anything they say.

Bias is an Ouroboros.  At some point “A” becomes more desirable than “B”.  After that, we lean.

I can agree that after we come to choose A or B that we become biased, but that has nothing to do with how we reach choosing one over the other. The process of choosing A over B can be accomplished without bias if approached through a logical process.

I know I’ve seen your Yetzer ha Ra before, and the web sight looks familiar, I think I’ve been there before.  The image disturbs me.  I like that....

It's a very popular website that I'm not popular on. I have shown more people my artwork in person than have seen it on that site. I don't find the image disturbing as much as cheesy.

[elliebean]

Easy: demonstrable, verifiable and predictable.

That's only one type of evidence, since it has to meet all three criteria.

Every time I read this I :cool:

[Davin]

Easy: demonstrable, verifiable and predictable.

That's only one type of evidence, since it has to meet all three criteria.

I think differently, unless we're going to get all into semantics.

I consider "demonstrable evidence" when one can demonstrate that X will happen if we do Y, then of course you verify whether X happened. But I consider "verifiable evidence" more along the lings of being able to independently test something instead of just making sure X happened or not.
I consider predictable evidence not just: If I do Y then X will happen. I consider it more along the lines of 80% of the people will do X, the rock will be going 45mph when it hits the ground... etc.

But I do understand the need to verify your predictions of your demonstrations... but that road just seems to lead the same place as the "can you even trust what your senses are telling you?" road that I don't think the Laid Back Lounge was built to handle.

[elliebean]

My mistake. Thanks for clearing that up for me.  

[Davin]

My mistake. Thanks for clearing that up for me.  

It's not your mistake really, you just had a different view than I. It's more likely my mistake, which is why I wanted to clear it up.

[Sophus]

Sophus hasn’t deigned to reply. He may be an example of the “Atheist - Religion Mirror Syndrome”. Law and Judgment fuel religion. I don’t satisfy Sophus’ law and he judged me unworthy...

Oh, sorry I forget about this thread.

[idiotsavant]

I was talking about positive, neutral and negative assertions about the truth of something

Okay, I think I’ve got this.  My thought process was just as you described.  My original thoughts on DWs were null, then came the DW image (nano-second), then not-DW.
That happened to me with Jesus.  Only it ended with yes.

How does one know that whatever personal revelation one has is true (in the colloquial sense)? If I said that I now believe in god because he came to me and told me that everyone must give me millions of dollars so that I can create a space ship capable of traveling to another planet in order to avoid a world wide disaster that will wipe out all life on the planet, would you trust me because I fervently believe that god told me in person? I would hope not.

Personal revelation is just that; we all must decide for ourselves.  I’ve found no way to convey my personal revelations to others.  And although I expect to have a million dollars to spare by 2022, I’m not giving it to you.  

Is it specific? Let us know what it is so that in twelve years we can all see this evidence come to fruition.

Like I said earlier, I'll be wealthy (...by U.S. standards.  (U.S. poor are wealthy)) by 2022.  The process has already begun -  If I were to win the lottery tomorrow, the sudden influx of money would cause harm, but I think my character will develop sufficiently in the next 12 years..  I doubt we’ll be in contact then, but if we are, what evidence would you trust to prove that my wealth came form God?  (Besides the fact I’m an idiot and must have had Divine help.)

(Wants) ...demonstrable, verifiable and predictable (evidence).

My experience says it’s never enough - An older lady tells you that on a missionary trip to the slums of India, a sick and dehydrated infant died in her arms as she prayed for its healing.  After another hour of  prayer the infant awoke, healthy and hungry.  She predicted the healing, it happened, and the parents verified it.  But you weren’t there.  This is just a story to you.  Like dancing waffles.  Hearsay.  And even if you were there, would you conclude God was involved?  I doubt it.  I suss you would look for alternative explanations.

Logic is what I do for a living

So you're a computer programmer.  I wrote COBOL programs on punch cards.  They tell me COBOL is still around, Ugh!  I liked PL1, Pascal, and and even Assembler better.  When Data Bases were coming in, I stepped out.  Recently I've heard of “Cloud" computing.  Do you know what that is?

...can't trust reason over their gut, I have a huge problem of trying to remain unbiased of anything they say.

That bias will change as you age.  Successful business people say they trust the gut.  It might help you to think of the gut as a subconscious supercomputer, processing minute information of which  we are not specifically aware.  I would have avoided many a regret had I trusted my deep...  Hindsight is a B.  (Can I write the B-word here?)

I can agree that after we come to choose A or B that we become biased, but that has nothing to do with how we reach choosing one over the other. The process of choosing A over B can be accomplished without bias if approached through a logical process.

I’m not sure we are ever motivated by logic. After all, emotion means “to move’.  I think logic is a tool for movement, not its source.

I don't find the image disturbing as much as cheesy.

You underestimate your Yetzer ha Ra.  I see fleeting malice in his eyes, but I don’t see good there, only a “good" mask.  Perhaps not exactly what you wanted, but I see talent there.

I do, however, feel compelled to address how you think the Bible says hell is not eternal. Read these: Daniel 12:2,3; Matthew 25:46; Revelation 14:11. The verse you had mentioned can just as easily be interpreted in a different manner, however it would not surprise me if it is in fact a contradiction to these.  I know we're veering but I would be interested.  

I’m disappointed Sophus, I had so hoped my answers (and questions) would be unique.
I use the KISimS principle with everything, Bible included.  So then, if we assume the Bible is the “Holy Written Word of God”, we must assume that any perceived contradictions are actually misperceptions.  In this case Jesus said God could (not necessarily would) kill both body and soul in geenna.  Your references speak of “eternal” and “everlasting” punishment.  At this point the argument could go either way, but if one of the exclusive benefits of salvation is eternal life, then geenna cannot be eternal.  And in Rev 20 hades (which I consider synonymous with geenna) is cast into the lake of fire, aka the second death.  Twice dead feels really dead...  

P.S.
I forgot John 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish (apollumi - to destroy fully), but have everlasting life.


And even if I’m wrong, why would it matter?  KISimS says, “If we assume that God is good, then any perceived evil is actually a misperception.”  In this light, your “difficult questions” can be summed up thusly: “Why doesn’t God fit my paradigm?”

Peace I/s

[Davin]

Okay, I think I’ve got this.  My thought process was just as you described.  My original thoughts on DWs were null, then came the DW image (nano-second), then not-DW.
That happened to me with Jesus. Only it ended with yes.

I don't understand. How is that even similar?

Personal revelation is just that; we all must decide for ourselves.  I’ve found no way to convey my personal revelations to others.  And although I expect to have a million dollars to spare by 2022, I’m not giving it to you.

Yes, personal revelation is logically worthless to anyone but yourself. I would even argue that it's somewhat worthless to yourself because you can't get any outside verification which would help to show that you're not just crazy.

Like I said earlier, I'll be wealthy (...by U.S. standards. (U.S. poor are wealthy)) by 2022. The process has already begun - If I were to win the lottery tomorrow, the sudden influx of money would cause harm, but I think my character will develop sufficiently in the next 12 years.. I doubt we’ll be in contact then, but if we are, what evidence would you trust to prove that my wealth came form God?  (Besides the fact I’m an idiot and must have had Divine help.)

So it's not specific.

My experience says it’s never enough - An older lady tells you that on a missionary trip to the slums of India, a sick and dehydrated infant died in her arms as she prayed for its healing.  After another hour of  prayer the infant awoke, healthy and hungry.  She predicted the healing, it happened, and the parents verified it.  But you weren’t there.  This is just a story to you.  Like dancing waffles.  Hearsay.  And even if you were there, would you conclude God was involved?  I doubt it.  I suss you would look for alternative explanations.

Like I said before, personal revelation is worthless, not just because you can't trust the person, but also because memory is known to be inaccurate. Now if this lady went around to hospitals bringing dead babies back to life, then that would really be something, but a one off shot can have several explanations including that the baby was never dead to begin with. What is wrong with looking for alternate explanations, without explanations that don't have to do with the supernatural we have come a long way in increasing the life span of people and feeding more people.

So you're a computer programmer.  I wrote COBOL programs on punch cards.  They tell me COBOL is still around, Ugh!  I liked PL1, Pascal, and and even Assembler better.  When Data Bases were coming in, I stepped out.  Recently I've heard of “Cloud" computing.  Do you know what that is?

Yes CoBOL is still around, though now we use keyboards (jk). And yes I have heard of and know what cloud computing is; basically cloud computing is linking a bunch of computers together to share the processing power essentially creating a super computer.

That bias will change as you age. Successful business people say they trust the gut. It might help you to think of the gut as a subconscious supercomputer, processing minute information of which  we are not specifically aware. I would have avoided many a regret had I trusted my deep...  Hindsight is a B. (Can I write the B-word here?)

Yes I have heard successful business people say that as well, however successful business people are also very competitive, why would you trust their advice? About saying "bitch" I did not see that is prohibited in the guidelines and I don't care about which words a person chooses to use.

I’m not sure we are ever motivated by logic. After all, emotion means “to move’. I think logic is a tool for movement, not its source.

I think we should all strive to live rationally and here is why: If I steal from someone and then get punched in the face I will feel emotionally bad for the person hitting me despite me committing a wrong action to begin with, however if someone steals from me and I punch him in the face then I feel emotionally fine and justified. Emotionally there are two different conclusions, however, logically both situations are the same.

You underestimate your Yetzer ha Ra. I see fleeting malice in his eyes, but I don’t see good there, only a “good" mask.  Perhaps not exactly what you wanted, but I see talent there.

It's cheesy to me, and not creepy at all.

[mama_ape]

I said brown.

[idiotsavant]

I said brown.

And you were right.  Let's see if we can spark this up a bit.

Okay, I think I’ve got this. My thought process was just as you described. My original thoughts on DWs were null, then came the DW image (nano-second), then not-DW.  That happened to me with Jesus. Only it ended with yes.

I don't understand. How is that even similar?

Not DW - Maybe DW - No DW.  Not JC - Maybe JC - Yes JC.

Yes, personal revelation is logically worthless to anyone but yourself. I would even argue that it's somewhat worthless to yourself because you can't get any outside verification which would help to show that you're not just crazy.

What value sanity?

So it's not specific.

Millions of $$ mine by 2022 not specific?

if this lady went around to hospitals bringing dead babies back to life, then that would really be something

Really?  In what way?  What would it prove?

What is wrong with looking for alternate explanations?

Wrong? Nothing.  I love our ability to imagine alternatives.  Our imagination has improved and prolonged life while it has improved war and destroyed life...  We stoop so low to reach so high.

Yes I have heard successful business people say that as well, however successful business people are also very competitive, why would you trust their advice?

Between the conception and the fruition lies the shadow.  I only trust what I experience.  We seek others with similar experiences to validate and encourage us as we walk through the shadow.

Karadan, my apologies, I wasn’t ignoring your post,  I just now stumbled on it.  And I hope you take no offense at my “What value sanity?" statement.  I’m actually questioning Davin’s definition of sanity.  I concluded years ago that joy and happiness matter much more than social acceptance / validation. And I learned that the only person altogether happy is the village idiot...

Your story sums up my OP quite nicely.  It seems all of us live by faith in our own perception of reality.  

(I hope your) ...experiences aren't masking something a little more problematic.

I appreciate your concern, but so far I’ve seen nothing but improvement.  I had a sever bout with depression once.  I climbed out on my own by changing my focus from regrets to opportunities.  I now know the cup is 2/3 full at least. I’ve a friend who lost a brother to paranoia.  We can’t find any way past his defenses, as your friends couldn’t get past yours.  Still, I’d like to hear more details if you can.  I don’t want to pry, but  I wonder if you made a decision to change like I did.  Having been on the inside, can you see anyway for an outsider to help?

And don’t beat yourself for being stupid.  It’s the common state of man.

Peace - I/s

[Sophus]

So then, if we assume the Bible is the “Holy Written Word of God”, we must assume that any perceived contradictions are actually misperceptions

That's my problem. You're assuming. You're arguing from your conclusions not to them. One must follow the evidence where it leads, not selectively pick the evidence one likes that supports his conclusion. I don't do assumptions.

I forgot John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish (apollumi - to destroy fully), but have everlasting life.

I'm familiar with this verse. Another translation is die. It is possible these authors interpreted death as something that did not cause you to cease existing. Certainly the Egyptians did. Then again, the other possibility is that there is a blatant contradiction. You cannot cling to only this verse with no way of explaining the other.

It is interesting to get your take on this. Are you by any chance a Jehoviah's Witness? This must be their Biblical reasons behind their interpretation.

[Whitney]

Are you guys still on topic?

If not, please link me to the post where the split should start and tell me what to title it (sorry I don't have time to read back through it all but just noticed the last two posts don't seem to have anything to do with exploring how we know we know)