knowledge vs. belief

L

louis

Well-Known Member
Messages
148
Reaction score
0
Points
0
From Louis...

I once saw this question on a church pamphlet :
" How do we know what's real ? "
I considered that very unusual because most churches
avoid thinking in that direction - some even have
taboos against it.
I didn't probe it at the time because I was a guest at
that church and didn't want to stir up trouble, but the
thought has remained with me.
What IS knowlege, anyway ?
Einstein had some pretty clear thoughts about scientific
knowlege - the three-way process involving "reality", the
mind "observing" reality and the "test" where observation
and reality are compared to see they match. When you
get a perfect three-way match (which hardly ever happens ) only then can you claim "knowledge" .
And knowledge and belief are NOT the same thing -
any honest believer will admit that.
Trouble is... anything that is NOT knowledge ( such as
belief ) must be LESS than knowledge... and have LESS VALUE than knowledge.
At least, that's how it looks to an outsider like myself -
as if beleivers don't really want THE TRUTH .
They seem to think the other way - even if they had
access to clear, hard-edged TRUTH, I think many would reject it and cling to their habitual viewpoint .
Am I being cynical or is that really the way it is ??
 
Truth?

Louis, it is not that believers don't really want THE TRUTH even if they had access to clear, hard-edged TRUTH. I think many would reject any variation from their religious conditioning and cling to their habitual viewpoint out of fear that they would be traiterous to their ingrained beliefs & they fear the possible eternal consequences therefrom.

As an example, I had 3 spiritual experiences which I completely believe to be the unadulterated truth. http://www.near-death.com/forum/0157.html
This has caused me to speculate why in this 21st Century the Age of Technology are we still plagued by religious beliefs that are contributing causes toward terrorism, killings and wars between nations; A belief in what much of mankind calls “God”, a deity who supposedly caused catastrophes, punished people and who created the universe out of nothing as if by magic; Is this the same God of today or was much of it brought about by hysteria and superstition?

Even though IMHO, I am thoroughly convinced that I KNOW the truth rather than believing it to be the truth, I must still consider that: The Ultimate Truth is indecipherable by the human mind and can only be divulged to the spirit which also often misinterprets its meaning, hence we have various religions and beliefs.


IMHO, God's message may have been misinterpreted slightly due to the messenger's conditioning or any prior superstitious belief. God has no desire to LORD over mankind. If a person's spirit has interacted with the Spirit of God, their spirit will KNOW that the soul of all of the "Men of God" are NOW a part of God in the spiritual realm & will remain there for eternity.

The goals of ALL religions are the same; a deserved, appropriate, just finale.

There is only ONE God; a God for ALL & too large to fit into any ONE religion.

This I know as a fact; it is God's message to me. Will anyone believe it?

As time passes and when people eventually transcend their religious prejudices they will no longer say, “I am a Jew, a Muslim, a Christian”; then they will say “I am a Jewish Transcendentalist, a Muslim Transcendentalist, a Christian Transcendentalist”; and thereafter they will say “I am a Transcendentalist”.

Namaste,
Kurt
 
"Louis, it is not that believers don't really want THE TRUTH even if they had access to clear, hard-edged TRUTH. I think many would reject any variation from their religious conditioning and cling to their habitual viewpoint out of fear that they would be traiterous to their ingrained beliefs & they fear the possible eternal consequences therefrom."

i didnt even read any of your post beyond this, but this is so true

so sad to..

amitabha

ps, i dont read alot of the posts completely unless they really grab me
 
Man in the street on knowledge and belief

As a man in the street, I think knowledge must be verifiable by the senses; while belief is founded ultimately on imagination.

The knowledge of an object like a pebble is verifiable by the senses. Somebody throws a pebble into your eye, you will get hurt very badly.

Belief is founded upon imagination, ultimately it's all in the mind; for example, you have the idea of God and that He is seeing you everywhere, but He does not budge you at all like when you get hit by a pebble, a rock, or when you walk into a wall in the dark.

But there are beliefs and beliefs. If you believe in something but you don't fashion your thinking and acting on that belief, then it stays in your mind as a belief, useful to keep you busy when you are sleepless.

Now, God is a belief object that you build a whole world on, and think and act according to that whole world you build in that imagination of God. You even have experiences of God in your inner world which you cannot reproduce outside like when you work on a good dish as in making an omelet.

There are healthy beliefs and unhealthy ones. And when you act on your unhealthy beliefs, make sure you don't hurt anyone outside yourself or make a mess of yourself for others to clean up after you. Then also don't get in trouble with the law.

Susma Rio Sep
 
kk said: "There is only ONE God; a God for ALL & too large to fit into any ONE religion.

This I know as a fact; it is God's message to me. Will anyone believe it?"

lunamoth: Yes, I believe it.
 
Last edited:
Susma Rio Sep said:
Belief is founded upon imagination, ultimately it's all in the mind; for example, you have the idea of God and that He is seeing you everywhere, but He does not budge you at all like when you get hit by a pebble, a rock, or when you walk into a wall in the dark.

Susma Rio Sep
Click to expand...
The spirit is in the mind & sometimes it has the ability to interact with the spiritual existence, which is God. God never has & never will interfere in the affairs of mankind.

How do you touch and feel without emotion or sense; which is spirit; without having it recorded by your subconscious where the spirit resides? The spirit is spirit and not a religious force and is neither heaven sent, though some people via deep meditation can have their spirit interact with God’s spirit. Sentience is the ability to sense, capability of feeling, consciousness.

The spirit is in the subconscious and often controls what one writes and thinks. The soul and spirit are often considered identical, though the soul has also been referred to as the vessel for the spirit.

Kurt
 
these comments are made with respect! people only experience emotion based upon new knowledge, nothing else. imagination is more likely the foundation of religion and faith is without a doubt the choice to believe. plato said, "true things are ideas" but i believe the contents of those ideas must be true. as for healthy and unhealthy beliefs - what better discription of good and evil, heaven and hell or satan or god!
 
In this world good exists on its own & evil exists in mankind. Eliminate mankind & you eliminate evil yet good will continue to exist.

In the spiritual realm only good exists.

Kurt Kawohl
 
Stick to concrete entities

Belief is founded upon imagination, ultimately it's all in the mind; for example, you have the idea of God and that He is seeing you everywhere, but He does not budge you at all like when you get hit by a pebble, a rock, or when you walk into a wall in the dark. -- Susma Rio Sep
Click to expand...
The spirit is in the mind & sometimes it has the ability to interact with the spiritual existence, which is God. God never has & never will interfere in the affairs of mankind.

How do you touch and feel without emotion or sense; which is spirit; without having it recorded by your subconscious where the spirit resides? The spirit is spirit and not a religious force and is neither heaven sent, though some people via deep meditation can have their spirit interact with God's spirit. Sentience is the ability to sense, capability of feeling, consciousness.

The spirit is in the subconscious and often controls what one writes and thinks. The soul and spirit are often considered identical, though the soul has also been referred to as the vessel for the spirit. -- kkawohl
Click to expand...
Allow me, kkawohl, to rewrite your three paragraphs so that you maintain some connection with the realm of concrete entities like pebble, wall, and omelet.

Paragraph 1: The spirit is in the mind & sometimes it has the ability to interact with the spiritual existence, which is God. God never has & never will interfere in the affairs of mankind.

Rewritten: The picture of a spirit is in our imagination, and we imagine this picture interacting with another imagined picture, that of God. As for me (you) I will never imagine my picture of God meddling with my breakfast and other routines of my day.

Paragraph 2: How do you touch and feel without emotion or sense; which is spirit; without having it recorded by your subconscious where the spirit resides? The spirit is spirit and not a religious force and is neither heaven sent, though some people via deep meditation can have their spirit interact with God's spirit. Sentience is the ability to sense, capability of feeling, consciousness.

Rewritten: We cannot smell the picture of the spirit in our imagination, because it is an imagined picture in our mind. Some people claim to imagine they talk with their imagined picture of a spirit, which is easy, that's how playwrights compose a scene with characters conversing together. Like Hamlet, addressing "To be or not to be", instead of to himself, to the picture of the spirit he keeps present in his imagination. That picture is present when you are awake and attending to it; but you and the picture of the spirit in your mind will both disappear when you fall into deep dreamless sleep. If you don't wake up, it's all over with you and your imagined picture of a spirit.

Paragraph 3: The spirit is in the subconscious and often controls what one writes and thinks. The soul and spirit are often considered identical, though the soul has also been referred to as the vessel for the spirit.

Rewritten: Your picture of a spirit is in your memory, but you regularly don't attend to its presence, like money in your pocket, knowing it to be there. The picture of the soul in your imagination is no different from that of the spirit, they are identical except in spelling and pronunciation. Some people like to say that their picture of the soul is like a basket wherein dwells their picture of the spirit: like a figure of speech where the container is taken for the content. For example: "Finishing off one wineskin in no time" -- Pachomius2000.



Avoid in all instances going from one level of abstraction to another and another until the man in the street walks away.

Susma Rio Sep

 
Hi mcedgy, and welcome to CR. :)

A quick point, though - wouldn't you also suggest that imagination is the foundation of science? After all, were people like Einstein and Boyle not imaginative in their thinking - simply in a particularly way? :)
 
kkawohl said:
In this world good exists on its own & evil exists in mankind. Eliminate mankind & you eliminate evil yet good will continue to exist.

In the spiritual realm only good exists.

Kurt Kawohl
Click to expand...
Yet are good and evil are entirely human cultural constructs? Eliminate mankind and you still have a natural world that kills indiscriminantly.
 
I said:
Hi mcedgy, and welcome to CR. :)

A quick point, though - wouldn't you also suggest that imagination is the foundation of science? After all, were people like Einstein and Boyle not imaginative in their thinking - simply in a particularly way? :)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the welcome Brian. [/QUOTE][A quick point, though - wouldn't you also suggest that imagination is the foundation of science? After all, were people like Einstein and Boyle not imaginative in their thinking - simply in a particularly way?" imagination plays a large role in all that is creative , including science, it plays a larger role in science fiction. i think the roots of science are tightly wrapped around curiosity and loosely draped over imagination. curiosity is the bugger that makes us search for more knowledge and imagination is what makes that search creative!
 
]



This I know as a fact; it is God's message to me. Will anyone believe it?

From Louis...

Exactly what I am trying to pin down !
How do you define "fact" ? Do you mean "real" because
YOU had direct, personal experience of it ? Do you mean
it must BE real because it FEELS real to YOU ?
( That would not be my definition of "real" - that would
be "subjective" - maybe only imaginary ).
If it is FACT, then it does not need to be "believed" -
it can be DEMONSTRATED. ( That's my definition of
fact ) Others can KNOW it by experiencing it themselves.
Maybe not in the way YOU experienced it, but in
their OWN way.
 
what is spirit ?

kkawohl said:
The spirit is in the mind & sometimes it has the ability to interact with the spiritual existence, which is God. God never has & never will interfere in the affairs of mankind.

How do you touch and feel without emotion or sense; which is spirit; without having it recorded by your subconscious where the spirit resides? The spirit is spirit and not a religious force and is neither heaven sent, though some people via deep meditation can have their spirit interact with God’s spirit. Sentience is the ability to sense, capability of feeling, consciousness.

The spirit is in the subconscious and often controls what one writes and thinks. The soul and spirit are often considered identical, though the soul has also been referred to as the vessel for the spirit.

Kurt
Click to expand...

From Louis ....
I'm sure you mean well, but your comments are no help
to me at all because I have never had any conscious
awareness of anything I could call a "soul" or "spirit".
It's like trying to describe COLOUR to a blind man - using
words "red" or "blue" won't work . The only approach
that might work would be to explain the electro-magnetic
spectrum and how the rod and cone cells in our eyes
respond to the different wavelengths. Technical stuff
like that is easier for me to comprehend.
A rather NEGATIVE way to explain "soul" would be to
call it a projection of our survival instinct - one thing we
all know for certain is the fact that our bodies WILL DIE - and the next instinct is scramble around for some
OTHER form of survival .
I expect you will disagee with that - try to spell out WHY
you disagree in words as technical as you can manage.
 
Plato

plato said, "true things are ideas" but i believe the contents of those ideas must be true. as for healthy and unhealthy beliefs - what better discription of good and evil, heaven and hell or satan or god![/QUOTE]

From Louis...
I notice you're quoting Plato. Pesonaly, I prefer Aristotle.
He would have put it something like this :
Things are either TRUE , PARTLY TRUE , or NOT TRUE.
If a thing IS True , it doesn't matter if anyone believes
it or not - it is STILL true .
But if it should happen that it is NOT true, then NO
amount of believing can MAKE it true.
Such things as SINCERITY or INTENSITY of PERSONAL
CONVICTION have no bearing whatsoever on whether
a thing is true or not true.
 
real ?

A quick point, though - wouldn't you also suggest that imagination is the foundation of science? After all, were people like Einstein and Boyle not imaginative in their thinking - simply in a particularly way?

From Louis....
Interesting point .
Before I retired, my job was to make images of things
that did not yet exist.
I would work with an research/design engineer -listen
to his ideas and read his notes - until we both came up
with a picture of a item before it was constructed.
Eventualy, of course, it would be contructed and I would
have a physical ( real ) item to compare with my picture.
But ... just WHEN did that item become "real"?
As an idea in the engineer's mind ?
As an idea in MY mind as I made the image ?
Or not until it was actually constructed ?
 
I said:
Yet are good and evil are entirely human cultural constructs? Eliminate mankind and you still have a natural world that kills indiscriminantly.
Click to expand...
Uh. Yes, good and evil are entirely human cultural contructs. IMO.

Nature is my darling, because She is the only darling, but I also know that She is sharp of tooth and bloody of claw.

I would assert that this is not "evil". And, really, the natural world doesn't kill "indiscriminately"; think of how populations are controlled without human interference - how a greater food supply stimulates the bearing of more offspring...how ovepopulation of one species results in a population surge in the predators of that species.

There is no *intent to harm* in any of this, which is what evil is, IMO. There is no joy in causing suffering.

There is just the wheel, turning this way and then that, to keep things in balance.
 
And, really, the natural world doesn't kill "indiscriminately"
Click to expand...
but then what of the observation that asteroids, earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, and tornadoes are some of nature's (not mankind's) most violent killers? are these not all natural events which kill indiscriminately, even to the point of extinction of entire species?

peace
 
thotzRthingz said:
but then what of the observation that asteroids, earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, and tornadoes are some of nature's (not mankind's) most violent killers? are these not all natural events which kill indiscriminately, even to the point of extinction of entire species?

peace
Click to expand...

I guess what I'm having an issue with here is the word "indiscriminately". Are these things "haphazard" or "random"? Earthquakes don't happen everywhere. Tsunamis don't happen everywhere. These are not random events.

When we say that natural occurances like earthquakes or cometary impacts or other "natural disasters" are indiscriminate, it's because we don't understand the forces that cause them and cannot predict their occurance, that's all.

I'm not saying that (from our perspective) these things cannot cause tragic (to us) loss of life, and misery to other life forms. They do.

But, again, what is "evil" about that? Is there intent to cause harm?
 
Käthe: When we say that natural occurances like earthquakes or cometary impacts or other "natural disasters" are indiscriminate, it's because we don't understand the forces that cause them and cannot predict their occurance, that's all.
Click to expand...
is it not possible that is also true of man's inhumanity to man? isn't it possible that there's something far deeper and more purposeful going on, than we are presently willing to accept?

despite our judging actions or events as being discriminate, indiscriminate, good, or evil... i think every action/event has purpose, although it may take a lifetime (or several) for that purpose to become clear to us?

i'm not necessarily taking issue with what you've said. just trying to examine it in a broader arena than most typically are willing to consider as being possible.

peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top