On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 5:17 PM, benjayk <benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> benjayk wrote:
> > Jason Resch-2 wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:51 AM, benjayk
> >> <benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> >>> > But with comp, you are using "1+1=2", and much more, to tackle the
> >>> > subjective truth of a universal number thinking about "1+1=2". So, if
> >>> > you reject arithmetical truth, comp makes no much sense.
> >>> I didn't write I reject arithmetical truth. I reject arithmetical
> >>> realism;
> >>> I
> >>> don't think arithmetical truth exists seperately from its observer.
> >>> 1+1=2
> >>> is
> >>> still true, just not independently of us. The reason is that 1+1=2
> >>> sense because it is true, and truth is fundamentally linked to a
> >>> that intuits what truth is.
> >>> This doesn't mean that 1+1=2 is true for me and not true for somebody
> >>> else,
> >>> but that is necessarily true because I (=consciousness, not ego)
> >>> necessarily
> >>> am.
> >>> My hypothesis is that truth is equal to awareness / consciousness / "I
> >>> am-ness" and all kind of expressions of truth are just... well,
> >>> expressions
> >>> of the truth and not independent of it. 1+1=2 is an expression of 1+1
> >>> being
> >>> itself as 2.
> >>> This hypothesis makes everything mysterious, but this may just be as it
> >>> is.
> >>> The truth is necessarily mysterious. All explanations are just
> >>> expressions
> >>> of its mysterious nature, that allow us to look deeper into what it is,
> >>> but
> >>> never giving an explanation *for* it. It's beyond explanations, seeing
> >>> itself through explanations.
> >> Ben,
> >> Would you say that e^*(2 * Pi * i) is exactly equal to 1, rather than
> >> approximately equal to 1?
> > Yes.
> > Jason Resch-2 wrote:
> >> If you believe that it is, you are believing in the independent
> >> of
> >> infinitely long numbers e and Pi, numbers which have never been fully
> >> grasped by any human, and potentially never grasped by any conscious
> >> being
> >> anywhere (due to their infinite nature).
> > I don't believe they exist independently. We don't need to grasp numbers
> > to be the fundament to their existence. We can't grasp ourselves. Yet
> > we are. So the same goes for numbers.
> > Even 1+1=2 is not graspable, because we can't grasp what 1 is. There are
> > infinitely many possibilities what 1 may be, dependent on various
> > contexts.
> > I don't think anything can fully grasped. The most simple things cannot
> > grasped because they have infinite contexts (and they cannot be taken out
> > of context, eg a square just exists because there is space that it exists
> > in). The more complex cannot be grasped because of the same reason and
> > because they are... well, to complex to grasp.
> > We can describe / put labels on reality and make good theories, but we
> > can't grasp any part of it in an ultimate way. It all grows and melts as
> > soon as we become aware of it.
> > So, with your argument, everything has independent existence (as a
> > Which actually makes sense, so I am okay with that.
> > I am just opposed to the notion that parts of truth are totally seperate
> > independent from *each other*. If they were, there would be no truth that
> > connects them, but there is, if it is only the truth that they both
> To put it in another way: Consciousness (=God) is everything (and nothing),
> but it doesn't know and can't know everything, because what it is cannot be
> completely known, as it is absolutely infinite. God *is* everything, yet
> infinitely ignorant about everything.
> Which doesn't mean that nothing is known, just that all knowledge is always
> incomplete. It doesn't matter what the knowledge is about, since all
> knowledge is contextual, and the context ultimately is everything.
These ideas are reminiscient of the Hindu concept of Parabrahman and Atman:
"The Absolute Truth is both subject and object, so there is no qualitative
"The Atman or self, he claimed, is indistinguishable from the supreme
reality from which it derives. "
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at