The probability that any belief is
> the ultimate truth is equal to any other belief.

I don't think that this is true. It is the content of the belief that
is either true or false and its validity, ultimate or otherwise, is
dependent on the content of the belief. To put it as simply as I can
it is very possible to believe what is not true and to disbelieve what
is and what makes something true or false is not the fact that it is
believed. In fact I don't think the truth has anything to do with
whether it is believed or not, or even whether it is perceived or not
unless the statement itself -its content-is about whether something is
believed or not.

...the world continues to suffer and
> summarizing that suffering into a cause and effect aspect simply
> exchanges one belief for another.  

I do not understand how analyzing the cause of suffering exchanges one
belief for another. It seems like a simple non sequitor to me.

  I just don't see that any belief is any more
> valid that any other belief, including my own.  

Just don't get this. Dont see how you can believe that the criteria
for validity is simply belief. What if what is believed is just wrong.
For example the hindu's believe that suffering can be eliminated by
understanding the nature of reality. Now to me that may be true or
that may be untrue but what will decide it is not whether I or anyone
believes it but rather whether understanding reality will in fact end
suffering.

 If we can all bypass the
> inquiry into the why and purpose and stop subjecting ourselves to
> needless anguish over dogmas, focus on a collective mindset of being
> happy, it would be a much better world.  Most problems stem from
> unhappiness.

Saying most problems stem from unhapiness is like saying poverty stems
from a lack of wealth. I don't think you are getting the content of
what is being said. It is not just an empty belief. It may be wrong.
It can be challenged as to its validity but the challenge cannot just
be that belief itself confers validity and hence any belief is ok or
rather an attempt to find the truth is worthless. I think that is just
wrong.

I do not think that you can just bypass the inquiry into the why. I
know that some think that if one just loves that, independent of any
inquiry there will be no problem. I am unconvinced by this. To me, the
nature of it is lucidity. I think that it may be possible but for me
the questioning if it had ended would not have worked. In a sense
there are some very deep questions about negation and its relationship
to questioning and there is a way that a kind of empty questioning can
be fruitless but I think that genuine questioning, if it is occurring
in someone cannot be eliminated through and act of will or a belief
that just ending the questioning through ones will, deciding to cease
it, will be effective. Unless one lies to oneself, if one is
questioning, you can't just cause it to cease.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to