It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: auto3000
a reply to: Sublimecraft
Knowledge is awareness by way of information or observation....what you don't want to end up doing is becoming the reference for objective meaning despite the objective reference and nature of words.
In short, wisdom is knowledge known and knowledge understood. There two different natures of knowledge: Factual knowledge and knowledge of the truth.
Logic itself can't be used by a person but instead are processed "logical processes". Since logic is processed, those processes are subject to the individual "contingent"
Because logical processes are subject to the man himself only wisdom can get to the truth and not logical processes.
a car exist materially (state)..and exist as a fact (nature).
A mind exist immaterially and exist as a truth.
it's a fact that I don't like the color red.....the correct statement would be, it is true that I don't like the color red, because it refers to a state of mind
two logical thinkers can contradict each other, but two people speaking the truth cannot.
Logic cannot tell you where the confirmation of truth derives from, only wisdom does and that can be demonstrated.
not physically existing as such but made by software to appear to do so........a car does not rely on a computer to be a car in this manner......
....note the question....this is not a bad thing by no means but at least look closely....A BELIEF THAT IS ACTUALLY TRUE?....watch what the statement really says....something that you accept to be true, actually..(as the truth or facts of a situation; really) being true?....then we look at this: what is auto3000 accepting to be true and claiming to understand?
What's happening here is this...your'e looking for facts that leads to the truth. How do you deal with a statement that is true, and what the statement is referring to is a truth?......Example (facts) 1: A horse is in my yard....you come to my house and see the horse in my yard...this means now you have determined the facts by seeing the horse and therefor discovered that the statement is true.....that's what you can understand better, I notice that...n
The reason why I know this truth without a doubt is not because people express feelings..that's just evidence that points to the case...I know undeniably because of this...Feelings: an emotional state or reaction.....we experience what it means...the experience does not make it true...the word meaning does....you not experiencing it has no bearing on the truth of it....the definition tells you the case before any physical demonstration does.
your'e wanting to follow a material path to understand immaterial realities....
Let's look at a beautiful mind.....what he was claiming was either fact of fiction not true or false...when a person makes a factual claim.."hey I work for the government" or "I'm chased by the military" these are factual claims and are subject to the person that you make the claim to.
he evidence of truth is the definition of words themselves....Truth claims don't work like factual claims work....someone says to you "a dog is an mammal"...where is the proof that a dog is an mammal?
It doesn't work that way....the correct wording would be...he's making a claim centered around what he has determined to be a fact.
you don't determine a truth because truth as a concept is not subject to man, man is subject to the truth.
ee, with truth it's like this....you don't determine a truth because truth as a concept is not subject to man, man is subject to the truth.
The definition of a word, validates what is claimed to be the case.
how would you know the definition of a mammal if you can't reference mammal objectively...you can't.