It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Mayura
reply to post by NorEaster
I'd just listen to him, it's hard to be lied to once you know YOURSELF.
It all depends if it resonates. I'm starting to sense things energetically as opposed to intellectually.
Indoctrination and the intellect can be very misleading...edit on 4-1-2011 by Mayura because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by Alethea
reply to post by NorEaster
"By their fruits you will know them."
I would not need to ask any questions at all. I would just need some time to observe his actions. Truth is something that resonates with others who hold the same values. "The Spirit bears witness."
Would that everyone was so gifted. They aren't, though. What questions would you have someone who isn't as equipped ask such a man about the nature of his information? Surely something specific would alert you to whether his premise was plausible enoiugh to warrant further investigation. At least it would alert you to whether it wasn't plausible. Most people are not very observable, and many are natural performers.
Originally posted by NorEaster
Besides, what does a man who's had the truth concerning the whole of reality dumped in his lap look and act like?
Oh okay. Then I suppose the questions I would ask for verification would depend on the specific nature of the knowledge he claims to possess.
Originally posted by NorEaster
Keep in mind that nowhere in my question is it suggested that this is a super-knowledgable person. Just that he claims to possess a very specific information set. This could be all that this person knows. That's what needs to be ascertained through extended questioning. The first task is to quickly determine whether he's legit enough to go to that level with him.
I don't understand what this means. What is a "true sub-structure'?
Relative truth, yes. However, for a true sub-structure to exist (and one does) then a True that transcends all contextual environments must exist.
Nor this. Can you rephrase these parts?
what has become increasingly obvious is that redundancy is the go-to strategy regardless of what contextual setting is setting the agenda. The nature of this redundancy (impetus, initiation, broad application, parameters) would likely be a very critical aspect of this man's information suite, and certainly a good target for inquiry.
Originally posted by NorEaster
...
If a man walked up to you (no one you've ever seen before, and there's nothing remarkable about this man either physically or in how his presence affects you viscerally) and he told you that he possesses the Truth about life, about reality, about the concept and/or existence of God, about humanity, and about why you (specifically) exist; what list of questions would you need this man to answer correctly, for you to take him seriously as someone who just might be the one guy who actually has that Truth?
Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...so this guy walks up to me and says he has the truth... i get five questions to determine if i want to believe his truth... if thats how the game goes, heres the only question i would ask...
...will you stop the war machine forever, right now?... if he says yes and actually does that, terrific... he's a got HUGE fan for the rest of my life... if he says no, i say "okay, have nice day", and then i go back to doing whatever i was doing before he intruded with his hooey...
Now, keep in mind that in the past, people would expect such a man to have extraordinary abilities - to be able to perform "signs and wonders" as proof of his access to the Truth
I can't know for sure unless you know with me ...
Originally posted by Tearman
Oh okay. Then I suppose the questions I would ask for verification would depend on the specific nature of the knowledge he claims to possess.
Originally posted by NorEaster
Keep in mind that nowhere in my question is it suggested that this is a super-knowledgable person. Just that he claims to possess a very specific information set. This could be all that this person knows. That's what needs to be ascertained through extended questioning. The first task is to quickly determine whether he's legit enough to go to that level with him.
I don't understand what this means. What is a "true sub-structure'?
Relative truth, yes. However, for a true sub-structure to exist (and one does) then a True that transcends all contextual environments must exist.
Nor this. Can you rephrase these parts?
what has become increasingly obvious is that redundancy is the go-to strategy regardless of what contextual setting is setting the agenda. The nature of this redundancy (impetus, initiation, broad application, parameters) would likely be a very critical aspect of this man's information suite, and certainly a good target for inquiry.edit on 4-1-2011 by Tearman because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...so this guy walks up to me and says he has the truth... i get five questions to determine if i want to believe his truth... if thats how the game goes, heres the only question i would ask...
...will you stop the war machine forever, right now?... if he says yes and actually does that, terrific... he's a got HUGE fan for the rest of my life... if he says no, i say "okay, have nice day", and then i go back to doing whatever i was doing before he intruded with his hooey...
Originally posted by Rezwar
If the truth were so easy to understand It would be printed in books for all to see. Without knowledge you cannot find wisdom. Without wisdom you cannot find truth. Say you are in school, you didn't study for the test and it's test time. Now someone can give you the answers but you don't understand the steps they had to take to get and understand the answers. Would you still take the answers even though you don't understand and thus learned nothing on your own? If you are truly ready for the truth, your wisdom needs to reach the level needed to identify it. I would not ask questions to validate to myself if what they were saying were true. I would simply listen to what they have to say. Truth makes sense, lies tend to fall apart when examined closely.
Originally posted by greenorbs
Originally posted by NorEaster
...
If a man walked up to you (no one you've ever seen before, and there's nothing remarkable about this man either physically or in how his presence affects you viscerally) and he told you that he possesses the Truth about life, about reality, about the concept and/or existence of God, about humanity, and about why you (specifically) exist; what list of questions would you need this man to answer correctly, for you to take him seriously as someone who just might be the one guy who actually has that Truth?
I would focus on physics/reality because the Higher Truth is in my opinion is unknowable to us at this point in time, hence:
1. What caused the Big Bang?
2. Is M-Theory correct?
3. If the answer to 2 above is "no" then what is the nature and extent of the Universe(s)?
4. How did intelligent life (humans) arise, i.e., design or chance?
5. Where are the non-human intelligent beings exactly in the Universe?