Hey XOBruce and 9th Engineer,

I was glad to see your responses to my last posting. Friendly discourse helps all of us clarify/understand our individual realities.

XOBruce: Would you mind giving me an example of a "victim of good intentions gone awry." ?

9th Engineer: Would you mind giving me an example of 'what can be known', as represented in your statement ", but you can know a hell of a lot more than your own emotions."

comic relief = my good intentions going awry
 

..but...but...but...I thought the prime example was a bad haircut. !


I've been the victim of the hairdressers good intentions many times. I swear I never wanted to hear the truth.:p

oh and how, unless it was his wife, would telling her it looked great go awry unless he blurted out the awful truth during a nightmare about the scary haircut?? :lol:

LOL
I like you skysidhe .

I was offering a chance to introduce a different example in case mine was not perceived as serious enough for other's viewpoints. ALSO: your comic relief could not be considered as going awry unless the person viewing it felt that humor was necessary within comic relief. (just kidding, thats my pitiful attempt at comic relief :) )


I guess I should rephrase my questions as: Could XOBruce (or anyone) give your thoughts on specifically what is a negative effect of any example of good intentions and what exactly else 9th can know with certainty besides your intentions of love or hurt.

Skysidhe: "I've been the victim of the hairdressers good intentions many times. I swear I never wanted to hear the truth."

If your hairdresser just wanted to use her services as a way to build her wealth , with no regard to the quality of your haircut, that is NOT Good intentions.

Now, lets assume her intentions were good (regardless of their specificity) . One could say that has gone awry because of its bad visual appeal. This is just a perception on someones part. Some will like it others will not. What if you did get a GREAT haircut ? Maybe some lady so enraptured in the essence of your style and sophistication looks at you just a second to long while driving by you. She doesn't see a car turning into her lane because of it and is instantly killed when impacting with it. I know this is a lot of what if and circular reasoning but here is my point: It's ALL just perception and conjecture because we can't see into the minds of others nor can we see the future. Why guess about it ? Why try to "work it all out" ? There is NO way to be certain, so just use your best intentions and let the world work itself out as IT intends.

Sure. It's very common for people to be supportive of a friend by taking their side in a conflict, even when that friend is in the wrong and would benefit from a frank discussion on why they are wrong and how they can improve.

On vacation a week ago, there was a kid who was doing flips from the side of our dock into 8 inches of water with hidden rocks below. He got royally chewed out, because he came close to killing himself or worse. He was being a total idiot. After he was chewed out by the adults, his cousin went up to him and consoled him, expressing his disbelief at how unfair the adults were, and that there was nothing wrong with doing flips into 8 inches of water. The cousin was trying to be his friend, but was giving life threatening advice.

By the way, the kid was doing flips in the shallow water because he couldn't swim.

Good intentions gone awry...

Overprotecting your children so they don't learn the realities of life themselves...ie: giving them too much money without earning it, taking care of legal issues without them having to suffer the consequences of their actions.

Your friend is extremely excited about a new venture idea he/she has. They are simply bubbling over with joy about it. Instead of telling them this is the worst idea you've ever heard and crushing their spirit, you say it's unique, has *cough* potential, and is fascinating. They promptly go out and quit their job, get a second mortgage on their house and throw themselves into developing this doomed project...losing everything in the process.

You are venting to another friend, who knows quite a bit about cars, that you are having electrical problems in your sports car. He knows nothing about the make/model, but thinks he can help anyway and offers to fix it for you. After completely dismantling the dashboard and wiring harness, he realizes he is in wayyyy over his head and cannot even begin to reassemble the car to operating order. (Had this happen to me).

All began with good intentions, but had the individuals involved been honest, things may have turned out very differently.

Stormie

Hi Glatt ! :)

Your perception of the cousins advice sounds logical and I would guess acceptable to the majority of people.

To extend the nature of my view on this I would offer the following:

Maybe the cousin was NOT trying to help. Maybe he wanted to see the other child get int further trouble. Maybe that bit of advice MIGHT have led to further damage or maybe the cousins consoling actually DID help. Such as: if the boy getting in trouble had not been consoled maybe he would have shown his defiance by pulling an even more outrageous and dangerous stunt that did lead to severe pain and suffering. We do not know. We can only guess about outcomes or perceive them in different ways. Only the cousin knows if he intended harm or help.

:blush:thanks

Howdy Stormie,

I think if you look back at my last couple post's you'll probably see what's coming from me. I'd like to give a general reply to your examples but ask others to reply to future examples as I'm sure "someone" has to be getting sick of seeing my name in this thread.

First possibility: Any of these examples could have started with bad intentions, not good intentions. Even close friends can be ruled and driven by internal conflicts and habits that we never even know about.


Second Possibility: Was the outcome actually negative or was it just perceived that way ? Can we be certain ? Maybe the outcome without the "good intention" would have been worse. Can we see the future or alternate pasts?

We work ourselves into a frenzy everyday over things "gone awry" and it's all just perception formulated by past events that we see our own individual way. (with attention to the initial purpose of this thread) Believing that our individual truth is the only correct one IS the ultimate DENIAL.

But our individual truth is all we can offer, isn't it? This is what makes humans so fascinating...in my opinion.

Isn't that why we choose who our friends are and why we have them in the first place? Having friends whose 'truth' is not TOO different than our own and yet whose feedback from a different perspective allows us to more objectively view the situation at hand. I know I wouldn't want my friends to all be carbon copies of me, because I want to hear what other people think (those I respect and trust anyway)..be it how my new haircut looks, or if I'm seeing my relationship clearly, or if I'm being a biatch in a certain instance.

I believe there is a gap between facts and beliefs. Beliefs are based on personal, historical experiences, desires, denials and perceptions. Facts generally consist of provable data and bear no relation to emotions.

The distance between point A and point B is provable data, even when the routes taken vary. That the sun is hot is an indisputable fact. My hair looks good is a belief (or delusion :p ). Intelligent people are more successful than those less intellectually endowed is a belief (depends on your personal definition of success). Humanity begins at conception is a belief. I think 90 degrees is hot, someone who lives in the tropics may think its downright cool. Beliefs can be changed, facts cannot.

And yes, the outcome of my examples above were merely 'perceived' to be negative due to my 'truth' and expectations. To someone else, these endings may have a different meaning.

Tolerance allows us to understand that everyone has their own 'truth', even when it is directly opposed to our own. Understanding it doesn't mean condoning or accepting it, just that we acknowledge that others feel as strongly about their truths as we do about our own.

Stormie

Stormie,

I really, really, really, really love your post. It is exactly the type of thoughtful and kind discussion that is needed to allow us to learn from each other.

I respectfully add my reflections as follows:

The ability to appreciate and desire another person’s individual truth is a rare blessing in our current world. Many believe ANY difference of opinion is a direct attack on their own beliefs. If our individual truth is all we have, this perceived attack is then equal to damaging/killing all that we are = nonexistence. What a horrible fear to live with each day. If I believe you are my brother ( I use brother as a term meaning someone you trust and love), and she is my sister, and EVERY other human in existence is my brother/sister I will cherish all of their individual experiences and truths. Here is the paradox: the more I believe in ANY individual truth, the further I am from believing all others are my brothers/sisters. If I don’t believe ALL people are my brothers and sisters I will never be free from fear of attack, separation, individual loss, emotional pain, etc….

You have a knack for explaining things clearly. Is teaching a part of your current lifework?
What would you measure the distance between A and B with? Would you use a ruler, a surveyor’s tool, or a digital instrument? There is no instrument on earth that can measure the exact distance between two points. Every tool we have to accomplish this task is based on approximations, not an exact factual length. Lets also consider this: Walk to the half point from A and B. Now walk to the half point between your current position and B. Now do the same again. Keep doing this. You would do this for eternity. There is no length so small that you cannot take half of it. This is why I perceive very, very few things as fact or truth.

Beautiful!

I think that the word 'truth' is being misused here. Truths rarely exist outside of science, and things that change in different contexts (or persons) are not truths. When people have been saying things like 'that persons truths' it's not really a set of truths that's being refered to, rather, that persons beliefs. Saying that a person has a unique set of truths is pointless because it completely takes all meaning out of the word. That person might feel very strongly about something, but if it doesn't hold true under all circumstances it cannot be a truth.

The whole idea sounds like something you'd hear a motivational speaker use, it just allows people to get wrapped up in their view of the world because it's their truth (said with nose held high) and no one has a right to challenge a truth.

Or maybe it's the stigma surrounding the word 'belief' these days. Being PC sucks.

Sorry to get all 'dictionary' on ya'll. Truth as it relates to reality is the one I want to emphasise. Reality is rarely exactly the same for everyone. Therefore, what is true for me may not be true for you ie: my reality is not the same as yours.

Here is an interesting essay on "truth": http://www.thymos.com/science/truth.html

No Bluesky, I am not a teacher. I am a student of life and seeker of knowledge :). But thank you for the complements.

Stormie

The use of the words truth, belief, and fact ,whether in the context of individualistic or scientific, were used interchangeably as an attempt to show the possibility that there is no difference between them. Scientific fact can be as subjective as belief , which was pointed out in the example of measuring distances from A to B.

My ideas were presented to offer a viewpoint for discussion and refinement of clarity. They were not said with nose held high nor were they presented in a need to be validated.

No. I won't waste my time. I've already seen you and I will never agree. :headshake

???? You sound like you are declining a date :p

I'm declining a trip to la-la land. ;)

The link between truth and scientific fact is stronger than personal belief, mostly because belief is inseparable from personal experiences and science strives to be completely isolated from the person doing the experament. We have seen bad science frequently these days (both sides of the global warming debate need to step away from the politics verrrrrryyyyy slowly) and it's giving it a very wishy-washy appearence. This is not real science. The express reason for requiring that all experaments be recreatable is to eliminate personal bias and error, and ensure that the data holds true for the defined set of circumstances. Behaviors are truths, matter will always exert a force on other matter, light will always propogate in a predictable fashion as long as you know the properties of the surrounding space. The only things that changes based on perception are people. It's not your surroundings that change, it's you.

The most basic reason I don't like the word truth used like that is that it takes all meaning away from the word. It's like saying "I'll love you forever", you won't be here forever but using a strong word puts emphasis on the intention. What we experience are not individual truths, just perceptions that are so important to us that we call them truths to emphasize how strongly we adhear to them.

p.s. quantum mechanics does not apply as long as you have more mass than an electron. don't go there. please :3eye:

yes, and I think as long as we have to filter truth through our senses we can't really be sure unless we are open to all options and test what we percieve to be true.

A good test here. What you think is true turns out to be not true at all. http://www.icerix.com/icerix.php?adr...nge/senses.swf

Hello again 9th engineer.

I read your post several times in order to, hopefully, understand everything you’ve presented. I feel it contains very insightful and sincere concepts. I respectfully add my reflections as follows:

Scientific truth is higher than personal belief truth’s
I thought it might be interesting to think about this statement in this manner: My understanding is that we’ve established that it is reasonable to accept that each of us usually perceives the world around us based on the filter of our past experiences and beliefs. If the above quote is a belief someone holds, how would this filter affect his or her daily experiences? Also: how would this filter make a person feel about themselves?

If we attempt to define levels of truth I believe you’ve hit the nail on the head in that scientific facts are higher than “normal” personal beliefs because scientists make a strenuous effort in eliminating personal bias. I say normal because I believe there is a way to construct a personal belief that makes it altogether different in nature than the ones most of us have accepted. I wonder if you feel that it is possible to have/create a personal belief system that is in no way based on past experiences/comprehensions in a similar manner that scientific procedure attempts

A lengthy article, but good information about intentions changing our very DNA structure, and a measurable field of energy emanating from our hearts that has effects on people/substances nearby. Could not these energies effect every Science experiment ever observed or performed near a human ?


Hard to get through, but basically we’re seeing light photons becoming ordered by the mere presence of human DNA. (this doesn’t appear to be a predictable fashion does it ?)

Look at just how complex the structure is to get all this information to our brains. Can it be that hard to believe our intentions can make the minute chemical and electric pulses needed to drastically alter what we perceive around us ?



I can understand your concern, but taking all meaning away from the word truth was my goal. I agree that there appears to be “levels” of observable reality (truth/belief/fact). The point is that they are all subjective in some manner. Why put my faith in any of them?

So, in essence, you are a Nihilist?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism

I don't consider Nihilism a correct description of my belief system. I see great meaning beyond all things, I do believe there is purpose and a comprehensible truth. I just don't think those things are within physical form. I believe in God. I believe all living/conscious beings are much more than their physical form and for some reason we have all decided to share this illusion we appear to work, play , and die within.

what is la la land? What are you against here? 'cause I don't see it.

glatt and stormieweather gave perfectly good examples of what I was describing. Having seen how BlueSky_The Man analyzed them, changed the parameters and went off tangentially, I can see how he thinks....or doesn't.

I think it's flawed logic.
Occam is spinning in his grave.
I will never agree with that approach to any question.
I think it would be fruitless to even enter into a discussion of it.
If anyone, buys his reasoning....fine, have at it.
I don't and prefer not to waste my time. :headshake

Bruce,

I respect your decision to discontinue this thread, and thank you for the interaction that we did share.

I think it's important to note that when describing another's viewpoint using words such as "la-la land","flawed","fruitless",and "waste of time" you are diminishing yourself. You can only successfully insult another if you truly believe insults are painful and detrimental to YOUR OWN SELF. Every time you enforce this by insulting another you are only adding to the pain your carrying around already. I would not wish for you to carry around more pain because of a simple philosophical conversation.

Sincerely,
BlueSky

I feel funny talking about another poster but since you addressed my question by referring glatt and stormie about bluesky I should say what I see.


I'm looking and I only see postitive. Blue Sky is affirming their beliefs and thoughts by positive affirmations. In the discussion between stormy and bluesky there was a lot of give and take.

Even with Glatt I saw bluesky not try to tear down but build up their own beliefs before presenting his own. Somehow I think that's cool.



Here is bluesky affirming their beliefs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stormieweather Originally Posted by Stormieweather Tolerance allows us to understand that everyone has their own 'truth', even when it is directly opposed to our own. Understanding it doesn't mean condoning or accepting it, just that we acknowledge that others feel as strongly about their truths as we do about our own.

Bluesky picked out this part of stormies comments to quote and then replied with a beautiful.



As far as buying his reasoning?? How about just reading it and picking out the best parts?? Isn't that what we do in a discussion is pick out those ones we like or don't like.I think if you arn't going to like something you should give your own examples.

I picked out the affirmation of others comments and I forgot the rest because typed words on a message board don't equal major thought process changes do they? You picked out the negative aspects and forgot the rest. We are only bantering ideas back and forth and I actually miss hearing a reasoning argument from you bruce. Lastly, You might be surprised with whom I actually do agree with regardless of what little part of me I type out because untimatly it isn't the whole truth is it? Anyway who I agree with is 9th Engineer and his thought was this.


I think 9th Engineer wraps it up for me.

In a word, NO.
Is that what you do with an instruction manual?
I told you, if you want to play that game, have at it.
I'm not interested in disconnected thoughts that have no logical progression, no matter how genteel the presentation.
Positive bullshit, is still bullshit. :smack:

:thepain: :blush: um yes, sort of.....but you gave me the chuckle of my week thanks. :lol2: