Reality and fantasy

[Stephen3141]

We forget that all our beliefs, theologies philosophies can only point to the truth behind this vast and mysterious reality. We build models then believe they are reality. We also then fight over who has the best model, forgetting it is only an imperfect model.

How can you assert that?

You are asserting a truth, that is not hidden behind some pointer.
You are using what you think are evident truths, to assert that all "real" truth can never be understood.
This is internally, contradictory.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

How can you assert that?

You are asserting a truth, that is not hidden behind some pointer.
You are using what you think are evident truths, to assert that all "real" truth can never be understood.
This is internally, contradictory.

Our intellect is a great gift. It enables us to make sense of our sensory input and even allows us to reason and imagine. And so we create our models of reality. Are you saying some models are perfect?

 

[zippy2006]

Introducing the virtue of temperance gave me something new to think about in this context. I often think of intemperance as over indulgence.

It's interesting to note that Aquinas classes humility as a virtue of temperance (ST II-II.161.4).

 

[stevevw]

I think we all realize that it is quite easy to convince ourselves. That is, to believe what we want to believe. I think for a good chunk of my life I lived in a naïve fantasy. I am not telling anyone that their beliefs are fantasies, but how do we guard against slipping into fantastical thinking? It is easy to find the speck in a brother's or sister's eye. But what about our own.

I am thinking first that we have to be humble enough to accept the possibility that we might be wrong.
Then we have to be able to look at the same information in a different way.

Yes I agree, we can decieve ourselves and I think this is a human trait as we wear many masks to cope with lifes realities. I have been following Jordan Peterson for some years now and I like the way he explains things. Hes a clinical psychologist and has put out some self help books and videos.

But primarily he advocates for seeking truth in your life. The truth will set you free so to speak in many ways. But its hard. We are fallible creatures. Modern life creates situations which can influence people to fall into ideological thinking.

People like to belong to groups especially the right group and theres all sorts of pressures to conform. But often that conforming is the worst thing you can do as you sacrifice your own truth and it becomes harder to break out of that deceptive thinking.

Peterson talks about taking the log out of your own eye first before taking the speck out of someone elses. About cleaning up your own life first and then look at your relationships and family life and then maybe be of help in a wider scale in the community.

Its important to not compare yourself with others but to compare yourself with yourself yesterday and see if theres anything you can improve for tomorrow. Also associate with good people who will tell you the truth and won't just say what you want to hear. After a while you come to appreciate it. Its like a bad medicine but you know its doing you good.

How we treat and see ourselves is how we see others and the world. As humans we are self conscious of our imperfections and capable of evil and we often don't value ourselevs. Basically its by learning to like or love yourself that you come to love others by loving the sinner (including yourself) and hating the sin.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

But primarily he advocates for seeking truth in your life. The truth will set you free so to speak in many ways. But its hard. We are fallible creatures. Modern life creates situations which can influence people to fall into ideological thinking.

It is easy and we don't have to deal with the complexities. How often we assert things that we do not know for sure. As Peterson says, we can at least not knowingly lie, especially ourselves. I think there is something deeply spiritual about all this even when it relates to think non religious. truth is of God, whatever it is about. If we do not seek truth, if we settle for what we like to believe is truth, we settle for illusion. But we cannot know everything, can we? To some point we must state what we currently believe to be truth, and live by it. But then, we identify that current belief with faith itself and become afraid to change it, or challenge it in any way.

 

[stevevw]

It is easy and we don't have to deal with the complexities. How often we assert things that we do not know for sure. As Peterson says, we can at least not knowingly lie, especially ourselves. I think there is something deeply spiritual about all this even when it relates to think non religious. truth is of God, whatever it is about. If we do not seek truth, if we settle for what we like to believe is truth, we settle for illusion. But we cannot know everything, can we? To some point we must state what we currently believe to be truth, and live by it. But then, we identify that current belief with faith itself and become afraid to change it, or challenge it in any way.

I think it comes down to knowing the human condition that we are capable of good and evil. We are all sinners and no one is capable of knowing the truth without God. Christ said I am the truth. He confronted the pharisees who hid the truth and had corrupted their hearts.

As Peterson mentions living a lie can eat away at you, can distort things. Its like 'truth' is a law of nature. It seems strange that of all creatures something so abstract like 'truth' can have such a sway over us. Its probably just as vital as sustigen for our bodies in that truth is sustigen for our souls, our mind to be able to function properly.

Thats why I think as you said being humble is important because then we are open to learning, discovering the truth. But we can only become humble by believing that there is something, someone greater than ourselves that represents the truth of who we are and what we can become. Something to aim for beyond our weak natures and the corruptable world we live in.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

It seems strange that of all creatures something so abstract like 'truth' can have such a sway over us. Its probably just as vital as sustigen for our bodies in that truth is sustigen for our souls, our mind to be able to function properly.

This brings us, I think, to the power of myth. Myth not as falsehood or fantasy but as deeper hidden truth expressed through symbolic language. Parables are good examples. Descriptions of the Kingdom of God as lost coin, pearl of great price, mustard seed, etc.

 

[stevevw]

This brings us, I think, to the power of myth. Myth not as falsehood or fantasy but as deeper hidden truth expressed through symbolic language. Parables are good examples. Descriptions of the Kingdom of God as lost coin, pearl of great price, mustard seed, etc.

Yes, its good you mention this. It is an important aspect of human experience that we make these myths, parables and fables about our experiences and what we have learned and come to know is truth. Its very foundational and we can look back and learn a lot. That was how we passed on knowledge. Even indigenous peoples do the same.

Its like these truths within these stories are formulas and laws we have come to know, been tested through trial and error. Basically this is a religious endeavour to overcome human suffering and transcend our earthly condition to be better individuals and communities.

That is why these myths and stories have lasted as they live in the spiritual world. Yet they are just as powerful an influence as physical reality on our lives even more so.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

So I once again find my self asking what I really believe. Especially as A Catholic we have extra stuff, like regarding Mary and other dogmas.

I can easily believe that Jesus existed and that he is the incarnation of a divine nature. But "original Sin", redemption, Trinity, etc, it seems so distant from the daily experience of living. I can only take inspiration form , "Blessed are those who have not seen, yet believe."

 

[Laodicean60]

hidden truth expressed through symbolic language.

I'd like to add: "hidden truth expressed through symbolic (ancient) language.

 

[zippy2006]

I can only take inspiration form , "Bleed are those who have not seen, yet believe."

I think you must have meant to say, "Bled..." (past tense).

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I think you must have meant to say, "Bled..." (past tense).

O, Blessed Brother. What I get for carelessness.

 

[Stephen3141]

I think we all realize that it is quite easy to convince ourselves. That is, to believe what we want to believe. I think for a good chunk of my life I lived in a naïve fantasy. I am not telling anyone that their beliefs are fantasies, but how do we guard against slipping into fantastical thinking? It is easy to find the speck in a brother's or sister's eye. But what about our own.

I am thinking first that we have to be humble enough to accept the possibility that we might be wrong.
Then we have to be able to look at the same information in a different way.

Is your post referring to some specific topic?

Or, are you talking about how to recognize what is real?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Is your post referring to some specific topic?

Or, are you talking about how to recognize what is real?

I think I am just sharing some doubts about my own beliefs...even though they are orthodox.

 

[FireDragon76]

The Buddha placed equanimity as a fundamental virtue of mindfulness. In the Eastern Christian ascetical tradition, apatheia is considered the most important virtue for discernment. It is more or less the same thing.

 

[Jermayn]

I think we all realize that it is quite easy to convince ourselves. That is, to believe what we want to believe. I think for a good chunk of my life I lived in a naïve fantasy. I am not telling anyone that their beliefs are fantasies, but how do we guard against slipping into fantastical thinking? It is easy to find the speck in a brother's or sister's eye. But what about our own.

I am thinking first that we have to be humble enough to accept the possibility that we might be wrong.
Then we have to be able to look at the same information in a different way.

In the context of Christianity, the question is, do you believe God alone chose to open your eyes and awaken from the fantasy world you lived in (Calvinism) or was it you yourself who, after processing what you had heard about Jesus Christ, came to the conclusion that it was true and accepted it, pulling you from your slumber (Armenianism).

If you have a Calvinist view, those who are deceived will remain hopelessly deceived unless God has elected them to inherit salvation from the beginning. If Armenian, deception is our natural state due to our sinful nature. The only cure is taking on the new nature of Jesus Christ through faith in him alone.

That's my take on it. As far as non-spiritual matters; things like Flat-Earth Theory, there are too many reasons to list in one place to describe why one may remain deceived.

 

[FireDragon76]

In the context of Christianity, the question is, do you believe God alone chose to open your eyes and awaken from the fantasy world you lived in (Calvinism) or was it you yourself who, after processing what you had heard about Jesus Christ, came to the conclusion that it was true and accepted it, pulling you from your slumber (Armenianism).

If you have a Calvinist view, those who are deceived will remain hopelessly deceived unless God has elected them to inherit salvation from the beginning. If Armenian, deception is our natural state due to our sinful nature. The only cure is taking on the new nature of Jesus Christ through faith in him alone.

In Reformed theology, God ordinarily operates through means: preaching and the sacraments. It's not a decisional theology, where our salvation is dependent on our choice, but neither is it hopeless.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The Buddha placed equanimity as a fundamental virtue of mindfulness. In the Eastern Christian ascetical tradition, apatheia is considered the most important virtue for discernment. It is more or less the same thing.

And was it you who introduced me to Eastern Christian Nepsis (watchfulness)?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Is your post referring to some specific topic?

Or, are you talking about how to recognize what is real?

I also ponder the issue of the Divinity of Jesus and how it factors into Trinity. Of course there were among the first controversies the early church dealt with. Most of us take it all for granted now. The terms eternally begotten don't seem to make much sense together. "Begotten" is past participle of beget. The action has been done. Eternally done? And Holy Spirit "proceeds" eternally. Yet all one God. Sometimes it seems to me that a church Fathers tried to fit it all together in a word salad.

I like simplicity. It would be easier to stick with “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). And leave it at that without trying to account for Jesus and Holy Spirit. I can see Jesus as the extension of that ne God her eon earth in the flesh. But why a distinct person? same with the Holy Spirit. Why the need to recognize a distinct person?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I also ponder the issue of the Divinity of Jesus and how it factors into Trinity. Of course there were among the first controversies the early church dealt with. Most of us take it all for granted now. The terms eternally begotten don't seem to make much sense together. "Begotten" is past participle of beget. The action has been done. Eternally done? And Holy Spirit "proceeds" eternally. Yet all one God. Sometimes it seems to me that a church Fathers tried to fit it all together in a word salad.

I like simplicity. It would be easier to stick with “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). And leave it at that without trying to account for Jesus and Holy Spirit. I can see Jesus as the extension of that ne God her eon earth in the flesh. But why a distinct person? same with the Holy Spirit. Why the need to recognize a distinct person?

I'm sort of on the other side of the epistemic spectrum: where explanations are purposely being whittled by a theorist to be "simple" rather than "accurate," I tend to lean toward thinking that Occam's Razor also needs to be Razored in such cases.

But why Jesus is presented as a distinct person? That's a tough philosophical and theological question, but I think that the New Testament writers, along with the Early Church Fathers, took the verbal traditions about Jesus, evaluated them and, conceptually speaking, concluded that Jesus wasn't merely speaking to Himself when He prayed to "God, the Father" and/or referred to "God, the Holy Spirit." So, they deduced that a Trinitarian connection existed within Jesus when they were done theologically appraising those traditions. In the case of Paul, there was more than mere deductive thinking upon ancient Jewish texts, though, going on in his own hermeneutical outlook, obviously.

At the same time, from our perceptual, historical and theological standpoint today, I'm all for advocating for simplicity of explanation where it's obvious that a theorist is working too hard toward the opposite direction in theology by misapplying and focusing too much on Deductive reasoning and, thereby, reaching for allusion upon allusion upon allusion by which to build his theology.