The Vital Necessity for Agreement 2 comments

12 Mar 2008 @ 17:14, by John Oates Anybody wishing to understand the thinking that lies behind the following short article is invited to read my website www.humantruth.org or, if they prefer, to read the new edition of my book The Wrong Reality (560 pages) shortly to be published by CheckPoint Press, Ireland. It is noticeable that in the interchange of thoughts and ideas within and between all departments and institutions of this reality there is a disposition to disagree. Politics depends upon disagreement, and philosophy is devoted to it. Disagreement persistently features in the articles and comments published by independent radical thinkers. Disagreement seems to be a way of life that involves a point of honour. We appear to regard it as a strength to hold firmly to our beliefs and opinions yet we know that there are always widespread differences between the positions that we take up. Since only one position can be completely true, broadly speaking, it follows that the rest of the beliefs and opinions must be incomplete and untenable. In our present reality we may make decisions not on the grounds of moral truth but according to the numbers voting for or against. We also attempt to settle arguments by debate, which more often than not ends in unsatisfactory compromise because agreement, between many differently convinced factions, is impossible. The solution to this problem is really quite simple. The basis of agreement is humantruth, which is the function of the postconscious mind, arrived at by correlating everything essential with everything else essential. All of us have travelled a certain way along the road to humantruth. On reaching each part-way stage on the road we are prone to identify that as our truth, unless and until we move on. But we do not attain whole humantruth until we reach the very end of that road. When we have done all that correlating and reached the end of the road, we shall know whole humantruth. This truth does not belong to us – it is ultimately the same for everyone and nobody owns it. It is unlikely that all of us shall arrive at whole humantruth at the same time, but those who have will know they have, and their beliefs and opinions, whether or not immediately accepted or adopted, shall have the utmost value. By the same token, if we have not arrived at whole humantruth we will know that too, and will decline to present our opinions or beliefs as fully true. It might be thought that we have neither the time nor capacity for all that correlating, but consider how much falsity we are conditioned by and attached to in our present lives. Think how much time we spend in reviewing, confirming and referring to that falsity in this present reality. Rather than build truth we persistently add fuel to the fires of unfinished reason. To arrive at humantruth in the midst of this wrong reality will be a daunting task. It involves breaking up the Machine and clearing away a mass of untruth. But subsequently, as falsity is rejected and humantruth built up, and as we steadily approach the road’s end, that task will become progressively easier and agreement more readily established.

[< Back] [HUMANTRUTH]

Category: Articles 

12 Mar 2008 @ 19:37 by a-d : Congratulations
on your Book!!!.... That is a truly GREAT achievement!

"... It is noticeable that in the interchange of thoughts and ideas within and between all departments and institutions of this reality there is a disposition to disagree. Politics depends upon disagreement, and philosophy is devoted to it. Disagreement persistently features in the articles and comments published by independent radical thinkers. Disagreement seems to be a way of life that involves a point of honour. We appear to regard it as a strength to hold firmly to our beliefs and opinions yet we know that there are always widespread differences between the positions that we take up. Since only one position can be true, broadly speaking, it follows that most of the rest of the beliefs and opinions must be incomplete and untenable...."

NO KIDDING!

"....In our present reality we may make decisions not on the grounds of moral truth but according to the numbers voting for or against. We also attempt to settle arguments by debate, which more often than not ends in unsatisfactory compromise because agreement, between many differently convinced factions, is impossible...."

VERY POWERFUL observation!

And, like you point out: At the END of the so called "personal" (oh, doesn't that sound nice and legitemate! : )-though I am tempted to call it the EGOMANIACK's road, that is where the Path of and to the ULTIMATE COSMIC/Divine TRUTH begins , ending in the Absolute of all lesser our "absolutes".
Thanks John B.!  

---

Your Name:
Your URL:	(or email)
Subject:
Comment:
	For verification, please type the word you see on the left: