Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Truth

Name: Anonymous 2007-04-08 11:40 ID:9Pvd/Z4h

Imagine this:
Two men are walking in an almost-empty parking lot. By this I mean there are approximately 60 car slots, and 7 cars. There is few enough cars to be at any point in the lot and be able to see every car. Suddenly, one man stops the other.

"There is the car," he says.

"I see no car," says the second man.

So we find ourselves in a predicament. Much like the question "does the tree make any sound?", I ask you: is the car really there? Which man is sane, and which is insane? This is a microcosm of the definition of truth. Because, isn't truth nothing more than popular acceptance? It is true that cells are the smallest unit of an organism. It is true that Columbus set foot on North America in 1492. Isn't it? What if there was another man there? A third party who says, let's say, the car really isn't there. Then the lone man is crazy and it is truth that that the car isn't there. But does that make the car's existence any more true or untrue? More probable, maybe, but truer... I don't think so. Now lets expand this microcosm into the real world, and perhaps the ratio of "crazy men" to "sane men" (who know the truth). Let's say one man claims that Christopher Columbus set foot on North America last year. All would say that he is insane. But what prevents it from being true? Or better yet, let's say all people agree on one thing, like Christopher Columbus landing in 1492. Does that make it true?

The answer is no. Truth cannot be defined as popular acceptance. Just as easily as something can be "true", it can be "untrue". These ideas form the basis of the theory known as Skepticism. That theory states that nothing can be for certain. However, I've come to realize that one thing can be for certain. That is love. Love between two people, or love between a man and God, is eternally true. That is because love is not something that can be known. That is, it is not something that can be explained. It is something that can only be felt. Knowledge is not truth. Only love is truth.

Afterlife, among other things, is the relief of ignorance and fulfillment of knowledge, as in most cultures. These cultures believe that when in the afterlife, a man knows all and his soul can rest. This is true. But people have come to regard this "fulfillment of knowledge" as knowing things, such as all aspects of Science, including the human mind, or more abstract, religious things like "what is God's plan?". The afterlife is nothing more than complete love. Love is the only truth and holding it completely will be complete truth. All aspects of the Universe are contained by love. They were created by love and are controlled by love. I'm not quite sure whether Jesus of Nazareth is indeed El Christo, but he certainly did carry the right message: God is Love. God is the ultimate, omnipresent power in the Universe. Love is that power, that we know exists, we know its power, yet is intangible.

Most importantly, you cannot know love. You can only feel it. It is truth, and all the power of the universe lies within it. Perhaps one of the greatest accomplishments of man is to not "know" love, but to know it exists.

Name: Anonymous 2007-04-08 12:43 ID:9Pvd/Z4h

>>25
Nigger is derived from the Latin word for the color black, niger. According to the Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang, it did not originate as a slur but took on a derogatory connotation over time. Nigger and other words related to it have been spelled in a variety of ways, including niggah, nigguh, niggur, and niggar. When John Rolfe recorded in his journal the first shipment of Africans to Virginia in 1619, he listed them as "negars." A 1689 inventory of an estate in Brooklyn, New York, made mention of an enslaved "niggor" boy. The seminal lexicographer Noah Webster referred to Negroes as "negers." (Currently some people insist upon distinguishing nigger—which they see as exclusively an insult—from nigga, which they view as a term capable of signaling friendly salutation.) In the 1700s niger appeared in what the dictionary describes as "dignified argumentation" such as Samuel Sewall's denunciation of slavery, The Selling of Joseph. No one knows precisely when or how niger turned derisively into nigger and attained a pejorative meaning. We do know, however, that by the end of the first third of the nineteenth century, nigger had already become a familiar and influential insult.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List