Within Everything Exists Everything

Many things that change constantly we understand ... such as the Earth .. People .. a river .. It is hard to find something that does not change constantly.

 

Everything which is said is simply pointing at some truth. We do the best we can but we cannot actually understand. Again, the simplest of things are infinitely complex. Fortunately, we can get along pretty well without our discriminating mind most of the time.

 

Well, that's part of the paradox. How do you think it is that all other species seem to get along pretty well without understanding. What exactly is it that you need to understand, anyway?

 

So, using whole numbers, 1+1 = 2 is not understandable?

 

You don't think other speicies understand anything. Every creature on earth is going around in chaotic manners?

 

Isn't that kind of like trying to describe the color red to a blind man?

 

Yes, you might consider it "understandable" within the agreed framework of conventional mathematics but consider the following...

If each object in existence occupies a unique three dimensional space [and is therefore subject to unique forces], you could say that all objects in the Universe are unique. If this is the case, what exactly does "2" mean? Technically, how can there be two of anything? And doesn't that make the accepting of multiples just something done out of convenience and convention?

All things are the same way.

 

Who's to say that everybody doesn't see red differently? Because the visual system varies from person to person, so must the perception of all things making it to the visual cortex. This applies to all things. What you perceive is unique for an infinite number of reasons.

 

who's to say anybody even sees, what does it mean to see.

Pseudo intellectual drivel is always the same.

So how do you know anything you see even exists?

What's the point of even trying to communicate. What are words auditorial sensory organs very from person to person so must all things making it to the temporal lobe. So what you said about vision is true about all human experience.


It's naval gazing. I can put do you with it.

 

I don't see why something being in constant flux means we can't understand it.

Is "1+1=2" in constant flux? I understand that 1+1=2.
I understand how a hammer works, to the extent that I care to. Is a hammer in constant flux? Does it matter whether the hammer is in constant flux for me to understand it?

You can't just say "this is the way all things work" and expect us to forget that you've done nothing to show why it would be so.

I agree, but I still don't see what this has to do with your point. Some things can be done without understanding, it does not follow that understanding is impossible.

This does not answer the question. Why do you call it "true understanding"? The thing you describe sound more like letting unimportant details get in the way of actual understanding.

 

Without consciousness as witness, "reality" has no meaning. Without perceptions that differentiate, there are no differences.

 

REALITY!! What a concept!... Robbin Williams

 

Now you're saying that an apple may not be an apple.
If I have 1 apple and you give me 1 apple. I would have 2 apples. 1+1=2. Of course, that means one has to believe or understand what an apple is.
It is defined, so most everyone can find out what an apple is.

 

But the color red is a result of a certain wave length that is in our visible spectrum.
So it can be defined by the wave length. Even if others may see the shade of red differently.

 

That is NOT what is meant when we say there are two of something.

 

There are two things here, one is the convention which everybody agrees to, the second being the truth of the matter. Just because everybody agrees on something doesn't make it true in many senses.

 

So, again you struggle to find some alternative sense in which the language fails!!

Why??

Besides, your idea of "the truth of the matter" is another case of you choosing a definition that isn't shared by the VAST majority of humans - and where those humans are NOT wrong.

Also, I'd point out that there is NO practical value in your view. For example, your view has NOT been required in order to support continued science. Further, not having a full understanding of the underpinnings for quantum field theory is not impacting our success.

 

Let me give you an example. Let's say that you are an atheist and chatting with a group of devout Christians [or Jews or Muslims or any God believing peoples]. Just because the entire group believes that God exists, does this mean that God must exist for you? This is how all things work, on very obvious and quite subtle levels.

Study history and you will smile at what everybody used to believe. It doesn't mean that it is correct.

 

I don't even see how that could be considered on topic.

I get along fine with Christians. There is lots to talk about, just as there is with everyone else.

It's not even SLIGHTLY my objective to convince people that their religion is false.

What you seem to be missing about history is that humans have made a whole lot of progress. Yet even so, it should be noted that our lives on Earth are not significantly altered by Einstein's revolutionary model of physics. We still use Newtonian physics when the problem is within the range where that works. Nor are we noticeably affected by the advent of quantum field theory, which carries our understanding into the small.

There will surely be advances in the future, too.

We'll figure out a quantum theory of gravity or whatever. But, what we know today is still going to work. The massive evidence we have can't magically go away. New discoveries will be constrained like relativity theory was constrained by the evidence we already had.

The canon balls we fire will still land exactly where Newton said they will land.

 

Perhaps different wavelengths are seen differently for reasons which we are not privy. Seeing a color is incredibly complex owing to the complexity of the visual pathway, from the pre-corneal tear film all the way to Brodman's area 17 in the visual cortex.

 

We will always know what works, but never why it works. This will always change.

 

Well, I would say we make progress on how things work.

Religion addresses the why, doesn't it?

 

Perhaps the grass is blue and the bright sunshine sky is green.

 

Yes, that pathway is fascinating.

But, we know the frequency of blue, for example. Our computer screens map colors using a known algorithm that doesn't involve any infinities or variability. And, people can pretty much equally recognize when a color is changing from blue toward having a yellow component - demonstrating that the relationships between the colors are known.

True?

 

colors actually have hex values