nexion
coalescing in diffusion
Is there any real reason an idea or belief existing within the framework of the mind should correlate in any way to reality? I suppose I could understand such an idea within the context of individuals with certain predispositions, those who inherently care about reality and whose only thoughts and desires align with what they themselves believe to be true (perhaps there are more of those types of people than I willing to acknowledge, but the advent of belief and the belief in belief or disbelief makes the true notions of any given person opaque and incomprehensible).
The Christian believes the Christ to have been risen and generally believes in the reality of his own salvation because of his belief. The Jew believes the Christian to be entirely false, and denies that the Christ ever had the ability to grant salvation in the first place. The atheist believes that both of these ideas are complete rubbish, and that the very concept of a god is dubious and likely to be false. But these are all just beliefs, and at the same time all of these contradictory beliefs are ones that their respective constituents completely trust to be entirely true.
The idea of belief as a tool stresses both the relative unimportance and the absolute importance of belief itself, rather than how that belief lines up with any individual perception of reality, or, God help you, absolute reality (empiricists be damned). It recognizes belief as the ultimate factor in creating and molding consciousness, and thus asks how different beliefs in different mindsets (or paradigms of thought) can create different consciousnesses and affect the human experience. In that way, the myriads of possible beliefs can both be entertained and accepted, and flatly denied for no reason whatsoever.
The core of my philosophy is an ineffability, the unity of opposites, which, by the very nature of that unity, deny even the most basic axioms of philosophy and the most primitive human logic. Transcendence, however, remains forever an impossibility, no matter how elevated one may become.
There need not be any replies to this post. Keep following your own paths, as I am sure you would do regardless if you had not read any of this.
The Christian believes the Christ to have been risen and generally believes in the reality of his own salvation because of his belief. The Jew believes the Christian to be entirely false, and denies that the Christ ever had the ability to grant salvation in the first place. The atheist believes that both of these ideas are complete rubbish, and that the very concept of a god is dubious and likely to be false. But these are all just beliefs, and at the same time all of these contradictory beliefs are ones that their respective constituents completely trust to be entirely true.
The idea of belief as a tool stresses both the relative unimportance and the absolute importance of belief itself, rather than how that belief lines up with any individual perception of reality, or, God help you, absolute reality (empiricists be damned). It recognizes belief as the ultimate factor in creating and molding consciousness, and thus asks how different beliefs in different mindsets (or paradigms of thought) can create different consciousnesses and affect the human experience. In that way, the myriads of possible beliefs can both be entertained and accepted, and flatly denied for no reason whatsoever.
The core of my philosophy is an ineffability, the unity of opposites, which, by the very nature of that unity, deny even the most basic axioms of philosophy and the most primitive human logic. Transcendence, however, remains forever an impossibility, no matter how elevated one may become.
There need not be any replies to this post. Keep following your own paths, as I am sure you would do regardless if you had not read any of this.