The Illiative Sense


I think GW called it "illative force" ... RS also spoke of a truth sense.  We each of us have our own sense of what is beautiful or funny or strange or what is new to us.  Why is it so hard for some people to accept that each of us also has our own sense of what is true?

... or said differently:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder ... well, so is truth.

Tags

  1. truth
  2. experience
  3. illative force
  4. vortex
  5. irrationality

Comments


M1g0r says
The vortex can't get outside itself - the walled garden is perfect!

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 12:25:37 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:50:10 17064
Notice the fixed nature of the word certain's meaning. It apparently is not the same as you hold truthy stuff to be.


a matter of degree ... there is a spctrum of certainty.  i know for certain that the sun will rise tomorrow and that i will eat prunes for breakfast.  The former is far more certain than the latter.  Both have a public reach ... er, you can come down here and watch me ... or talk to denise she knows ... or even ask me and i will tell you ... then your certainty will be informed by your trust in my honesty.   nothing esoteric or even philosophical going on here ... and nothing to doubt ... eh?
So you disagree (what a surprise!) with the dictionary/etymology abour the fixedness of certainty !


Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:27:02 17064
seth 2014-02-04 09:14:59 17064
thing is there is an inside and an outside of this vortex.  I can see the outside of your vortex via your behavior and deeds and communications into my senses ... but i cannot see inside your walled garden.   only you are privileged to see in there. 
How do you know you are inside the walled garden. There are no one-eyed kings in such a valley of the blind.


well i know what i am aware of ... i think therefore i am ... this is not something that i know how to doubt.  "inside" and "outside" is just what i have been calling the viewpoints different people can have relative to an experience of awareness.  it is using the metaphor of a box  which has an inside and an outside.   your awareness of my awareness is outside my awareness box, mine is from inside that box.  it is a metaphor, but i don't see where it breaks down. 

or are you asking how i know the garden is walled?  how strong or porous is the box?

i cannot guess what you are saying about one-eyed kings in a valley of the blind. 


Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:50:10 17064
Notice the fixed nature of the word certain's meaning. It apparently is not the same as you hold truthy stuff to be.


a matter of degree ... there is a spctrum of certainty.  i know for certain that the sun will rise tomorrow and that i will eat prunes for breakfast.  The former is far more certain than the latter.  Both have a public reach ... er, you can come down here and watch me ... or talk to denise she knows ... or even ask me and i will tell you ... then your certainty will be informed by your trust in my honesty.   nothing esoteric or even philosophical going on here ... and nothing to doubt ... eh?

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 12:18:14 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:33:22 17064
How can one have a private truth With a public reach?

propositions about those things which we share tend to have a public reach.  For example, we both could share an experience at the corner of Powell and Market street in San Francisco.
Nah! You would go away with your private truthy & I another according to your philosophy - Even if I just bip you upside the head. Something might have occurred however.  If one could refine existing at that moment so fine that there was no time (vortex) for cognizing nor memory making & we were both actually present I might agree.  LOL


M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 09:14:59 17064
thing is there is an inside and an outside of this vortex.  I can see the outside of your vortex via your behavior and deeds and communications into my senses ... but i cannot see inside your walled garden.   only you are privileged to see in there. 
How do you know you are inside the walled garden. There are no one-eyed kings in such a valley of the blind.


Seth says
thing is there is an inside and an outside of this vortex.  I can see the outside of your vortex via your behavior and deeds and communications into my senses ... but i cannot see inside your walled garden.   only you are privileged to see in there. 

M1g0r says
How can one have a private truth With a public reach?

M1g0r says
Notice the fixed nature of the word certain's meaning. It apparently is not the same as you hold truthy stuff to be.


Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:33:22 17064
How can one have a private truth With a public reach?

propositions about those things which we share tend to have a public reach.  For example, we both could share an experience at the corner of Powell and Market street in San Francisco.

M1g0r says
How do you know outside of your own viewpoint?
  • In the story that spawned the quote "in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king" - H.G.Wells the outside world is both feared & imaginary until an person from the outside stumbles into their buried world with 2 eyes.
  • You are smart enough to get that story of a metaphor of a personal walled garden of your own truth, I think, eh?
  • Is your viewpoint the only one that IS? - exists for you? is certain? your words the only truth you know if any?
  •  - the latter being the Walled Garden of Subjectivity

Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 12:31:42 17064
seth 2014-02-04 12:25:37 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:50:10 17064
Notice the fixed nature of the word certain's meaning. It apparently is not the same as you hold truthy stuff to be.


a matter of degree ... there is a spctrum of certainty.  i know for certain that the sun will rise tomorrow and that i will eat prunes for breakfast.  The former is far more certain than the latter.  Both have a public reach ... er, you can come down here and watch me ... or talk to denise she knows ... or even ask me and i will tell you ... then your certainty will be informed by your trust in my honesty.   nothing esoteric or even philosophical going on here ... and nothing to doubt ... eh?
So you disagree (what a surprise!) with the dictionary/etymology about the fixedness of certainty !


well i certainly agree that the dictionary has accurately recorded the fixed connotation of the word.  as a practical matter we both know there is a spectrum to a feeling of certainty.  we know that because we have experienced people professing certainty and then later finding that they were mistaken.  denise does this all the time.  she goes, "i am 300% certain of that" ... non the less she doesn't bat an eye when we discover that she was mistaken ... even thought most frequently she is not.
 

anyway, i am certain that i will eat prunes tomorrow for breakfast. 

M1g0r says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:25:11 17064
  • I don't hold truth to be just a feeling.
  • I don't hold the feeling of certainty to be the only indicator for a truth encounter.
  • I hold truth to be that which IS articulated in sufficiently precise language.
  • I hold that a direct experience needs no language to behold
  • ..  & probably can't be described by language.



Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 12:28:38 17064
seth 2014-02-04 12:18:14 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:33:22 17064
How can one have a private truth With a public reach?

propositions about those things which we share tend to have a public reach.  For example, we both could share an experience at the corner of Powell and Market street in San Francisco.
Nah! You would go away with your private truthy & I another according to your philosophy - Even if I just bip you upside the head. Something might have occurred however.  If one could refine existing at that moment so fine that there was no time (vortex) for cognizing nor memory making & we were both actually present I might agree.  LOL

i think if you narrow it down to some specific proposition ... like for example, did we see a cable car there .. or did you bip me on the head ... i suspect that should we be honest, we would both have to assent to those propositions ... and both of us would sense (feel)those propositions were true. 

There are zillions upon zillions of these shared truth feelings ... for example i sense it is true that "17064 here at fastblogit.com was written by me at 2014-02-04 08:28:38 "... if you check the date on this item, will you not feel the same way twords that quoted proposition?   I pretty much call that the firmament.

Are you really doubting this in any practical sense?  Are we having just a bit of spass here with a quibble?

Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:17:30 17064
How do you know outside of your own viewpoint?
  • In the story that spawned the quote "in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king" - H.G.Wells the outside world is both feared & imaginary until an person from the outside stumbles into their buried world with 2 eyes.
  • You are smart enough to get that story of a metaphor of a personal walled garden of your own truth, I think, eh?

ok, i get that you are referring to clairvoyance ... some special power possessed by some humans which would allow them to sense what is so independent of any subjective interpretation ... right? 

well seems to me the person with this special power would still need to sense (feel or perceive, whatever you want to call it) what was so.  no?  So we still have the same predicament:  that which is so, and some person feeling it so.  The only question then is the accuracy of the sense; AND whether two people with the same power would feel the same way toward the same thing.  From my own experience i find it laughable that they would ... though if this what is so ether actually does exist, why hasn't somebody performed some experiment to see if actual clairvoyants agree on it.

Seth says
source: mark
  • Is your viewpoint the only one that IS? - exists for you? is certain? your words the only truth you know if any?
  •  - the latter being the Walled Garden of Subjectivity

  1. obviously there are many viewpoints not just my own
  2. my viewpoint is the only one i can experience - that for me is perhaps what you call "the walled garden of subjectivity"
  3. my certainty of things varies just according to my experience
  4. i feel truth in many people's words, not just my own
  5. me thinks we are putting this "Walled garden of Subjectivity" is a different relationship.

Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:26:32 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:25:11 17064
  • I don't hold truth to be just a feeling.
  • I don't hold the feeling of certainty to be the only indicator for a truth encounter.
  • I hold truth to be that which IS articulated in sufficiently precise language.
  • I hold that a direct experience needs no language to behold
  • ..  & probably can't be described by language.

  1. "feeling" may be the wrong word.  but more generally i hold that the only tangible aspect of truth is an experience that people have towards something.  in other words there exists no "what is so ether" apart from those experiences. 
  2. you kind of did acknowledge the predicament i am talking about  when you start talking about "an encounter" ... is not such an encounter an experience? 
  3. certainty is a dodge here ... a quibble ... i dealt with it above. we do not live in a binary world of certainty and not certainty.
  4. lots of things can be articulated in sufficiently precise language which, me thinks, we would both have to agree are totally false.
  5. i also hold that "a direct experience" does not come from language and language cannot transmit it from one person to another.

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 14:14:22 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:17:30 17064
How do you know outside of your own viewpoint?
  • In the story that spawned the quote "in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king" - H.G.Wells the outside world is both feared & imaginary until an person from the outside stumbles into their buried world with 2 eyes.
  • You are smart enough to get that story of a metaphor of a personal walled garden of your own truth, I think, eh?

ok, i get that you are referring to clairvoyance ... some special power possessed by some humans which would allow them to sense what is so independent of any subjective interpretation ... right? 

well seems to me the person with this special power would still need to sense (feel or perceive, whatever you want to call it) what was so.  no?  So we still have the same predicament:  that which is so, and some person feeling it so.  The only question then is the accuracy of the sense; AND whether two people with the same power would feel the same way toward the same thing.  From my own experience i find it laughable that they would ... though if this what is so ether actually does exist, why hasn't somebody performed some experiment to see if actual clairvoyants agree on it.
  • I am not talking or suggesting clairvoyance
  • no special powers or x-ray vision
  • what allows some people to see what others can not is focus, attention & even the idea that they can't see anything else

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 14:24:01 17064
source: mark
  • Is your viewpoint the only one that IS? - exists for you? is certain? your words the only truth you know if any?
  •  - the latter being the Walled Garden of Subjectivity

  1. obviously there are many viewpoints not just my own
  2. my viewpoint is the only one i can experience - that for me is perhaps what you call "the walled garden of subjectivity"
  3. my certainty of things varies just according to my experience
  4. i feel truth in many people's words, not just my own
  5. me thinks we are putting this "Walled garden of Subjectivity" is a different relationship.
  • maybe
  • I say it is possible for 2 people to have an experience like the PR exercise of "I am experiencing you experiencing me experiencing you" - when experienced ends with one saying "we are in communication!"
  • If you follow the same path as I do toward an agreed goal I suspect that at the end we should reach the same point experiencing the same thing or aspect through our respective vortexes.

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 14:39:52 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:26:32 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:25:11 17064
  • I don't hold truth to be just a feeling.
  • I don't hold the feeling of certainty to be the only indicator for a truth encounter.
  • I hold truth to be that which IS articulated in sufficiently precise language.
  • I hold that a direct experience needs no language to behold
  • ..  & probably can't be described by language.

  1. "feeling" may be the wrong word.  but more generally i hold that the only tangible aspect of truth is an experience that people have towards something.  in other words there exists no "what is so ether" apart from those experiences. 
  2. you kind of did acknowledge the predicament i am talking about  when you start talking about "an encounter" ... is not such an encounter an experience? 
  3. certainty is a dodge here ... a quibble ... i dealt with it above. we do not live in a binary world of certainty and not certainty.
  4. lots of things can be articulated in sufficiently precise language which, me thinks, we would both have to agree are totally false.
  5. i also hold that "a direct experience" does not come from language and language cannot transmit it from one person to another.
I kinda hinted at #5 in previously above. I hold otherwise.  It's the old thing-itself dilemma. But on the way to the Harvest Turd Company (Bread) I had a couple of epiphanies:
  • Direct experiences are content-free otherwise they would be describable
  • They are similar to the IS & Exist verbs (see BofNK)
  • I had an experience with a song wherein my focus on the song sent me to content free emotion which I can not clothe in words. I blog most of those kinds of experiences at songs

Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-04 17:11:13 17064
seth 2014-02-04 14:14:22 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:17:30 17064
How do you know  ?
  • In the story that spawned the quote "in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king" - H.G.Wells the outside world is both feared & imaginary until an person from the outside stumbles into their buried world with 2 eyes.
  • You are smart enough to get that story of a metaphor of a personal walled garden of your own truth, I think, eh?

ok, i get that you are referring to clairvoyance ... some special power possessed by some humans which would allow them to sense what is so independent of any subjective interpretation ... right? 

well seems to me the person with this special power would still need to sense (feel or perceive, whatever you want to call it) what was so.  no?  So we still have the same predicament:  that which is so, and some person feeling it so.  The only question then is the accuracy of the sense; AND whether two people with the same power would feel the same way toward the same thing.  From my own experience i find it laughable that they would ... though if this what is so ether actually does exist, why hasn't somebody performed some experiment to see if actual clairvoyants agree on it.
  • I am not talking or suggesting clairvoyance
  • no special powers or x-ray vision
  • what allows some people to see what others can not is focus, attention & even the idea that they can't see anything else

well yes certainly focus, attention, and attitude will allow people to see what they otherwise would not.  but that still does not get them to objective knowledge without interpretation ... just makes their interpertations better. 

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 19:17:34 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 17:11:13 17064
seth 2014-02-04 14:14:22 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 13:17:30 17064
How do you know  ?
  • In the story that spawned the quote "in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king" - H.G.Wells the outside world is both feared & imaginary until an person from the outside stumbles into their buried world with 2 eyes.
  • You are smart enough to get that story of a metaphor of a personal walled garden of your own truth, I think, eh?

ok, i get that you are referring to clairvoyance ... some special power possessed by some humans which would allow them to sense what is so independent of any subjective interpretation ... right? 

well seems to me the person with this special power would still need to sense (feel or perceive, whatever you want to call it) what was so.  no?  So we still have the same predicament:  that which is so, and some person feeling it so.  The only question then is the accuracy of the sense; AND whether two people with the same power would feel the same way toward the same thing.  From my own experience i find it laughable that they would ... though if this what is so ether actually does exist, why hasn't somebody performed some experiment to see if actual clairvoyants agree on it.
  • I am not talking or suggesting clairvoyance
  • no special powers or x-ray vision
  • what allows some people to see what others can not is focus, attention & even the idea that they can't see anything else

well yes certainly focus, attention, and attitude will allow people to see what they otherwise would not.  but that still does not get them to objective knowledge without interpretation ... just makes their interpertations better. 
Some people having that attitude would fail because the 3rd bullet above is not fulfilled.


Seth says
source: mark
  • Direct experiences are content-free otherwise they would be describable
... i tend to agree

for an experience to have content, be describable, i think it needs to get feedback, be reinforced, from the outside, ... but i think those experiences come deep from within where they are not connected or related to the outside at all and cannot get feedback.  They are extremely private and personal ...  notwithstanding that they can be extremely intense and clear.  i presume that makes them easily interpreted as some kind of absolute.  several times i have noticed when i am so very clear about something that i just know it must be so, that is just the very time that i cannot communicate it at all, and others just go tilt about it.  it is infuriating. 

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-04 19:43:49 17064
source: mark
  • Direct experiences are content-free otherwise they would be describable
... i tend to agree

for an experience to have content, be describable, i think it needs to get feedback, be reinforced, from the outside, ... but i think those experiences come deep from within where they are not connected or related to the outside at all and cannot get feedback.  They are extremely private and personal ...  notwithstanding that they can be extremely intense and clear.  i presume that makes them easily interpreted as some kind of absolute.  several times i have noticed when i am so very clear about something that i just know it must be so, that is just the very time that i cannot communicate it at all, and others just go tilt about it.  it is infuriating. 
  • Maybe so or not.
  • The lack of communication about them  is not the main event.
  • They just are.
  • That which is, IS!
  • Worthless or priceless.
  • Infinitesimal or Infinite.
  • Perhaps they do not fit in the context of ordinary experience

M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-05 07:47:42 17064
source: mark
  • The lack of communication about them  is not the main event.
... i agree in that the event itself is not the communication about the event or even the lack thereof.  But we can use that apparent lack of an ability to communicate to distinguish it from other common events about which we can communicate.

but our topic here is sensing truth.  i have taken that truth is a relationship between experience and the metaworld ... and is a property of the metaworld, not the experience.  that relationship is perceived by some specific mind.   i am not alone in that, mainstream epistemology establishes the same nature for truth.  but your direct experience does not even impinge the metaworld ... it is not reflected there ... as you say, it just is.  so just how can we honestly sense a property in the metaworld about it?  No, that would be a category error.  So i am compelled in my mind to accept that i sense (feel, grock, whatever) the truth between my experience and the metaworld in which i talk.

but then you deny that truth is even sensed ...  you are content to assert that it just is.  just like this direct experience which also just is.  it is not sensed, not experienced, notwithstanding that we continually talk about it.
  hmmm ... perhaps then we really should stop talking about that which we cannot .
  • If one is doing cognition one is not having a direct experience.
  • Cognition is not a direct process & process is not a direct experience
  • See: sequence of encounter
  • I use Peter Ralston as a reference because his ontological material is free of religion
  • There are others - see Rudolf Steiner - Theory of Knowledge (I read ~ 19)

Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-05 08:01:44 17064
seth 2014-02-05 07:47:42 17064
source: mark
  • The lack of communication about them  is not the main event.
... i agree in that the event itself is not the communication about the event or even the lack thereof.  But we can use that apparent lack of an ability to communicate to distinguish it from other common events about which we can communicate.

but our topic here is sensing truth.  i have taken that truth is a relationship between experience and the metaworld ... and is a property of the metaworld, not the experience.  that relationship is perceived by some specific mind.   i am not alone in that, mainstream epistemology establishes the same nature for truth.  but your direct experience does not even impinge the metaworld ... it is not reflected there ... as you say, it just is.  so just how can we honestly sense a property in the metaworld about it?  No, that would be a category error.  So i am compelled in my mind to accept that i sense (feel, grock, whatever) the truth between my experience and the metaworld in which i talk.

but then you deny that truth is even sensed ...  you are content to assert that it just is.  just like this direct experience which also just is.  it is not sensed, not experienced, notwithstanding that we continually talk about it.
  hmmm ... perhaps then we really should stop talking about that which we cannot .
  • If one is doing cognition one is not having a direct experience.
  • Cognition is not a direct process & process is not a direct experience
  • See: sequence of encounter
  • I use Peter Ralston as a reference because his ontological material is free of religion
  • There are others - see Rudolf Steiner - Theory of Knowledge (I read ~ 19)
  1. all true sentences ... all of which i agree with
  2. ... and all, strangely enough, have been incorporated in my thoughts above
  3. none of which contradict or dispute your true sentences

which, of course, leads me to question why you said them here in the context of "The Illiative Sense"  .



M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-05 06:50:44 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-04 23:55:51 17064
seth 2014-02-04 19:43:49 17064
source: mark
  • Direct experiences are content-free otherwise they would be describable
... i tend to agree

for an experience to have content, be describable, i think it needs to get feedback, be reinforced, from the outside, ... but i think those experiences come deep from within where they are not connected or related to the outside at all and cannot get feedback.  They are extremely private and personal ...  notwithstanding that they can be extremely intense and clear.  i presume that makes them easily interpreted as some kind of absolute.  several times i have noticed when i am so very clear about something that i just know it must be so, that is just the very time that i cannot communicate it at all, and others just go tilt about it.  it is infuriating. 
  • Maybe so or not.
  • The lack of communication about them  is not the main event.
  • They just are.
  • That which is, IS!
  • Worthless or priceless.
  • Infinitesimal or Infinite.
  • Perhaps they do not fit in the context of ordinary experience

my question in this context is how does a illitive feeling happen in relationship to them at all?  "when i take a pee i feel the pee dribbling out ... sometimes now i almost squeeze it out". i don't feel my peeing is necessarily true ... no, it is the same like you say about direct experience ... it just is.  now my last italicized sentence i do feel is true ... ive gone over it, and yes i could get more detailed, but given a bit of license with the words "dribbling" and "squeeze", substantially what i have written there i feel is true. 

in other words, why do some people seem to profess an exceptional feeling of truth to these particular kind of experiences?  How would you feel about me professing that my peeing was absolutely true?  Wouldn't that kind of go tilt in your mind?
  • I don't hold pissing or any other kind of ordinary experience  as a direct experience
  • There is too much history & cognition wrapped up in such
  • I suppose that one could find Satori in taking a piss in some way never been experienced in  the Universe however even this one is taken already:
  • But before I show you an example maybe ponder that a direct experience, one of the epiphany kind maybe, indescribable, may have the unfolding of the being it inspires as a main event instead of the frustration of clothing it in robes.

Seth says
source: mark
  • The lack of communication about them  is not the main event.
... i agree in that the event itself is not the communication about the event or even the lack thereof.  But we can use that apparent lack of an ability to communicate to distinguish it from other common events about which we can communicate.

but our topic here is sensing truth.  i have taken that truth is a relationship between experience and the metaworld ... and is a property of the metaworld, not the experience.  that relationship is perceived by some specific mind.   i am not alone in that, mainstream epistemology establishes the same nature for truth.  but your direct experience does not even impinge the metaworld ... it is not reflected there ... as you say, it just is.  so just how can we honestly sense a property in the metaworld about it?  No, that would be a category error.  So i am compelled in my mind to accept that i sense (feel, grock, whatever) the truth between my experience and the metaworld in which i talk.

but then you deny that truth is even sensed ...  you are content to assert that it just is.  just like this direct experience which also just is.  it is not sensed, not experienced, notwithstanding that we continually talk about it.
  hmmm ... perhaps then we really should stop talking about that which we cannot .

M1g0r says
Underneath all of this I suspect that you are still trying to proove that truth does not exist! When you get there, if you can get there, the the truth of it will not exist!





M1g0r says
seth 2014-02-05 09:24:31 17064
M1g0r 2014-02-05 08:59:45 17064
Underneath all of this I suspect that you are still trying to proove that truth does not exist!


Come on mark that is very definitely not what i am trying to prove.  If you would take that twist out of your mind, then perhaps you would actually understand what i am trying to say.

What i am saying is that truth exists as an experience of a specific nature.  In a way i call myself being radically honest about it ... rather than, what it seems to me you are doing: imagining it to be something that cannot even be experienced.
Well, your snarkiness does not encourage any further participation on my part.
  • the blue bolded part  could be anything & everything
  • we started out with your truth & my truth probably not shareable
  • did that shift?
  • even if shared via language you can't get everyone everywhere to buy into it
  • I hold truth similar to proof - i.e. demonstration (see BC)
  • still some agreement as to the a priori assumptions has to show up (axioms in mathematics)
  • agreement is not truth - see current politics
  • there will come a time down this road where I loose interest in you view of truth
  • I have one that works for me
  • We can still converse on other subjects as long as their truthyness is irrelevant
  • I suggest you begin to bump the ideas here against someone else

Seth says
M1g0r 2014-02-05 08:59:45 17064
Underneath all of this I suspect that you are still trying to proove that truth does not exist!


Come on mark that is very definitely not what i am trying to prove.  If you would take that twist out of your mind, then perhaps you would actually understand what i am trying to say.

What i am saying is that truth exists as an experience of a specific nature.  In a way i call myself being radically honest about it ... rather than, what it seems to me you are doing: imagining it to be something that cannot even be experienced.

M1g0r says
M1g0r 2014-02-05 08:41:43 17064
I don't know, perhaps you can read back through all the nested material & notice how you triggered them or not.
a priori -vs- a fortiori in the context of illiative (infer) - see Barbara Cubed for the a fortiori & reasoning.  So what do you have here that is new since the 1590's?
- illiative or illative in the Wikipedia
your primary reference seems outside the illative case grammar construct
infer (v.) Look up infer at Dictionary.com1520s, from Latin inferre "bring into, carry in; deduce, infer, conclude, draw an inference; bring against," from in- "in" (see in- (2)) + ferre "carry, bear," from PIE *bher- (1) "to bear, to carry, to take" (cf. Sanskrit bharati "carries;" Avestan baraiti "carries;" Old Persian barantiy "they carry;" Armenian berem "I carry;" Greek pherein "to carry;" Old Irish beru/berim "I catch, I bring forth;" Gothic bairan "to carry;" Old English and Old High German beran, Old Norse bera "barrow;" Old Church Slavonic birati "to take;" Russian brat' "to take," bremya "a burden"). Sense of "draw a conclusion" is first attested 1520s.

Maybe this is a good link from Wikipedia.

Seth says
What is amusing to me is that you have to have a weird sense of truth to continue to support the current POTUS.



M1g0r says
The Scientific Method is something to consider. Science is corrupt when proof is a matter of voting or consensus.
I like this picture found on G+ as a metaphor of all kinds of things.
Otherness could be where thoughts come from. Of course if one hears voices ....




M1g0r says
FYI,
cocksure (adj.) Look up cocksure at Dictionary.com1520s, "certain," from cock (n.1) + sure (adj.). Probably "as assured as a cock." "The word was originally perfectly dignified, and habitually used in the most solemn connections" [OED].


Seth says
it seems to me that what is called "proof" is quite a different thingey than what i call "truth".   proof is where one follows a standard recipe and arrives at a result such that anyone else who performs that same recipe exactly will arrive at the same result.  the recipe, the inputs to the recipe, and the results can all be ~shared~ by anyone who follows the rules of the recipe.   if we perform such proofs, or are told by someone we trust in such matters that proofs were performed, we do get a feeling called "certainty" about them.  actually i get a feeling of certainty about anything that i ~share~ with others, whether it has been  proved or not.   however, few things in life can be proved in that manner.  this paragraph is a case in point.  yet i ~feel~ that every sentence of this paragraph is true.  not only that, but i still feel they are true when i grock them taken as a whole and not just singly.  not only that, but that i am telling you about this topic with this paragraph, i also feel is true to my intentions and ~should~ be true to your comprehensions.  obviously the "~should~" is my judgement for i cannot know that, it is otherness to me.

now if you want to call the feeling of certainty you get when you have proved something, "truth" ... then i can certainly oblige you ... and i will know what you mean when you use the term. after all, what's in a name ... it's really quite arbitrary which names we use for thingeys ... the important matter, inho,  is that both of us  know specifically what each of us means when we talk together.

Seth says
Re this pesky word ~shared~ which we have started using. 

At the intersection of Powell and Market streets in San Francisco there was a platform which rotated around and was used to redirect the cable cars back up the Powell street hill.   I suspect that both of us experienced the location and manner of operation of that thingey.  If you actually did experience the location and manner of operation of that, then i would call that a fact that we share. 

The question is:  is that rotating platform still there?

Seth says
... apparently it still exists.

See Also

  1. Thought #ThreeLawsOfReality with 550 viewings related by tag "experience".
  2. Thought Events underdetermine Truth with 406 viewings related by tag "truth".
  3. Thought #WillToBelieve with 168 viewings related by tag "experience".
  4. Thought Consciousness as "transactional relative relivance" reares it's ugly head for the first time here with 87 viewings related by tag "truth".
  5. Thought about: Time Might Only Exist in Your Head. And Everyone Else's with 78 viewings related by tag "experience".
  6. Thought I can walk and chew gum with 72 viewings related by tag "experience".
  7. Thought The Oath of Truth with 64 viewings related by tag "truth".
  8. Thought Fox Guarding the Hen House with 54 viewings related by tag "truth".
  9. Thought Socrates Cafe August 23 2017 with 42 viewings related by tag "experience".
  10. Thought Generalizing what "a lie" means to me with 39 viewings related by tag "truth".
  11. Thought about: Special Counsel Collusion - comment 82936 with 34 viewings related by tag "truth".
  12. Thought Yet another FoHammer siteing at the FBI today with 33 viewings related by tag "truth".
  13. Thought Oath of Truth with 32 viewings related by tag "truth".
  14. Thought Truth with 17 viewings related by tag "truth".
  15. Thought about: abraham hicks - for beginners... what is the vortex? law of attraction - youtube with 17 viewings related by tag "vortex".
  16. Thought Decentralizing Truth with 13 viewings related by tag "truth".
  17. Thought Energy? What is it? with 8 viewings related by tag "truth".
  18. Thought How to see an elephant with multi-person binocular vision. with 7 viewings related by tag "truth".
  19. Thought about: Consensual Reality - comment 61266 - comment 61327 with 6 viewings related by tag "experience".
  20. Thought President Trump's Interview With TIME on Truth and Falsehoods with 6 viewings related by tag "truth".
  21. Thought Nepenthe circa 1970 with 5 viewings related by tag "experience".
  22. Thought The wisdom of the natural seperating of being with 3 viewings related by tag "experience".
  23. Thought A Better Truth with 3 viewings related by tag "truth".
  24. Thought Illative Force - A Lament with 3 viewings related by tag "illative force".
  25. Thought edges with 2 viewings related by tag "truth".
  26. Thought I go with what happens with 2 viewings related by tag "truth".
  27. Thought The Conversation About Truth & Context with 2 viewings related by tag "truth".
  28. Thought Schrodinger's Cat with 2 viewings related by tag "experience".
  29. Thought BARBARA CUBED - I. DEFINITIONS with 1 viewings related by tag "truth".
  30. Thought Seth's ideas about a world where truth is not binary with 1 viewings related by tag "truth".
  31. Thought Belief with 1 viewings related by tag "experience".
  32. Thought Truth with 1 viewings related by tag "truth".
  33. Thought The Abyss with 1 viewings related by tag "truth".
  34. Thought Electioneering vs Truth & Substance with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  35. Thought I do not create 100% of my experience with 0 viewings related by tag "experience".
  36. Thought For those with children! with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  37. Thought Knowing with 0 viewings related by tag "experience".
  38. Thought Logic is great, Survival is better! with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  39. Thought Experience with 0 viewings related by tag "experience".
  40. Thought about: sequence of encounter with 0 viewings related by tag "experience".
  41. Thought bozo unvindicated with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  42. Thought My Reality with 0 viewings related by tag "experience".
  43. Thought Truth & Science with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  44. Thought From the News with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  45. Thought A question about consciousness ... with 0 viewings related by tag "experience".
  46. Thought Relationship with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  47. Thought about: a diagram of the interactions between thoughts, focus, emotions, and experience with 0 viewings related by tag "vortex".
  48. Thought How to create a common reality ... with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  49. Thought The T-word with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".
  50. Thought [title (18519)] with 0 viewings related by tag "truth".