A general problem everyone seems to come around to at one time or another is how to define something. Sometimes it may not be evident that this is a problem, but it is! In fact, by thinking about something, you are defining it. Internally, interpersonally, and between our collective consciousness and the universe thinking is how we define our perceptions.
It has been our sole purpose; as well as our families, our societies, and the laws we live by-- to construct paradigms in order for us to define our experiences. Language, music, dance, cuisine, trade, art, games, spirituality, logic, and senior graduation projects are some of the ways we have found to share a small part of our experience with someone else.
Above is a possible sketch tracing for the origins of an idea. As a thought becomes perceptible to one Original Thinker, it becomes a form of Virtual Truth. Through sharing with others of Intelligent Consciousness, this thought, along with other’s ideas continuously develop a greater Relative Truth value. The most agreed upon examples of truths are codes of behavior. So one might speculate “for one human being to kill another human being is unethical” is an Absolute Truth.
Different people’s perceptions are all ‘truths’ of varying degree. Therefore, a good definition of truth is what a great many number of people can definitely agree upon as truth. A better one, a formal proof via falsification of the ‘zero hypothesis’, is
That is not to say it is known exactly what the truth is, but that all things share the state of being Objectively True, as opposed to being relatively true or uncertainly true. This is an important point to keep in mind while reading about the sciences of the twentieth century. For as was once done with religion, and another time with deterministic ideology, our society is now adopting interpretations of holism, uncertainty, and relativity for popular beliefs. Science is no more the answer to our longing for ‘absolute truth’ than any other collection of rules, though these rules are self-consistent, and in agreement with the observed state of the universe. Science will never end suffering, predict the future, prove the existence of god, save humanity from its own silliness, or transport us to a logical universe of enlightenment. If you need any of these things, you are called a mathematician.
However, it is impossible for us to make sense of our world without some form of paradoxical definition, like God, or Infinity, or Ω, as we are able to perceive these things may exist beyond any truth. They are the unavoidable, ineffable Eternal Questions. If mathematics is taken as the axiomatic equivalent to metaphysics; the search for truth, and whatnot-- then the aforementioned relation may take on a deeper meaning. I will argue that these perceptions are random and not accurate. However, I will also argue that they are necessarily meaningful and holistically necessary.
Science allows us, through the filtering out of random information, to define a statement about the Perceived Physical Universe (PPU). It does this via the scientific method. The scientific method is interplay of experiment and theory. The experimenters are always trying to test theories while the theorizers are always trying to interpret experiments. Statements are presented most formally as mathematical relationships. In fact, it is generally believed that a universal truth statement about the PPU must be able to be interpreted mathematically; and furthermore, it must be mathematically self-consistent. It is the job of scientists to formalize the PPU into universal laws with these properties.
So, to exist, we need all three forms of Truth, but can only define the absoluteness of things in the physical universe with relative certainty. It must also be clear that nothing existing outside of the Verified Physical Universe (VPU) can have any influence whatsoever on the PPU which relative truth describes. Though, as new revelations arise out of our intelligent interpretation of information, the relative truth must grow to encompass them, as they are part of Ω. Our consciousness is a system interacting with the VPU via information transfer to produce our own unique PPU. This is everything. It is ice cream, God, sex, and the moon. It is difficult for humans to interpret and respond universally to the VPU because of the great many differences in our own perceptions. If we are able to identify these differences between them and the VPU then we can create a more stable environment for the survival of humanity. Writing this paper only allows others to see my PPU, and only through the arguments of another can what is said be nullified. I believe what I have said is a common dream An invitation is thus written to anyone willing to share their own dream. This has been articulated many times by famous peace activists throughout history and wrestled by every human being who has ever questioned the necessity of evil in the world. Science, it seems, offers those who question, an answer. Maybe not what one expected, but always, always, I AM THE UNIVERSE. And so…
