One person's freedom fighter, is the others terrorist.
Some truths are more worthy than others based on the chain of evidence, which tyrants and despots are determined to suppress to serve their own purposes.
One measure for truth and virtue is to ask ourselves: What if this was a common practice in our societies, where would it lead, what are the consequences?
Truth is elusive and corruptible but we should never allow it to be slandered and obliterated as it is now.
The power elites are desperately trying to cover their criminality and bloodied hands
by destroying our social and individual consciousness.
Where there are those who claim to own the truth they are immediately suspect and must be challenged.
..... some random thoughts for your consideration....
The truth is unknowable. What we believe is truth is our perceptions, and people we respect agreeing with our perceptions. That is, "it's all belief", and always will be. To know something, one must be one with it; in contrast, every human being is limited and imperfect about external reality.
Hence in politics, we can have similarly large groups of sane, intelligent people, yet with radically opposed interpretations of reality and values. Exhibit A are those of the current apologists for Israel who are sincere, as opposed to us. No, we're not "the realists", vs "the deluded"; we just believe we are. That's not a criticism of us, it's just a description.
If we can recognize this, maybe we can recover the humility necessary to successfully conduct ourselves again. The path forward needs to include interactive dialog, where each claim can in turn be tested by an opponent. This is now missing in nearly all MSM, especially when/where they have abolished comments.
And comments are only an unstructured version; we have yet to come up with good structures, ones that aim to "map" reality -- say, by "vote", the congruence in multiple human interpretations of it. Meanwhile, the word "knowledge" and its variants should, eventually, become obsolete; words that are human-centered (e.g. "belief") needs to take its place.
Not a criticism of your comment but simply an observation. "...there are two sides to every story." There are THREE sides to every story.
Generally speaking there is your version, my version, & last but by no means least, the truth of the matter.
One person's freedom fighter, is the others terrorist.
Some truths are more worthy than others based on the chain of evidence, which tyrants and despots are determined to suppress to serve their own purposes.
One measure for truth and virtue is to ask ourselves: What if this was a common practice in our societies, where would it lead, what are the consequences?
Truth is elusive and corruptible but we should never allow it to be slandered and obliterated as it is now.
The power elites are desperately trying to cover their criminality and bloodied hands
by destroying our social and individual consciousness.
Where there are those who claim to own the truth they are immediately suspect and must be challenged.
..... some random thoughts for your consideration....
The truth is unknowable. What we believe is truth is our perceptions, and people we respect agreeing with our perceptions. That is, "it's all belief", and always will be. To know something, one must be one with it; in contrast, every human being is limited and imperfect about external reality.
Hence in politics, we can have similarly large groups of sane, intelligent people, yet with radically opposed interpretations of reality and values. Exhibit A are those of the current apologists for Israel who are sincere, as opposed to us. No, we're not "the realists", vs "the deluded"; we just believe we are. That's not a criticism of us, it's just a description.
If we can recognize this, maybe we can recover the humility necessary to successfully conduct ourselves again. The path forward needs to include interactive dialog, where each claim can in turn be tested by an opponent. This is now missing in nearly all MSM, especially when/where they have abolished comments.
And comments are only an unstructured version; we have yet to come up with good structures, ones that aim to "map" reality -- say, by "vote", the congruence in multiple human interpretations of it. Meanwhile, the word "knowledge" and its variants should, eventually, become obsolete; words that are human-centered (e.g. "belief") needs to take its place.