UnbornTao

What do you mean? The truth only cares about itself, so to speak. So what are you asking? Re-construct what?

We could even say that this system is itself a belief structure: a set of thoughts strung together that is assumed or taken to be true once adopted (believed). Hmm, maybe. Perhaps it'd be more accurate to say that they are different from, or independent of, the truth itself - whatever that turns out to be.

A thought that is held as true. Or a thought about the truth of something. "Thought" that can appear as if it were "the way things are". But it is still a thought, an activity (of the mind), and therefore distinct in nature from whatever is the case for itself. It is thinking taken as true in itself. May need to rephrase this one.

You can keep believing, if you want.

I'd like to emphasize the second part of the quote in relation to this discussion: than to convince them they have been fooled.

Getting tattoos.

I love you.

It is far easier to fool someone, than to convince them they have been fooled.

Nice. The book's quite pricey, though

You probably already make it to some degree. Inquiry is an open investigation aimed at uncovering whatever is true, independent of one's preferences, desires, biases, and so on. Fantasizing, by contrast, can be understood as coming up with imaginary scenarios in one's mind - usually based on wants, biases, and subjectivity - often aimed at outcomes like feeling better, more powerful, or reassured. Whatever serves one's agenda. A scientific experiment versus belief in God might serve as a succinct way of contrasting these two activities. Not the best examples, but hopefully the point comes across.

Oh, yeah. Not fantasizing.

Something to get for oneself. It is also the case that people delude themselves by choosing that as a question to "contemplate" in the first place, in that their goal is feeling good and improving their experience, and not uncovering whatever turns out to be really true. Very rarely, if ever, are people concerned with asking what pain or manipulation are. I wonder why. It is asked with the preconception that it is absolute in mind, is it not? It is not really a genuine question based on wonder, but an attempt to validate a fantasy. The power of the mind is such that any preconception can be made to be perceived as "reality." But hey, people benefit from believing in God - in emotional, psychological, and social ways. Maybe that's the case here too. But that ain't the same as going after what's true. I suggest the principle of compassion is not the images one has of it. How it manifests is secondary to the principle itself.

🤩 Who doesn't love love?

Haha, yeah. People's problems are their own. What's true? That's the goal here, at least to me. Not whether we like something or not.

Is it? For example, is seeing a tree the same as liking it? Do those exist in the same domain?