How Is Definitive Knowledge Possible?

[Someone here]

1 hour ago, r0ckyreed said:

Right. But there is an assumption that our experience is direct. Your “direct” experience is filtered through the lenses of survival. Experience is not as direct as you think. Our course experience is all that we have, but that doesn’t mean it has total access to reality and is unbiased. There are plenty of things I don’t experience right now but yet are true.

Everything is filtered through the human nervous system, so how can objective reality be known if everything we have access to is experienced subjectively? Definitive knowledge seems impossible, but my intuition tells me that definitive knowledge possible. It’s hard to know what to listen to and whether my rationality, intuition, etc. are correct.

You are repeating the same questions. So I will have to answer by providing the same point .

No one said objective reality exists.  There is no such thing as objective reality . Everything is just a subjective experience. 

Two things you should contemplate :

1) subjective vs objective reality .

2) relativity. 

watch Leo's episode on relativism and Leo's video on solipsism. 

You said there are planets that exist right now but you don't experience right now ..

Example question:........ Does planet Mars exist while one is not perceiving it?

 Check your experience: Nothing exists for you the stuff that is occurring in your direct experience in the NOW.

Existence =NOW. Ideas about here and there.. Now and then and back then.. Up there and down here..themselves must occur NOW for them to be just more concepts occurring again NOW.  Make sure you get this .

 It's not that there is an absolute static truth about whether "Mars" "exists".. There is no such thing as "Mars".. For all you know mars could be exploding and getting destroyed now.. So it exists at one point and it doesn't exist in the next moment. Make sure you get this .

How about when you are dreaming and completely lost in your dream..mars doesn't exist in the context of your dream world. Just like a flying spaghetti monster does not exist in this world as far as we can tell.. But who knows maybe it exists in some other dimension! You see it's all relative. Identity itself is relative to time and change. Existence itself is relative to a frame of reference and to an observer. 

So does mars exist? Yes and no without a doubt relative to whatever one imagines this question even "means" lol. But don't go looking for an absolute answer. No idea is absolute. 

[Ero]

Consider epistemological anarchism more as an intermediary phase transition when the previous system loses ground (Tier 1-> Tier 2). You are encountering the issue of lack of “absolute truth” in the epistemological sense, seeing the failure of the previous stages.
However, there is light at the end of the tunnel. Even now you can verify not all knowledge is created equal - what is a flat earth with earth-centric celestial mechanics vs a helio-centric vs galaxy-cluster level awareness. So there is a way out of epistemological anarchism, but only through careful study and examination of the epistemological and metaphysical basis of that paradigm - the homework Tier 2 has to do to not fall in the traps of Tier 1.

 

Solipsism is more of an ontological statement, so it isn’t directly related to the subject of knowledge.

 

[Buck Edwards]

@r0ckyreed

You have worded your post really well. Unfortunately I don't know how to answer your topic. You are right in a way. But that's not to mean that everything we know is false. It's a matter of understanding and perspective. It's how your mind molds things and makes a sense of reality. So everyone in a way has their own version of truth that makes sense to them, maybe not to others. You have to do a comparative analysis where you match your theory with practical observations and that's the only way you'll have at least an iota of understanding of the truth. 

Your mind grasps reality to the extent that it gleans something from it, usually this is tied to our survival biases so a lot of what we glean from the environment is based on our own biases and dissonances and we are often looking to confirm them. You can't test reality because what will you test it against, there's no fundamental block of truth out there. Whatever knowledge we have learned so far, it has only been tested through empirical research over the years and this research is rooted in science and science also has its own limitations. So you're right, we cannot really know the truth. Yet we can compromise with the truth to the extent to which it aids in our survival and understanding of human existence. 

[Davino]

Once metaphysic is realized

Epistemology can flourish 

Like fertil ground that gives rise to gorgeous flowers

[Leo Gura]

11 hours ago, r0ckyreed said:

To fully awaken and reach true knowledge, I think you need to answer definitively of whether anything can exist independently of the mind. If there is such a thing as a mind-independent phenomenon, then notice that you could never awaken and know definitively because all knowledge and awakening are mind-dependent. 

Awakening is not an escape from mind, it's the realization that mind is actually Mind. It's the absolutizing of Mind.

You don't need phenomena to be mind independent, you just need to realize that phenomena are absolutely mind dependent.

Awakening is the realization of the absoluteness of consciousness. Absoluteness of consciousness is that one thing you cannot be wrong about. And it's not knowledge. Awakening is beyond knowledge, it is a state of consciousness.

With that said, there are still many degrees of awakening and more you can realize.

You are right to realize that knowledge isn't definitive, it is relative, partial, and highly fallible. But knowledge ain't all there is. So you must seek beyond knowledge.

Edited Tuesday at 11:09 AM by Leo Gura

[Buck Edwards]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Awakening is not an escape from mind, it's the realization the mind is actually Mind. It's the absolutizing of Mind.

You don't need phenomena to be mind independent, you just need to realize that phenomena are absolutely mind dependent.

Awakening is the realization of the absoluteness of consciousness. Absoluteness of consciousness is that one thing you cannot be wrong about. And it's not knowledge.

What work do you do that makes you come to such a realization and how do you know if such a realization is rooted in truth? 

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, Buck Edwards said:

What work do you do that makes you come to such a realization

Any of the classic spiritual pratices or psychedelics. The classic practices usually require long retreats and extreme rigor to work.

And contemplation on top of that.

Quote

how do you know if such a realization is rooted in truth? 

It's not just rooted in truth. It IS truth.

Existence itself is recognized to be Absolute Truth.

Awakening is the realization of the nature of existence itself. What is existence? You grasp its nature absolutely.

It's as if you lived your whole life in a dark room and suddenly someone turned on the lights. There is no doubt that the light is on once it is on.

Or it's like you have been a fish your whole life and finally you realize what water is.

Edited Tuesday at 11:01 AM by Leo Gura

[Nemra]

@Leo Gura, can we say that it's like realizing that reality isn't solid.

[Leo Gura]

22 minutes ago, Nemra said:

@Leo Gura, can we say that it's like realizing that reality isn't solid.

It's better to phrase it as realizing that reality is Consciousness/Mind.

The world is actually a cosmic mind, forever dreaming, like a mad artist lost in an opium den. It can dream anything.

This realization is more than knowledge, it's your state of being. It's your condition. You are a dream. Being in a dream is beyond any knowledge of the dream's content. "Knowledge" itself is a dream. You are dreaming knowledge, which is why knowledge is fallible and partial. Before there can be any knowledge, there must first be a dream about which to have knowledge. So dreaming is more fundamental than knowledge. Awakening is not about changing your knowledge, it's about seeing the dream as a dream. Which is why no amount of knowledge can awaken you.

Edited Tuesday at 11:28 AM by Leo Gura

[Nemra]

I haven't reached to that level. 😮

One day I'll get it, one day, once I get my hands on psychedelics.

However, I had a beginner level of realization that everything is consciousness, which is still an amazing realization for me, considering that I live with mostly "SD Stage Blue" people.

Edited Tuesday at 11:51 AM by Nemra

[r0ckyreed]

44 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Awakening is beyond knowledge, it is a state of consciousness.

With that said, there are still many degrees of awakening and more you can realize.

You are right to realize that knowledge isn't definitive, it is relative, partial, and highly fallible. But knowledge ain't all there is. So you must seek beyond knowledge.

 But isn’t awakening an insight into the nature of being/reality? An insight can be false. The only thing I can think of that is beyond knowledge, which you already pointed out is truth/existence/reality. There cannot be knowledge or insight without a reality to have knowledge/insight about. How is understanding possible? It seems like there is no definitive method, which means there may not be any definitive knowledge/understanding/insight.

I agree that the only thing I can know for certain is that consciousness exists, but that is all I know. That’s all I can really say exists. But I also cannot say that consciousness is all that exists because I cannot get outside my own consciousness to know that. It’s an impossible problem. Yet, it seems like my whole sense of reality tells me there is more to reality than my consciousness. For instance, the news tells me that there are things happening “in the world” that I wasn’t conscious of.

[r0ckyreed]

The only method I have found that somewhat gets me results is contemplation. But even that isn’t a definitive method because the mind is very foolish. But overtime as I continue to contemplate, it seems like I get the kinks worked out. Contemplation for sure is a more reliable method than faith, belief, and dogma. No method is going to be perfect. Knowledge is relative.

[Buck Edwards]

2 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

 But isn’t awakening an insight into the nature of being/reality? An insight can be false. The only thing I can think of that is beyond knowledge, which you already pointed out is truth/existence/reality. There cannot be knowledge or insight without a reality to have knowledge/insight about. How is understanding possible? It seems like there is no definitive method, which means there may not be any definitive knowledge/understanding/insight.

I agree that the only thing I can know for certain is that consciousness exists, but that is all I know. That’s all I can really say exists. But I also cannot say that consciousness is all that exists because I cannot get outside my own consciousness to know that. It’s an impossible problem. Yet, it seems like my whole sense of reality tells me there is more to reality than my consciousness. For instance, the news tells me that there are things happening “in the world” that I wasn’t conscious of.

Awakening is not an insight. It's a state of consciousness. Then how can it be false? 

[r0ckyreed]

3 minutes ago, Buck Edwards said:

Awakening is not an insight. It's a state of consciousness. Then how can it be false? 

What is an insight but a state of consciousness? People can think they have an insight but can be wrong. There are certain states of consciousness that even though they are always occurring inside of Absolute Truth, they are still wrong, which means they lack understanding about reality. A conspiracy theory is a state of consciousness and so is having an insight into oneness. Realization, insight, knowledge, understanding are states of consciousness.

Edited Tuesday at 11:50 AM by r0ckyreed

[Staples]

36 minutes ago, Nemra said:

One day I'll get it, one day, once I get my hands on psychedelics.

Don't need psychedelics for that one. A weekend of meditation could be enough, or even just a few moments of contemplation.

Imagine you were a hyper-intelligent infinite alien mind. Despite all your mental computing power and knowledge, your experience would still take place on the same stage. It would take place in the now, as an experience. Then imagine you are an ant. You would be very limited and stupid, yet all your experience takes place on the same stage.

That stage is consciousness, the dream, being, whatever you like calling it.

Then notice that nothing can come prior to the dream. Nothing can undermine it, and it is not dependent on anything else in order to exist. That stage could be any shape or state, but the stage is where everything takes place.

Edited Tuesday at 11:55 AM by Staples

[Buck Edwards]

2 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

Realization, insight, knowledge, understanding are states of consciousness.

I don't think this is True. A realization, insight, knowledge are temporary things. They help us understand reality. But a state of consciousness is permanent. 

[r0ckyreed]

5 minutes ago, Staples said:

Don't need psychedelics for that one. A weekend of meditation could be enough, or even just a few moments of contemplation.

What I’m saying is that those methods will not guarantee you truth. Some of those methods can put you further into delusion depending on how they are used. You might say, well, then you weren’t really doing psychedelics, meditation, or contemplation “properly”. But what is properly? How do you know what properly is? It begs the question and assumes you already know what’s true.

Edited Tuesday at 11:56 AM by r0ckyreed

[r0ckyreed]

2 minutes ago, Buck Edwards said:

But a state of consciousness is permanent. 

Consciousness is permanent but states aren’t. Being sober, depressed, high, happy, paranoid, and drunk are states. But they are temporary.

Edited Tuesday at 11:55 AM by r0ckyreed

[Buck Edwards]

Just now, r0ckyreed said:

Consciousness is permanent but states aren’t. Being sober, depressed, high, happy, and drunk are states. But they are temporary.

Consciousness is permanent therefore consciousness cannot be knowledge. If you think knowledge is not sufficient, it's because it's temporary. 

[Someone here]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

You don't need phenomena to be mind independent, you just need to realize that phenomena are absolutely mind dependent.

@r0ckyreed this is it right there . Leo tossed you with one sentence 😂. 

Even science agrees with this. Science tells us that everything is composed of atoms and energy. And when the atoms spin at a certain rate of speed.. this determines what the object is. Science tells us that our eyes see a reflection of light and the reflection of light 
causes the image to appear before us..as a tree..as a person..as a mountain..as an ocean as the moon etc

In other words..science is beginning to see that no thing exists the way it appears to exist. It only exists because you exist. If you weren't around to see it.. there would  be no existence. It is only because you are around and you are conscious. 

Consciousness is absolute and more fundamental than all of your skeptical thoughts.