The Two Levels Of Truth : Practical And Metaphysical

[Philip]

In French, "Bonjour" literally means "Good Day". And when I was young, that was a problem for me. Because I wanted to say Hello to people, without necessarily wishing them a good day. What if the person's was a murderer ? What if their "Good Day" was spent abusing children, or manipulating people. Why would I wish them a good day ?

Basically, I was so obsessed about honesty that it became hard for me to interact normally with people. For me, small talk wasn't a "small" problem at all. But a few years ago, I finally found a solution to it. I had to work on my personal dictionary. I had to split my definition of truth in two parts. Practical Truth and Metaphysical Truth.

1. Practical Truths are the useful ones. The ones people use in their day to day life. The ones that are "true enough" to help you get tangible results in life. For example : My laptop is in front of me right now. This is true enough. Sure, if you gave me 30 minutes and a joint, I could find a hundred ways to make that statement philosophically debatable or scientifically inaccurate. But if you wanted to borrow my laptop, I probably wouldn't answer "I don't really know what a laptop is. Or if any of us really exist. Or what borrowing even means". I would probably say "Yeah, here it is". Which is not metaphysically accurate, but still practically accurate.
2. Metaphysical Truths are the ones that survive any kind of questioning. They are absolutely and fundamentally true. Unfortunately, during my own pursuit of truth, I reached a point where nothing is certain enough to be classified as a Metaphysical Truth. So I can't give examples. Even statements like "Something exists" doesn't seem solid enough for me. But some religious folks might include "God exists". Some spiritual folks might include "The real self is nothingness". Some scientific folks might include "Evolution is real". No problem with that...

I want to hear your thoughts on the subject ! What do you classify as Metaphysical Truth ? Do you split Practical Truths in subcategories, depending on their level of consciousness, or the level of personal development needed to access them ? Do you see totally different levels than the two I proposed ? Do you think about those things as much as I do ?

And finally, I wish you a good day everyone ! Even the murderers...

[Emerald]

55 minutes ago, Philip said:

In French, "Bonjour" literally means "Good Day". And when I was young, that was a problem for me. Because I wanted to say Hello to people, without necessarily wishing them a good day. What if the person's was a murderer ? What if their "Good Day" was spent abusing children, or manipulating people. Why would I wish them a good day ?

Basically, I was so obsessed about honesty that it became hard for me to interact normally with people. For me, small talk wasn't a "small" problem at all. But a few years ago, I finally found a solution to it. I had to work on my personal dictionary. I had to split my definition of truth in two parts. Practical Truth and Metaphysical Truth.

1. Practical Truths are the useful ones. The ones people use in their day to day life. The ones that are "true enough" to help you get tangible results in life. For example : My laptop is in front of me right now. This is true enough. Sure, if you gave me 30 minutes and a joint, I could find a hundred ways to make that statement philosophically debatable or scientifically inaccurate. But if you wanted to borrow my laptop, I probably wouldn't answer "I don't really know what a laptop is. Or if any of us really exist. Or what borrowing even means". I would probably say "Yeah, here it is". Which is not metaphysically accurate, but still practically accurate.
2. Metaphysical Truths are the ones that survive any kind of questioning. They are absolutely and fundamentally true. Unfortunately, during my own pursuit of truth, I reached a point where nothing is certain enough to be classified as a Metaphysical Truth. So I can't give examples. Even statements like "Something exists" doesn't seem solid enough for me. But some religious folks might include "God exists". Some spiritual folks might include "The real self is nothingness". Some scientific folks might include "Evolution is real". No problem with that...

I want to hear your thoughts on the subject ! What do you classify as Metaphysical Truth ? Do you split Practical Truths in subcategories, depending on their level of consciousness, or the level of personal development needed to access them ? Do you see totally different levels than the two I proposed ? Do you think about those things as much as I do ?

And finally, I wish you a good day everyone ! Even the murderers...

One that really threw me for a loop was about boundaries. When I was 20, I had two artificially catalyzed 'ego-transcendence' experiences where I felt and lived in a state of complete connection and oneness with the rest of existence, for a few hours. They were so amazing that I (foolishly) tried to replicate them in any way that I could. I tried a lot of stupid and harmful methods, where I was trying to push away practical truths and apply metaphysical truths instead.

So, I decided that because I felt boundless during that time, the solution would be to have no boundaries between myself and others. So, this opened me up to a ton of negative influences... especially as a young woman. 

So, on the metaphysical level, we are boundless and intricately connected. There are no boundaries. On the practical level, we need strong and healthy boundaries to function in life.

Here are a few more:

- We have no free will. But if we behave in this way, our lives will be terrible.

- There is no "me." But if we behave this way, our life will be dysfunctional.

- All of life is an illusion. But we still suffer consequences within that illusion, if we let go of responsibility.

- We should practice unconditional love and acceptance. But justice and accountability are important for helping society function.

- Death is an illusion. But if you throw yourself into a wood-chopper, you will die.

[Ajax]

I never had this problems. I suppose it is because how I viewed Truth. I defined truths as a reflection of the viewer. Just like light, we are looking at a reflection and it comes in many varieties of colors and intensity.   Just like a rainbow, it can be seen but never reached or held.

Since I reached the conclusion that the view is determined by the viewer, I can also extrapolate that the lack of view is determined by the degree of "fog"  and mental orientation that the viewer sees.

As for the word "Bonjour" I view it simply as a society attempting to reflect the values of a civilization which literally means "kind and courteous". In as ideal Civilized society, any situation would be done with the most kindness and love as possible, even dealing with criminals.

This leads me to a question... Do you consider idealism as a practical or metaphysical truth?

[Isle of View]

@Philip I see where you are coming from, but metaphysical truth are still only then good if they are practical. No?

Something like Absolute Truth is indebatable. 

As @d1ajax  said, Truth is dependend from the viewer. It's expandable. 

Scientific "truths" are the agreed upon, practical truth. Very variable.

Coming back to Absolute Truth, if you see something exactly as it is, it vanishes. Truth makes free. But of course there are levels of insights. Truth is that which is not. It's non-existent. Ungraspable. It can be experienced, but not taken with you into the next moment. What follows are waves of cognitions. 

The more Truth revealed, the more the non-truth is gotten rid of.
You can see it in societies (the more non-truth in education, the worse and more depressed the society) and in individuals. 

Knowledge and science tries to approximate truth. 
Meditation and Spiritual Practice is only as good as it leads to Truth (accompanied with a better mood, more clarity in perception etc.).

Something like objective Truth (2 or more people seeing exactly the same thing) does not exist. 2 viewpoints can only be approximated, they will never match entirely.

Truths and illusions are very personal things. 

Kind regards, 
Chris

 

 

 

[vizual]

This distinction seems really arbitrary to me. Nothing holds up as the truth, you will never be able to define it. Even if you are enlightened, a laptop is still going to be defined as a laptop. It's the underlying understanding that is aware that that laptop is not really as a separate thing, but part of the whole experience. Just going around and trying to decompose everything as untruthful might help you gain perspective, but the thing you consider as untruthful is actually part of the truth.

The thing about not saying Hello to people because they might be murderers doesn't make much sense to me. That's just called prejudice. Life is about intention, if the intention of your action is pure, the consequence will also be pure(even if it doesn't initially seems to be so). 

[Philip]

@d1ajax I guess you're talking about moral idealism and not philosophical idealism. Which makes your question really interesting.

As I said, I can't find something true enough to be classified as Metaphysical Truth. I actually gave up any attempt at describing what the world really is, except for enlightenment work. Consequently, I know I'm kind of spitting out bullshit all day, and I'm fine with that. All I ever say is only Practical Truth. Therefore all I say is highly uncertain and debatable. Even this very sentence.

That being said, Idealism is one of the truest things I can think of. The possibility of honoring extremely high standards of behavior is very real to me. I never saw someone who reached the level I aspire to, though. Leo may be one of the best examples I know, but I can still aim a lot higher than that.

The expectations I have for my life are at the verge of megalomania and fantasy. I literally want to become an Immortal Nano-Robotic God within a few decades. And twice a month, I put some money aside to achieve exactly this goal. So let's just say Idealism is a VERY Practical Truth in my mind.

[Isle of View]

@Philip  Thanks for your honesty!

[Philip]

7 minutes ago, Isle of View said:

metaphysical truth are still only then good if they are practical

@Isle of View Yes, you're right. Metaphysical Truth IS ALWAYS Practically True. But Practical Truth IS NOT ALWAYS Metaphysically True. The two bars are raised at different heights. So if you jump over the highest bar, you automatically jump over the lowest one too.

Scientific Truths, to me, are very Practically True, but not yet Metaphysically True.

And all the rest of your comment is probably my best candidate for actual Metaphysical Truth. And well explained. Good job. All that I'm missing now, is an actual experience of it. Which I don't have because I'm far from enlightenment.

[Philip]

@vizual Interesting point. I'm not sure if I understand all of it.

24 minutes ago, vizual said:

Nothing holds up as the truth, you will never be able to define it. Even if you are enlightened, a laptop is still going to be defined as a laptop. It's the underlying understanding that is aware that that laptop is not really as a separate thing, but part of the whole experience.

If an enlightened person says something like : "That laptop is not really a separate thing, but part of the whole experience", will this statement refer to a real Metaphysical Truth ? Personally, I think it might. But I'm curious, what do you think ?

32 minutes ago, vizual said:

The thing about not saying Hello to people because they might be murderers doesn't make much sense to me

Don't worry, it doesn't make much sense to me either. Anyway, I now believe anyone deserves a good day. So that's another alternative solution to the issue.

And I like your views on intention. You should create a topic on that. That would be great !

[Isle of View]

@Philip How do you define Meta-Physics?

It's etymological meaning is "beyond physics" (see full etymology here), hence, any experience you had was a meta-physical experience. The "physical" organs that deliver the signals to you (who is non-physical in nature) culminate in a meta-physical experience.

~Chris

 

 

[Philip]

OMG @Isle of View  I forgot to mention this, but Metaphysical is only the best word I could find so far. I just took for granted that the field of metaphysics is interested in "What is true". So I went on with that word and I hoped people would understand what I meant.

6 minutes ago, Isle of View said:

any experience you had was a meta-physical experience

Yes ! And that's why the existence of experience as a whole is a really good candidate for a Metaphysical Truth. 

Because, yes, experience feels like it exists. I do see colors, I do hear sounds and I do feel touch. I mean, every possible reasoning supports the existence of experience. Trying to deny experience is totally illogical and crazy. But you know what ? 

I think I like crazy... 

[Isle of View]

Experience and express are the two basic processes ("doings") of spiritual presences. :-)
That's all there is to existence, actually.

Meta-physics has not so much to do with truth seeking. It's just a subtler level of experience and expression (beyond physical manifestations).

The physical universe (if such thing even exists beyond our agreed upon definitions of "reality") is only in place to give us the feeling of separation (from each other) and a playground with specific laws where our creations (expressions) can be shown, exchanged and experienced.

We truly are spiritual presences having a physical experience. Nothing bad about it, except when we come to the conclusion (and are thaught in schools) that we come from mud. 

Cheers
~Chris