how to validate any tools used for knowing if sth is true

[sarapr]

so basically there are a couple of methods used for knowing truth, couple of them might include: logic, math, science, direct experience, guessing and speculation or superstition and some more maybe. the problem is each of these has their own blind spots, for example, facts discovered by logic, math and science do actually work in real life and we might think if they work then the method is correct right? but what if it only works in our human perception of the world and the way we interact and perceive the world to be, so it could be that our limited human minds perceive the world a certain way which could be the farthest things from what it actually is but still manage for our partial rules of the world to have real-life application but only because we are humans and have common grounds if you know what I'm trying to say

and the other thing which would be direct experience can still somewhat not be trustworthy because each individual can have different experiences and you could say it doesn't matter whatever your experience is, is actually true even if it's just for you like Leo says. so how would we know that it can actually be the case, it could basically only make sense if you have certain type of mindset or conception of the world and to say you could validate that by being conscious of it also doesn't make sense cause maybe the conciseness we use to validate it is again only a human thing that could potentially have nothing to do with what is actually the case. now leo solves that too by saying there is no material world, right but then again how can you trust the way in which you came into that realization!

I mean it doesn't seem like the truth could be as accessible as Leo puts it 

[Truth Addict]

What does the word "true" mean?

[tsuki]

The belief in external reality is a byproduct of your undisciplined mind. You cannot know the truth, you may only embody, realize it. The way of doing that is by using the mind to explore itself, find its limits and going beyond them. 

The mind creates images that can correspond with actuality and potentially be useful. The images are not the truth. Usefulness, the extent of applicability, is not the criterion here. Seek peace, bliss and happiness. 

When it comes to validation of the applicability of models, the scientific method is the way. In self-discovery, sincere phenomenology is useful. 

I think that it's important to mention that all models must be necessarily incomplete, and that incompleteness can be incorporated within them. 

Edited August 31, 2019 by tsuki