Truth Addict

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,750

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Truth Addict

  7. Posted

    On Saturday, June 09, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Truth Addict said:

    First of all, I'm not saying that mathematics is wrong or bad or anything like that, I'm here to make some things clear about it.

    Also, I don't have any historical resources for my information below, I just assume that it happened the way I describe.

    .

    So we start:

    Have you ever happened to question mathematics? Especially this special and most obvious truth of (1+1=2).

    If you did question it, you'd immediately see what's really going on.

    So my claim, in brief, is that all mathematics is only concepts within the mind, it doesn't have anything to do with the Truth.

    For the case I'm here to discuss (1+1=2), whatever object in reality, it doesn't have any digital value (1 or 2 or anything else), because it is itself, and nothing else.

    Mathematicians and logicians are (or maybe just the human mind) very intelligent thinkers, they were able to create conceptual values for objects, so then they could use it to benefit practically.

    This means that we agreed (unconsciously, but they did consciously) that every distinct object in reality has a value of 1 and if we have another object then we have another 1 etc...

    Now what happened is very smart and interesting, as human societies started to get complicated and increased in numbers, etc... They needed to create something to help them with their trades, relationships, life, etc... to make them easier, so they started to use mathematics; they (and we as well) agreed that they could combine distinct objects intellectually, so they created the "plus" symbol and used it as a tool to combine the digital values that they created in the first place.

    They agreed that they could code this process with language (mathematics), just like any other language, to help socialize and interact easier.

    So, for example, if we have an orange, we say we have one orange, and if we have another orange we say we have two oranges instead of saying we have one plus one oranges. (One orange + one orange = two oranges) rather than (one orange + one orange = one orange + one orange). Notice how beneficial this is, symbolic abbreviations that help us consume less time, especially these days when we deal with millions and billions. Actually, we can't perform without mathematics, because without mathematics, if you wanted to say one hundred you would say one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one etc... to a hundred, think about a million then ?

    You see, we created this conceptual framework to make life easier, and it does make it easier. The problem here is that we take it for granted, and we tend to forget how it initiated and evolved.

    This is the whole show at play, it's only a human convention. Not the Truth. And that's why we can't prove it, because you can't prove what you construct (you can't prove that C + A + T = CAT because it's it by your own definition).

    In reality, we can't combine stuff together, if we have one orange and another one, and we want to combine them together, we will ultimately get one orange. An easier example to explain this is if we take each orange and squeeze it then combine the juices together, we will only get one single juice not two separate juices. That's why the final result of any combination must be one number that has one value, not a single digit necessarily, but a single whole number (a unity) (37485836 is a single number or a unity, because it's not 37485835 + 1)... (CAT is a single unity, because it's not C + A + T).

    This is a proof of the unity of everything. One contains everything.

    1 + 1 = 1

    And I'm done.

    @Dodo (hope I made my claims clear to you).

    @Leo Gura (just in case you haven't seen the post). 

     

    @Dodo Hey, sorry for the late reply, but I thought very much about what happened here (our discussion) and came out with this result:

    First of all, I apologise for being blind of my arrogance. I should have seen it in myself and acted more maturely and admitted that I was not precise at all.

    Now I realized the problem, I was metaphorical about my statements, and you took them literally. And that made me lose sight of the main point of my post, which therefore led us out of context, I guess this sums it all up.

    And to be honest, it was totally my fault (because you should take every statement literally unless it's mentioned otherwise) and I'm sorry. I hope you forgive me cuz that will set me free.

    So, just to be clear, 1 + 1 = 2 , no doubts. My whole post was just a pointer to show that mathematics is a collective conceptual agreement (couldn't edit post title), and you can disagree with me if you want, you definitely know better than me since you are a maths teacher.

    Let us forget the past, and forgive.

    I hope that mistake will not happen again, and I'm sorry if I caused you any discomfort.

    Much much love and respect. ?

  8. Posted

    @Dodo

    I said "inquiring" alone, without a "self".

    Maybe it's only my opinion. Maybe I'm deluded.

    We agreed that it's the same thing at last. What is different though is the conceptualizing, because an object is only itself, and multiple objects is a concept. One and one is still not quite accurate, because it's a value and a concept, maybe I was thrilled a little bit. The real thing (not necessarily actually real) is what is, not what we think it is. Saying an orange is also a conceptualizing, therefore we can't rely on discussion, all we have is our subjective experiences, and inquiring. ;)

    I don't defend anything, I only say what I see, and you kept quoting and mentioning me until I responded, I didn't want to reply at first.

    Much love ?

  11. Posted

    On Saturday, June 09, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Truth Addict said:

    First of all, I'm not saying that mathematics is wrong or bad or anything like that, I'm here to make some things clear about it.

    @Outer

     

    I wasn't discussing the validity of mathematics, obviously it's valid and practical. It's very beneficial to us. But that's not the point.

    My main aim was to show you how it's irrelevant to Truth, that (1+1=2) is not a Truth, (1+1=2) is a collective agreement, a human convention, and therefore cannot be proven or disproven.

    I always thought (1+1=2) is a "Mathematical Truth" or a proof for the validity of mathematics. My original post was to show you that mistake, so you don't fall for it like I did. That's all.

  12. Posted

    8 minutes ago, Outer said:

    Freedom is the ability to be able to say 1+1=2.

    We'll call you back as soon as possible.

    4 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

    @Truth Addict how do you even know an orange exists?

    Mathematics independently isn't an illusion. Its an illusion precisely because its trying to talk about other illusions.

    If the word 'god' wasn't a concept, and 'god' was real, saying god + god = god (the laws of an infinite set) would be a truthul statement, a statement outside of the mind.

    Mathematics is a dream layed on top of another dream, the physical word. If the physical world was real, then mathematics would be real.

    The reason why mathematics isn't real isn't because of naming conventions, like 1 + 1 or 2, its because its a language, and languages are pointers.

     

    "I tried to explain as simple as possible, though I see things slightly differently, meaning that I see some Truths that some people can't see, and I'm not bragging, I'm just saying that for the very advanced people here that might criticize me (for example, an orange is not an orange in truth, it's also a concept)."

    ...

    I deleted this part before posting cuz it felt like bragging, though it isn't.

    And it's hard to explain it to people unless you use their terms, I knew some of you are more advanced than me, so I kept that part in my notes.

    We're on the same board.

  17. Posted

    12 minutes ago, Dodo said:

    How do you know I am lost in the matrix, I might also be in the matrix to take people (you) out  lol

    If language is a collective nonsense and the only way you can communicate it is language, then by your own definition you are talking nonsense.

    You can't say that all language is nonsense, because this sentence defeats itself. 

     

     

    Yes, only logically. But what if there's something beyond logic? A strange loop, for example.

    All language is a collective agreement, not Truth, including my statement(s).

  18. Posted

    @Dodo

    On Saturday, June 09, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Truth Addict said:

    First of all, I'm not saying that mathematics is wrong or bad or anything like that, I'm here to make some things clear about it.

    And no, I can use language to tell you that language is a collective nonsense. I can use meaning to tell you that meaning is meaningless. I can enter the matrix to get you out of it. ;)

    In fact, I need to, it's the only way, sometimes paradox is inevitable.

    .....

    But if you're here to win, then you win. I wouldn't mind.

    Have a nice day/night, whatever. ?

  20. Posted

    @George Paul

    It's intelligent. Just like it exists.

    Non-intelligence (illusion) is just a concept that occurs within infinite intelligence (Truth). Just like non-existence (illusion) is just a concept that occurs within existence (Truth).

    It's intelligent in its design. That's why it's here, that's why it exists. Because otherwise it won't.

    Randomness will never ever make such complicated, delicious, and beautiful design (as materialism assumes). Same goes for non-intelligence. Therefore it's infinitely intelligent.

  22. Posted

    1 hour ago, Mikael89 said:

    "The laws of mathematics, having relation to the real world, are unreliable and robust mathematical laws are not relevant to the real world."

    "Do not worry about your difficulties in mathematics, I assure you that mine are greater."

    "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

    - Albert Einstein

     

    Thank you ?

    Definitely Einstein got it. Otherwise he would have been some typical "nerd" or maybe a "philosophical zombie".

  23. Posted

    1 hour ago, QandC said:

    Haha this is funny

    Synchronize because I wrote this in the new book I'm currently writing (before I saw this post).

    In all essence, mathematics is a collective agreement. We add a meta-belief to that "1" + "1" = 2. That's all science really is, a collective agreement, a language. Not Truth.

    Thank you ? you just gave the brief for the whole post: "A collective agreement, a language, Not Truth"

    I lost hope for a minute, cuz it's so obvious, it can't be unseen. Still it's hard for some people to see it.

    And I would like to read your book when it's done if you don't mind ?

  24. Posted

    @Dodo

    You're wrong, you're still stuck in your mind. Do some inquiry, it'll help a lot.

    I wasn't talking about units, it's totally irrelevant for my claims.

    2 is a human convention. We call it 2 cats when 1 cat is next to another 1 cat. 3 is the same, we call it 3 cats when 1 cat is next to another 1 cat and another 1 cat. Same thing for 4,5,6,7,8,9,10,etc... We agreed to do so, consciously or unconsciously. Are you aware of this? Mathematics is only happening in your mind.

    In the real world though, objects don't have digital values. Values are mind-made.

    There is only one, everything is one. You just can't see it yet.

    Remember the orange juice example? It's exactly the same with cats and with everything else. You can't combine 1 orange juice with another 1 orange juice and get 2 orange juices. You will always and only get 1 orange juice. Get out of your mind a little bit and examine the real world. This is a real-life exercise, not some intellectual mind storming.

    For practical purposes, we agreed to use abbreviations for everything. We abbreviate "1 cat and 1 cat and 1 cat" with the symbol "3 cats". See, it's a mind game. Exactly like language, we call that annoying creature clawing on your curtains a CAT. We can call it anything else. Is the word CAT a real CAT? of course not. Same thing goes for mathematics. Is the number 2 two objects? Of course not. It points to 1 and 1 objects, but it itself is just 1 object. Become conscious of this fact or don't. It's blindly obvious. 2 cats is an abbreviation for 1 cat + 1 cat, no more no less.

    I'm not going to discuss anymore. You need to become conscious of this Truth directly, or you'll stay stuck in illusion.

  25. Posted

    2 hours ago, Quanty said:

    Does not work that way. That is the illusion of reincarnation. In the highest degree of reality, you go on the path of enlightenment/immortality and reconsolidate the ego, or you decide to die and never reconquer the ego you had. 

    Thank you.

    2 hours ago, Arman said:

    *cracks knuckles*

    another lifetime pwnin noobs

    *Background music: burn it to the ground* ?