How truth is prior from proof?

[Beeman]

If we think the universe is the reflection of God quality and all the universe qualities comes at the same time how truth could be the prior? 

[Forestluv]

Look around right now. There is nothing to prove. You would need to come up with an idea of something to prove. That is one step away from pure Beingness. 

[ajasatya]

10 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Look around right now. There is nothing to prove. You would need to come up with an idea of something to prove. That is one step away from pure Beingness. 

That is some great way to phrase it. Thanks!

[Beeman]

Why did you look outside, when the things happens on you in the inside. Proof is not something always outside it could be inside, your consciousness has a proff everyday day that you exist. Proof is a God quality that was there with truth and everything at the same time. 

[Beeman]

@Shiva no I don't think so, that is not absolute proof and truth, that is human scientific model of proof. Poof can be thoughts, word, speech, action maths, logic, English anything. It could be any form. You mention mathematical formula of proof. Proof can be consciousness. So proof, Truth, and any other qualities exist equally at the same time. When you proof that you exist your consciousness will make know that you exist as the time. 

[Forestluv]

3 hours ago, Beeman said:

Why did you look outside, when the things happens on you in the inside. 

In saying “look around”, I mean both “inside” and “outside”. The same principle applies. 

[Beeman]

@Shiva@Shiva everything exist simultaneously. The scientific model of truth is helps people to survive, To build new technologies. When I say I am exist that is truth, and when I proff that I exist that is also happening at the same time.

[AnTe]

@Beeman the only reason to prove anything is because of the ego and denial of truth. everything we think we have to prove has already been proven but for some reason it's not good enough unless others also validate it for us. 

[Beeman]

This question goes to @Leo Gura

In the mechanic of belief video he talked about this thing, so that I asking for clarification. 

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, Beeman said:

@Shiva no I don't think so, that is not absolute proof and truth, that is human scientific model of proof. Poof can be thoughts, word, speech, action maths, logic, English anything. It could be any form. You mention mathematical formula of proof. Proof can be consciousness. So proof, Truth, and any other qualities exist equally at the same time. When you proof that you exist your consciousness will make know that you exist as the time. 

The mistake you're making here is you're stretching the meaning of the concept of "proof", extending it to mean truth, thereby rigging your argument to win by definition. If you do that, then yes, you can say everything is proof. But this is a sloppy way of thinking which lacks nuance. Proof is precisely not everything. Proof is a concept designating a specific type of thing. It is not equivalent to truth. As a simple example, if someone actually committed a murder, that would be truth, but the proof of it is something else. DNA evidence, a bloody knife, video camera footage, verbal testimony from eye-witnesses, etc all of that is proof, but none of it is identical to the murder itself. To say that the murder itself is the proof is a sloppy way of thinking which fails to understand what the notion of "proof" is supposed to designate.

As you can see in the above example, truth is prior to proof. You can have a murder with zero proof, but you cannot have proof of a murder which never occurred.

Proof is a secondary phenomenon. Truth is a primary phenomenon.

Of course, ultimately, when you get to nondual consciousness, proof will collapse into truth as everything becomes oneness. But you have to be careful here not to conflate absolute and relative domains. Proof only occurs in the relative domain. Truth occurs in all domains because it is everything that is. As an example, a donkey has not idea what proof is. You cannot prove anything to a donkey because proof is a conceptual human activity. But the donkey IS truth. Even though the donkey also has no concept of truth, it is BEING truth, whether it knows it or not is irrelevant in this case.

You have to be careful with how you define your terms when doing philosophy, otherwise you end up playing word games. Here's how the dictionary defines "proof":

Quote

"evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement."

Synonyms:

"evidence, verification, corroboration, authentication, confirmation, certification, validation, attestation, demonstration, substantiation, witness, testament"

 

[Beeman]

@Leo Gura

Leo gura said "truth is prior to proof. You can have a murder with zero proof, but you cannot have proof of a murder which never occurred." 

Proof is a secondary phenomenon. Truth is a primary phenomenon.

That is from police investigatior points of view?. When the murder happens that is truth and also it is proof that murder is committed. 

Everthing can't exist with other, Everthing happens simultaneously. Example if I am eating food I also Listening, watching, feeling, thinking, smelling etc. But I only highlight that the eating part, that is what happening here. 

For example it is true that you exist when you proof that you exist being is a proof, equally at the same time with truth. If we buy in to scientific model that will keep us going. 

it all boils downsom from which perspective we are looking in it. When The truth also wants to proof itself that it is a truth, it happens at an instance time which at the same time, equally exist with truth. If we are talking about scientific model of truth that would be correct, because it goes chronological. 

Edited June 6, 2019 by Beeman
Missing word

[Leo Gura]

@Beeman Be here to learn. Empty your cup.

[Shadowraix]

You are using proof in such a loose or different manner I can't even get where you are getting at. 

[Norbert Lennartz]

It's like someone unscrewing his car and putting it back together to prove it's his car.

[Beeman]

@Leo Gura

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Beeman Be here to learn. Empty your cup.

Of course I have to. But it comes on my mind, I don't want it to be put and become just a belief. That is why I ask. Thanks, I will.