Absolute Certainty

[loverofhumanity]

This is a discussion about Absolute Certainty.

First I will give what I see are Absolute Certainty.

100% Certain of God - Unknowable.
100% God sends Messengers.
100% Certain those Messengers are all we can know of God.
100% Certain that if you believe in one of those Messengers, one has found a source of Truth.
100% Certain that we are in true form, we are Spirit.
100% Certain that creation is a Relative Certainty.
100% Certain that all people have this knowledge within.
100% Certain, that we will mess up that Certainty.

Well that is a good start.

What about you, what are your Absolute Certainties?

Do your Certainties find any agreement in Mine?

Do you think we can have Absolute Certainty?

Regards Tony

I am absolutely certain that you are absolutely right.

 

[syo]

100% certain paganism is the way.

 

[MJFlores]

What about you, what are your Absolute Certainties?

Do your Certainties find any agreement in Mine?

Do you think we can have Absolute Certainty?

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes. Humans aren't very good at logic. When we derive a law, we are prone to error at every step. We know how to minimize those errors and we know to measure the chance of errors so that we can be 99.99999...% sure about derived laws.

We know how to minimize those errors? Maybe you think after millions have died or been killed as a result of errors?

 

[YoursTrue]

We do not declare it, we just believe it. It is difficult to explain why.

Some can explain. For instance, take a peace movement. Or animal shelters. The advocates can usually explain why they do these things.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Some can explain. For instance, take a peace movement. Or animal shelters. The advocates can usually explain why they do these things.

I can offer that I follow and apply the Absolute Certainty in my life for all people.

I see life is more than self, even though life in some aspects has aspects of self that have to be fulfilled.

Thus every thought, every prayer every action becomes a longing to do it for the good of ALL, a world citizen on one planet where all are as brothers and sisters.

In that way I see that Absolute Certainty will eventually embrace all people and all people can have that certainty, in a world where nothing short of that foundation in unity, can save us from the cancer of materialistic tenancies.

Regards Tony

 

[Polymath257]

I am 100% certain, that the only 100% certatude? Is in Mathematics.

Math is the sole Human Endeavor, where Proof is both meaningful and accurate to 100%.

Not ironically? Math is also only and ever exists within our collective heads-- oh, sure, you can write it out, but without a Key to the Symbols? What is written out is essentially meaningless.

So. Proof and 100% is only and ever for Maths. Yaaay Maths!

As a professional mathematician, I have to disagree. There is no certainty in math either. There are *always* assumptions and if you change those assumptions, you change the resulting truths of math. Even logic is not certain (although we tend to stick with a two-values logic based on true/false): there are three valued logics as well as versions of logic where the 'law of excluded middle' is false.

 

[Polymath257]

I know I exist because I have a body and a soul. That is what it means to exist from my perspective.

.

How do you know you have those? Could that evidence be wrong?

 

[Polymath257]

No, because what we are certain of could be wrong.

Precisely. And an awareness of that possibility means you are NOT 100% certain. You *might* be 99.9999999999999% certain, but not 100%

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

As a professional mathematician, I have to disagree. There is no certainty in math either. There are *always* assumptions and if you change those assumptions, you change the resulting truths of math. Even logic is not certain (although we tend to stick with a two-values logic based on true/false): there are three valued logics as well as versions of logic where the 'law of excluded middle' is false.

Well, yes-- I understand the concept of "givens" in Maths. That being said, since it is 100% abstract, and self-contained (as it were) math is entirely dependent on math, and nothing outside of it. I loved studying a bit about non-Euclidean Geometry, which seemed to defy what we observe, yet within it's scope, is sensible.

I've heard others describe math as the only thing we know, that doesn't need external proofs, i.e. chemicals in a lab or something. It's entirely abstract.

Which is pretty cool, from where I sit.

It happens that certain maths seem to model actual reality, and that is quite handy-- but I've heard it said, that math only ever proves math. Math Models of reality are always just approximations. Yes-- some are quite good approximations, but still.

 

[Polymath257]

Well, yes-- I understand the concept of "givens" in Maths. That being said, since it is 100% abstract, and self-contained (as it were) math is entirely dependent on math, and nothing outside of it. I loved studying a bit about non-Euclidean Geometry, which seemed to defy what we observe, yet within it's scope, is sensible.

I've heard others describe math as the only thing we know, that doesn't need external proofs, i.e. chemicals in a lab or something. It's entirely abstract.

Which is pretty cool, from where I sit.

It happens that certain maths seem to model actual reality, and that is quite handy-- but I've heard it said, that math only ever proves math. Math Models of reality are always just approximations. Yes-- some are quite good approximations, but still.

My view is that math is a very good *language*. it is a *formal* language, so it helps us keep extraneous assumptions in view. But it is a very flexible language and can model any number of situations.

 

[Trailblazer]

Some can explain. For instance, take a peace movement. Or animal shelters. The advocates can usually explain why they do these things.

But that is different from why we believe what we do with absolute certitude.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

My view is that math is a very good *language*. it is a *formal* language, so it helps us keep extraneous assumptions in view. But it is a very flexible language and can model any number of situations.

This takes me back to the Prodigy Days, in the 1990's. I had this exact discussion, what is 'math' which arose because someone claimed that "the math proves XXX" when XXX wasn't a mathematical concept. We went around, and someone (me? I do not remember) pointed out that Math was an entirely invented language, based on logic instead of happenstance (as with other speaking languages).

I do love the notion that math is a formalized language, and I take your point that it's never 100%, as there are always Axioms, are there not? (I had to look up that term-- could not remember. Alas, my memory for things isn't what it once was...)

 

[Polymath257]

This takes me back to the Prodigy Days, in the 1990's. I had this exact discussion, what is 'math' which arose because someone claimed that "the math proves XXX" when XXX wasn't a mathematical concept. We went around, and someone (me? I do not remember) pointed out that Math was an entirely invented language, based on logic instead of happenstance (as with other speaking languages).

I do love the notion that math is a formalized language, and I take your point that it's never 100%, as there are always Axioms, are there not? (I had to look up that term-- could not remember. Alas, my memory for things isn't what it once was...)

Not only are there axioms, but those axioms are far from 'immediately obvious truths'. Furthermore, we *cannot* know that the axioms are consistent unless we assume some *stronger* set of axioms.

And, we can go further. No matter what system of axioms you have, if it is strong enough to talk about counting numbers, then there *will* be statements that can neither be proved nor disproved. For the standard axiom system for modern math (Zormelo-Frankl with Choice, ZFC), there are many known statements that are not resolved by those axioms.

 

[Polymath257]

But that is different from why we believe what we do with absolute certitude.

From my terminology, any possibility of being wrong, if acknowledged, implies some degree of uncertainty. And there is *always* the possibility of being wrong (even in that statement?).

 

[Milton Platt]

This is a discussion about Absolute Certainty.

First I will give what I see are Absolute Certainty.

100% Certain of God - Unknowable.
100% God sends Messengers.
100% Certain those Messengers are all we can know of God.
100% Certain that if you believe in one of those Messengers, one has found a source of Truth.
100% Certain that we are in true form, we are Spirit.
100% Certain that creation is a Relative Certainty.
100% Certain that all people have this knowledge within.
100% Certain, that we will mess up that Certainty.

Well that is a good start.

What about you, what are your Absolute Certainties?

Do your Certainties find any agreement in Mine?

Do you think we can have Absolute Certainty?

Regards Tony

There is no such thing as absolute certainty...and I am absolutely certain of that.......

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is no such thing as Absolute certainty...and I am absolutely certain of that.......

As I am that there is

Always good to chat Milton, stay happy and well.

In the end I see humanity will decide there is a God and the purpose was always and oneness in unity in our Diversity. A unity that will build great capacity in knowledge and science.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

How do you know you have those? Could that evidence be wrong?

I know I have those because I believe what I believe.
Could my evidence be wrong? I suppose, but it is highly unlikely.

 

[Polymath257]

I know I have those because I believe what I believe.
Could it be wrong? I suppose.

In which case, you don't have *absolute* certainty.

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: No, because what we are certain of could be wrong.

Precisely. And an awareness of that possibility means you are NOT 100% certain. You *might* be 99.9999999999999% certain, but not 100%

I meant hypothetically speaking it could be wrong.
But I am 100% certain, not that these kinds of exact percentages matter.