on language, objective truth, the makeup of a person.
language is a medium for conveying meaning. language is not meaning itself.
it is a shared experiential history that is used as a basis to attempt to convey something to one who hasn't experienced it (or experienced it in the same way).
language can also be used to encompass all of our senses. we learn a language of sight, a series of past visual stimulous that we have developed concepts and systems to be able to interprite. all of our experience is put into a system of conceptual order. All of these methods of understanding the stimulous we are given are fallable. the transferance of raw stimulous to some sort of usable explained data immediatly limits the variences, the things that makes ones each and every experience unique. it makes those nuances all of a sudden seperate from a coded defined understanding. they are thus generally ignored or not even processed at all as usable data, or they are given exceptional importance that without that developed language and patterning would have been absurd.
so language for the sake of necessity is not a code of objective truth.
that is not to say that language is not an excellent tool. truth can be conveyed through all the myriad forms of language. just because a thing is fallable does not mean it is in a constant state of failure. meaning is successfully conveyed more often than not.
but what of truth? conveying meaning merely means the language is successfully transmiting something of significance.
when does language convey truth?
truth is the composition of the soul. it is the portion of ourselves that is not altered by the flaws and failures of perception. the only thing that can alter a soul is the very thing it is made out of- when truth manages to travel through the problematic channels of language and reaches a new person, it has the ability to alter their core, their bastion of existence. Before it is altered, the soul is built out of the first and primary truth of personality- "I exist."
the nature of wisdom is to recognise the sensation of being altered by the interaction with sucessfully expressed truth. the second is being able to recognise the effects that change has caused in the rest of the self. altering ones touchstone, ones basis for judging the world around them can have unexpected and counterproductive effects on ones interaction with the world. all the language coming in and going out of that person will be differently interprited or intentioned. wisdom is accepting this change, without losing the context for communication one had before it.
Everything that can be experienced about a person that is not an objective truth can be called their spirit.
they are impressions, misconceptions, thoughts and feelings in regards to a personality that are different for everyone observing. memories after they have left, the impression that lives on after someone has died or traveled away may change over time, but their recalled impression does not require the concurant presence of the soul or the body to continue to have an effect on others. the spirit is a persons personal language with the rest of he world. it is the flow of stimulus to and from a person that is used to recognise them as unique.
spirit is the means by which we diferentiate and recognise each other. language is the abstraction of experience for the purpose of being able to communicate it. it binds us together, but moreso it allows us to, under certain circumstances, share the truth that is our most sacred and necessary posession.
cheers.
it is a shared experiential history that is used as a basis to attempt to convey something to one who hasn't experienced it (or experienced it in the same way).
language can also be used to encompass all of our senses. we learn a language of sight, a series of past visual stimulous that we have developed concepts and systems to be able to interprite. all of our experience is put into a system of conceptual order. All of these methods of understanding the stimulous we are given are fallable. the transferance of raw stimulous to some sort of usable explained data immediatly limits the variences, the things that makes ones each and every experience unique. it makes those nuances all of a sudden seperate from a coded defined understanding. they are thus generally ignored or not even processed at all as usable data, or they are given exceptional importance that without that developed language and patterning would have been absurd.
so language for the sake of necessity is not a code of objective truth.
that is not to say that language is not an excellent tool. truth can be conveyed through all the myriad forms of language. just because a thing is fallable does not mean it is in a constant state of failure. meaning is successfully conveyed more often than not.
but what of truth? conveying meaning merely means the language is successfully transmiting something of significance.
when does language convey truth?
truth is the composition of the soul. it is the portion of ourselves that is not altered by the flaws and failures of perception. the only thing that can alter a soul is the very thing it is made out of- when truth manages to travel through the problematic channels of language and reaches a new person, it has the ability to alter their core, their bastion of existence. Before it is altered, the soul is built out of the first and primary truth of personality- "I exist."
the nature of wisdom is to recognise the sensation of being altered by the interaction with sucessfully expressed truth. the second is being able to recognise the effects that change has caused in the rest of the self. altering ones touchstone, ones basis for judging the world around them can have unexpected and counterproductive effects on ones interaction with the world. all the language coming in and going out of that person will be differently interprited or intentioned. wisdom is accepting this change, without losing the context for communication one had before it.
Everything that can be experienced about a person that is not an objective truth can be called their spirit.
they are impressions, misconceptions, thoughts and feelings in regards to a personality that are different for everyone observing. memories after they have left, the impression that lives on after someone has died or traveled away may change over time, but their recalled impression does not require the concurant presence of the soul or the body to continue to have an effect on others. the spirit is a persons personal language with the rest of he world. it is the flow of stimulus to and from a person that is used to recognise them as unique.
spirit is the means by which we diferentiate and recognise each other. language is the abstraction of experience for the purpose of being able to communicate it. it binds us together, but moreso it allows us to, under certain circumstances, share the truth that is our most sacred and necessary posession.
cheers.