Quote:
Originally Posted by cypher197
Would it be fair to say that, perhaps, this is what my approach is attempting?
There is this idea that proof via induction is impossible, but with regards to reality, induction based on our observations is really all we have.
So, how do we reach something which is objectively true in order to have a proper moral theory to act upon, given that we can only reason about a rather limited number of topics in order to obtain objective truth, and that pretty much everything we know about "reality" is based on potentially-falsifiable sense inputs? This is what my approach intends to work on.
|
It's fair to admit that this is your approach if it suits your purposes. It would help us summarize your position if we can use that metaphor.
In balancing the different between reality and delusion, it necessary involves observation. But it also involves contemplation and a constant effort towards being present in the moment, within the reality you seek to discover.
I think your problem---or challenge, as it were---is that you are trying to create a systematized approach to something that is constantly changing. You can't come up with a formula for this kind of thing, because even if you could, it would become obsolete the very next moment. The universe, despite observable cycles on a macro level, is in constant flux. This exemplifies the importance of living in the moment if you wish to observe and respond to reality. If you glimpse it only to back off from it to come up with theories and formulas so you can anticipate future reality parameters and how to adequately respond to it, you've just participated in an act of futility. By the time you come up with anything, the moment has passed.
The key is remaining in the moment, looking at "now."
Quote:
|
I had not considered any relation to Buddhism, in part because, to my knowledge, Buddhism rejects material things, while material things can be quite useful; especially when it appears that our time alive is subject to possibly overcome-able material constraints.
|
It's a rather common misconception of Buddhism to think that it is world-denying and pessimistic, or interested in "rejecting" material reality. The opposite it the case. Buddhism acknowledges the body's required material reality; what it warns against is clinging to this reality in futility----that is usually where people get confused, I think. Even the Buddha himself taught that being materially secure (i.e. via a household) is good because it means you are less of a burden on others and are in a position to help others. There are many other aspects to this, but I don't want to get sidetracked.
I will have to return to your further comments later.