by lastcat743 | 2025-07-12 15:06:02+00:00
> In your parlance, in order for there to be "no contradiction or embellishment" between your "Truth" and your "truth" there must be an isomorphic mapping between what entities you deem exist and the symbols you use to reason about them.

You play a childish game with your token of thoughts.

Now is not the springy knoll to discuss the nature and virtue of all things.

I declare my way “simple truths” and whose goal is to “undeceive the self as to the nature of existential reality.”

It is true there is an ontological chain established these medium for communicative protocol, yet you are pretentious and vacant when pointing this out without utility.

You do not undermine my point by saying “words are symbols and distinctions between the terminal and non-terminal, the signified and the signifier,” and so on.

Pardon your ignorance for your learnings are incomplete; you literally advocating gaslighting ourselves rather than explore existential truths.

Existential reality exists, only that which perturbs existence is existential, period. And only how without contrivance is good science, period. No matter how much you (Man) are intimate with your thoughts and conclusions, those are the symbolic non-truths.

Existential reality is true Truth. The sole and exclusive domain of interest for “science”, anything else is fantasy. Even well respected theoretical stuff, is objectively fantasy. However optimistic a handmaiden to discovery.

> Furthermore, there must be a logical law of noncontradiction upon which you will erect the notion of things, categories, and concepts.

I believe you stumble for “identity” and “attribute”. I still remember Aristotle making this distinction very clear to me while reading his works as a teenager.

As far as “law”, watch yourself. That is how Men lie in the most honest possible way. They confuse Truth (and therefore “truths”) as confined to the horizon of their ignorance. Your “laws” are crib rules to keep your lines straight.

Modern information theory is a lie and will be mocked for generations to come. How the smartest people of the western world could think existential reality was built upon state (“information”) rather than the (obvious) potential distributing as state (potential resolving to state in the moment of now.) Entropy is the existential phenomena of potential distributing over the infinite expanse of negative potential, not a footnote of thermodynamics and a prop for loss in their models. I tell you modern science is as much a cult of delusion as astrology six thousand years ago.

> We need not fear embellishment, the most successful physical theories involve forms of existence that are unlike anything related to the human experience, and there was never any reason to think they would be otherwise.

Enjoy your exotic shit man, it’s good for the mind and spirit. It is not existential Truth, and when you confuse this you become a part of the lie!

> I have no idea what repeating the word truth does to prove a point.

Those are two different words btw, “true” (a presumed validated symbolic reference) and “Truth” (some perturbation [even displacement] of existential reality.)