[Howie17]

I agree with you (your teacher), this is one of the realizations that freed me to drop some limitting beliefs I had of the Bible. Shortly after exploring the nature of communication and how it is limitted by itself from expressing "true reality" I decided to explore what Truth really is, and what is the truth we experience here on earth. The following is a quotation of my exploration. Keep in mind that two beliefs I actively use to explore the nature of truth are; the idea of our beliefs not being our identity and as such are just the 'lenses' by which we view reality and as I relay this message to you the lens of Communication is limitting. I adopted the 'lens' perspective after reading Steve's article on "Empowering Beliefs." In the following quotation I reference two articles I have written, one on the topic of Beliefs as lenses ("Lens Theory (Analogy)") and the other describing much of what you have written in this thread. My take is recorded in "Words by Definition." I do not promote these posts for self-aclamation or a source for revenue (as it is held on a site that I do not get any money from (Myspace)). The reason for reference is for clarification, you can read them if you think you don't understand my perspective.

Objective Truth vs Subjective Truth vs Subjective Conditional Truth

Posts worth reading prior to this: “Words by Definition” & “Lens Theory (Analogy)”

Movies that may be beneficial to watch or have watched: The Matrix Trilogy, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy


Today, I would like to address another lens, another belief I hold at times when I encounter certain situations. As it is a lens, through which we can view “reality” it has the properties of any other lens, limited in some way, unclear looking at “the big picture,” but also extremely clear and focused on a single variable, or aspect of reality.


The lens through which I’m speaking doesn’t have a label in my mind, so the only distinguishing factor we have to pick it up as apposed to any other lens is the variable(s) it can be used to analyze. The variables are the words in the title, and I define each of them in this way:


Objective Truth is the unconditional truths that exist in (my) reality.


Another term worth clarifying is “reality” by itself. There are two forms in which I choose to define it. When I refer to it as ‘my reality,’ I am referring to the core of our identity, and the nature of the existence of that entity. Simplified, I define it as our spirit and the world it lives in. The second way I define reality as is: ‘our’ or ‘your’ reality, this is the reality we interact in, it is the reality of everything “we can touch, taste, see, and hear” and smell, it is this reality of form. The word ‘form’ as I most often use it, is synonymous to this latter definition of reality: “our reality” or “your reality,” it is this physical form filled reality, whereas the reality I speak of as “my” reality, is formless as far as I can tell. Questions at this point may be raised, as to how I further define “my” reality. At this time, I can’t say much more, but I will imply the nature of it throughout this article, and any article I write. At best, (at this point in the article is a looping definition) I can only define it as: the collection of Objective Truth(s) that only exist unconditionally in such a reality (or existence).


I realize my definitions for Objective Truth, and “my” reality, are defining each other, and therefore indefinable, I can only assure you as you bare with me in this article that I will better describe the nature of each.


Definitions two & three:

Subjective Truth & Subjective Conditional Truth: the way I define each of these terms is extremely similar and equivalently important to understand the distinction. If you fail to see the distinction it will lead you to at best misunderstand the rest of this article; at worst you’ll completely misinterpret it and if you don’t think so already, consider me a lunatic.


I define subjective truth as the conditional experiences we encounter that lead us to experience an Objective Truth. As cryptic as that may sound I will attempt to clarify it using an analogy expressed in The Matrix Trilogy. If you are familiar this is the clearest expression of the truth I’m trying to illustrate. Ho’kay So, Keeping the lens that you’ve put on by reading this article and adopting the language, I now ask you to put on the lens of the Matrix; what memory you have of it. In this Trilogy, the main character, Neo, goes to see an Oracle, THE Oracle, on three separate occasions. The general context for what happens in each situation is this:


First Conversation: Neo is not The One and Morpheous takes him to see her as he thinks Neo is ready for her message. Neo arrives and they have a short dialogue to confirm her credibility as being such an Oracle. She then examines Neo, tells him he is not The One, and also warns of a decision he will need to make. Neo or Morpheous is going to die, and Neo is going to have to make the choice on who it is. A minute detail worth mentioning here is that Neo asks a question (I can’t think of the exact verbatim, and is actually irrelevant), the Oracle replies with pointing to a sign over her doorway that says “Know Thyself.”


Second Conversation: Neo is the One, he goes to see the Oracle because he believes she can tell him what he needs to do to save Zion. He learns a lot of things since the first conversation and goes to her for clarification, to insure he is right. She tells him, its all true, and he then asks, what he must do, she points him to find a man named “The Keymaker.” Once again, Neo doesn’t know what he needs to do, the “why” he needs the keymaker, but he trusts the Oracle’s message, as she hasn’t lead him wrong yet. (more could be said about all this)


Third and Final Conversation: Neo is still the One, he understands the reality of the Matrix, and he’s upset with the Oracle, for not telling him sooner. The dialogue goes something along these lines:


Neo: “Why didn’t you tell me this was just another control?”

Oracle: “You weren’t ready.”

Neo: “Whose to say when I’m ready, or not?!”

Oracle: *Points at sign above door*

Neo: *Reads signs message: “Know Thyself”* “I did…”


*Snap out of it, yes You, The Reader* O.K., now that you have The Matrix lens in your foreground, move it to your background, and bring back that lens you had in the foreground when you were reading this article.


Subjective Truth, as this analogy so eloquently illustrates it, is described in every piece of advice the Oracle gave Neo. Nothing she told him was Objective Truth, nothing she said described the nature of who Neo was in the grand scheme of things, everything she said was subjective in the sense that it was exactly what he needed to hear to experience Objective Truth. Morpheous couldn’t of worded it better every time he was adamant about saying “What the Oracle told you, was for you to hear, and you alone.” And at another point in the movie “What she told you, was exactly what you needed to hear.”


Keeping that definition of Subjective Truth in mind, Subjective Conditional Truth (For lack of a better term or phrase to label it), is the conditional experiences we encounter, that lead us to the absence of Objective Truth. As such, both terms Subjective Truth and Subjective Conditional Truth are the same thing, what it results in is the variance, and that variance hinges on our interpretation of the message or medium the Subjective Truth is expressed through.


Subjective Truth in either form therefore is not good or bad, it is what it is. How we interpret the Subjective Truth, is therefore the basis for whether we reach a positive or negative outcome. Interpretation is where you choose to believe one way or another. From this lens such interpretations of famous people’s quotes can take on a greater meaning. For instance, as I’m a fan of Einstein’s quotes, the statement “There are two ways to live: you can live as if nothing is a miracle; you can live as if everything is a miracle” fits this topic all too well. There are indeed two ways to live, you can choose to interpret your subjective experiences of reality as miraculous by nature, or not miraculous at all, both options are equally valid and un-falsifiable; it is your free-will to decide which you prefer. Naturally to accept one belief, one lens, is un-accepting of the other, that is why those that believe in miracles think those that don’t are lunatics; and those that don’t believe in miracles think those that do are lunatics.


Remember, either belief is just another lens, and the nature of lenses is that they’re neither good nor bad, they are there for us to interpret the world the way we choose to.

Despite my disclaimer, I would appreciate any feedback for both the ideas expressed, and the medium (text) through which they are expressed. I currently don't have a lot of feedback to know if my skills as a writer are worth further developing, maybe that alone is my feedback .