An objective truth

_____________________________

Image Copyright 2006

Marc Aupiais

All Rights Strictly Reserved

__________________________________________ 

 

To begin, is the idea of God. Even discounting what we know, this itself is utterly provable. Every theory of existence, always talks about this or that happening, in order to create or sustain the universe, they always, however assume a background, reality. Even if I am not human, or existent, I still; acknowledge existence. Existence is the base block of all, and that about which I now look into.  

Because we exist, or rather- rely on existence, and are of existence, (also called life), therefore we are not more complex than that which produces, whether or not directly- all that exists. If I am sentient, then reality is sentient, that is to say that that which is eternal, which we know always has been, and will be, and which has all the attributes of God-  is a being. This, like much, we can gain from truth, yet some would still say that it is but speculation, yet they themselves have experienced this very thing.

 To say that something we have no experience of is so, is simply to speculate, let us explore this concept of speculation.

 

I, personally have never been to Great Britain, yet could speculate greatly about the country. I could amount any length of facts, and have the greatest of arguments about it with all around. The simplicity of it is that, London, to me, is a place I imagine, not the real place, which is exclusively what it is, whatever I imagine it to be, or no matter the arguments, debates or proofs, I having never been there to this point may offer.

 

Likewise, it seems, that everyone in the world knows what is right and what is wrong. There would be no need to excuse behaviour otherwise, and without a moral grounding, why would most languages have a word for adultery. Why would we compliment some, and deny compliment to others, unless there was some or other unwritten law, which we and all others follow. A law, not of instinct, for it often requires the resisting of instinct. A law, that allows propaganda to work, and a law that makes us determine that one society, person, ideal or standard is more moral, more acceptable, or simply more appealing.

_____________________________

Image Copyright 2006

Marc Aupiais

All Rights Strictly Reserved

__________________________________________

 

Whenever a non-Christian, knowing I am Catholic, speaks to me, often, they will begin to list their sins, informing me of all they have done against my God. It is mostly when they are irritated that I am upholding justice (again a word hinting at a greater right and wrong, an unwritten law) against them, who have broken it.

 

Often, also, however, when I do not uphold such ideals, for some reason or other, these same people will moan against me for it. They will claim what is unfair, when it negatively affects them, but will not acknowledge it. They also come up with the greatest, and most useful, even imaginative excuses for their behaviour when they are in the wrong.

 

Surely, while the unwritten law of morals is there for all to know (perhaps with a few exceptions, even as some have physical defect), none seem able to obey it absolutely. This discounts it as instinct, you simply have to attack any animal for it's fight or flight instinct to kick in. Not all people follow the unwritten code, and few, if any follow it all the time. They may well be highly deluded if they think they do. Yet, in areas where it is not convenient, those who do not follow it, or acknowledge it, seem often to excuse their behaviour, either siting this very law to justify their breaking it, or else the emotions of others based on such law, even as the fundamentalist will quote the bible, (even giving the verse) or a lawyer will use the law to show how, despite a wrong, another law appears to justify.

_____________________________

Image Copyright 2006

Marc Aupiais

All Rights Strictly Reserved

__________________________________________ 

This does not deny good and evil, or right and wrong, rather, it proves the latter two, that there is a set standard. Also, delusion takes effort, therefore, if one finds the wider global population, most would consider some form of fraud or lying wrong.For without such belief, we would not have legal systems.

The same people would justify their own lies. Without such justification (i am not saying such is right or wrong), we would not have the phrase "White Lie".We would also not have the phrase "white magic". These phrases make something considered wrong by most, if not all, appear not such a giant infringement.

 

Of course, as "delusion" only appears present apon the "Law of Nature" of individuals breaking it, one notices vast similarities between all major societies and religions concerning this law. That is not to say that it is their own creation, even as my reasoning is not solely my own. Rather, that they record into language and action, that which is obvious to them, from even a very young age. They record that law of reason apparent to all,

 

In Roman Dutch law, one is not fully liable for one's actions until a certain age. It is not assumed that one will learn the Law with age, but rather that one gains reason and ability of conscience before a certain age. Therefore, it is not ignorance of the Law that is the excuse of the young, but rather the believed lack of moral ability.

 

Surely, law is not there to guide one's actions, "Natural Law" does such informing adequately, rather, it is there to punish those who do not adehere to certain sections of "Natural Law". Or, if abused, though such statement itself proves the existence of unwritten law, then it reflects abuse of law, a kind of corruption in recording "natural Law".

 

I am not sure if your own legal system is based on similar principals as the Roman one from which my own country gains such, yet even our written laws reflect the unwritten ones.

 

There is no nation in the world where cowardliness is exemplified. That is not to say that the people who do not exemplify cowardliness are not themselves cowards, even as those who verbally accept a creed or faith, do not always adhere to it. Rather, the coward is looked down on, but himself sites the Law of Nature, in an attempt to justify himself, even as in nations, mathematics or music are seen as standard, or near so. All music at least has some audible rhythm, or it is not music, but sound. Rather, the law mentioned is quoted to make excuses for its breaking.

 

As I said, without having visited England, I can only extrapolate, or guess what it will be like. I can guess what it looks like, or appears to be based on the testimony of others and on how people behave in my own country, yet language itself is not always perfect. Even texts considered absolute are often interpreted entirely differently by different people who agree with them, and even as I hear witness, as one may see evidence concerning England, that is not to say that I have an accurate picture of it in my mind. Rather, it is to say, that I have an oppinion about England. Only visiting the Nation, or having someone from such to verify my opinions can aid such, but that is still not to say that I have the objective truth, nor that the person claiming to come from England, really does, nor to say that due to inefficient language, that they themselves have not misinterpreted me.

 

Somehow, however, due to the similarities amoung man, I can get a relatively good picture of England, even as many do. It is not to say that the English person is not having me on, and lying about their nation. Often people from Africa love to spread the false perception of some, that we do not have civilization. Such foreigners, based on credence of our own opinion, or lies will gain a false perception, that may never be entirely rectified.

 

Therefore, while truth is absolute, while "Right" and "Wrong" are universally accepted, whether openly, or in denial, for all seem to know the "Law of Nature", therefore, the real question lays at what the objective, independent truth of the matter is. Every scientific formula needs testing with independent results. I personally subscribe to my own religion due to the fact that there are not any holes within the logic behind it, as well as because of what I intuitively believe.

_____________________________

Image Copyright 2007

Marc Aupiais

All Rights Strictly Reserved

__________________________________________

 Yet, even as all human religious systems are imperfect, if religion is based not just on human principals, but on revealed truth, something that an honsest person, who does not speculate, but knowing the truth, talks honestly about the truth, then surely such is correct. It surely is not simply the perfect logically provability of my religion that I follow it, and intuition only leads so far. Rather, if my religion were a human system, and not devinely created, with the intention of relaying actual truth, then I would not follow it.

 

Those things that people seem unable to fake are those that they are unable to analyse.

 

Love, true love, or death, or those intuitive things cannot be faked entirely. They can be imitated, just as one can pretend to come from Africa, or England, but really not. It is to an, however, not being blinded one's self, that one can verify love, or death.

 

Even so, aspects of religion, may not be understood, except intuitively. Yet, it is not purely logic, that we accept, but rather truth, to which logic tesifies.

 

Marc Aupiais

Of note to Christians is the gospel account of their faith, which they believe to be revealed.

The Gospel of Matthew

Chapter 16

"17

Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood 12 has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. " New American bible

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/_PVP.HTM