163 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2019
    1. Learned vanity, which exceeds that of every other kind, still takes up arms against any thing that is offered as new

      Thinking we know everything also makes us think there's nothing left to learn.

      This has really important consequences in terms of post-humanist thinking! If we presume that there is a true definition of anything, we are allowing experience, culture, language to limit us. It is better to presume an every shifting definition of the human that responds to the situation at hand. Starting a discussion of the human with the idea that we all obviously know what a human is, is extremely limiting.

    1. I-laving developed one's rational powers, one could then read as extensively (or not) as one wished.

      This reminds me of Plato's "Chariot Allegory:" the notion that the charioteer (logic, reason) attempts to drive and control the two horses (rational and irrational) toward the truth.

    2. Madonella.

      Meaning "little Madonna" or "small Madonna." What is fascinating about this reference is the history behind the Madonnelle street shrines (little Madonnas) in Rome/other Italian cities. These little Madonnas were seen as the protectors of the communities in which they looked over (literally believed to be protecting them from evil). Also, lamps in front of the shrines were lit at night to guide passer-bys through the darkness, and, unlike other Madonna icons, these little Madonnas gazed directly at the viewer, establishing "a personal connection between the two." Maybe not such a ridicuous bluestocking figure to compare Mary Astell to afterall?

    1. abuse or perversion of terms from their na1ura

      Some violent wording here. What does Hume mean here by "natural?" Does he actually believe that anything is natural? How can we pervert anything when knowledge is constructed by sense data and thus not based in any objective truth? Am I totally misunderstanding Hume?

    2. Among athousand different opinions which different menmay entenain of the same subject, there is one,and but one, that is just and true;

      Aaaand there we have it, the rejection of relativism that was also in Locke. "Come, John! There is one Truth and we must seek it out!"

    1. he names of simple ideas tlie least doubtful. c8. Fr

      So, Locke is trying to establish somewhat of a hierarchy of language based in clarity. Names of simple substances are closest to the Truth of the substance. "Philosophical" words are furthest from Truth because what the concepts/things they represent are most difficult to nail down. I wonder, then, if we can translate this to exploring the human--do we have a hierarchy of understanding? Or a hierarchy of Truest representation?

    2. no-body having an authority to establish the precise signification of words,

      While Locke seems to favor the capital T Truth, he here says that nobody is the authority on it.

    3. certain and undoubted

      "Certain and undoubted" brings to mind the classical sense of logos, where it's meaning isn't logic or reasoning (as we tend to think of it now) but is more about the commonly accepted truth. It's a truth that people believe--but that doesn't make it correct. Locke undoubtedly is not intending this meaning but is instead calling for an objective Truth.

    4. nonrelativistic view of knowledge.

      Objective knowledge of Truth

    5. incomplete or inaccurate idea

      Incomplete or inaccurate according to whom? Some objective Truth?

    1. verisimilitude

      Interesting word choice--not truth but verisimilitude

      The fact or quality of being verisimilar; the appearance of being true or real; likeness or resemblance to truth, reality, or fact; probability.

      http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/222523?rskey=VlffzB&result=1&isAdvanced=false#eid

    2. manages to follow a roundabout way whenev

      or "has the aim of truth coursing though all his blood vessels," to reintroduce a metaphor Vico used earlier.

    3. are truth

      "Truth" vs. "truth"

    1. indb-•i' putablc truth

      The belief in capital T truth strikes again. For the Greeks, search for Truth was under the purview of the philosophers; here, it's sought by practitioners of science. Interesting parallels between scientists and philosophers.

  2. Jan 2019
    1. where no clear 1ruth was availahlc

      When there's no Truth (in subjective situations), rhetoric comes to the rescue.

    2. half-truths as a form of propaganda

      I would understand that rhetoric in these instances would be a vice rather than a virtue.

    1. Value-free language and the possibility of a self-contained discipline make possible both modern sci-ence and that mapping of humanistic inquiry onto a scientific model which has created modern social science as well.

      And yet, any mapping of humanistic inquiry onto a scientific model would lead to the creation of incomplete maps, of certain lies. One of those lies? If you can't use the scientific method to come to know something, then that something isn't knowledge/true/truth/fact.

    2. To read it is co learn how the "humanities crisis" started, how the conception oflanguage as value-free and ideally transparent underwrote the modern world.

      To read it is also to learn how/why we have been lied to and how/why we will continue to lie to ourselves and others.

      ~ shout out to my homie Nietzsche ~

    3. there is as much truth as we need, maybe more,

      And not enough of other truths.

    4. If we conceive the world as somehow externally fixed and sanc-tioned, then rhetoric, and by extension the arts, will be derivative and cos-metic, "verbal." If, on the other hand, truth is what the judge and jury, after a suitably dramatic proceeding, decide it is, then rhetoric is architectonic.

      Is Lanham making the distinction between "Truth" and "truth?"

    5. truth and Truth,
    6. prove

      Interesting that there's this call for "proof," some form of evidence, something tangible that we can point to. Such a desire feels very objective, as though there's some Truth this proof will point to. What would such proofs be?

  3. Oct 2018
    1. Bruno Latour, the Post-Truth Philosopher, Mounts a Defense of Science

      Latour on science and truth.

    2. At a meeting between French industrialists and a climatologist a few years ago, Latour was struck when he heard the scientist defend his results not on the basis of the unimpeachable authority of science but by laying out to his audience his manufacturing secrets: “the large number of researchers involved in climate analysis, the complex system for verifying data, the articles and reports, the principle of peer evaluation, the vast network of weather stations, floating weather buoys, satellites and computers that ensure the flow of information.” The climate denialists, by contrast, the scientist said, had none of this institutional architecture. Latour realized he was witnessing the beginnings a seismic rhetorical shift: from scientists appealing to transcendent, capital-T Truth to touting the robust networks through which truth is, and has always been, established.

      A paradigm shift in the rhetoric of science, from metanarratives of truth to the mechanics of truth manufacture.

    1. Dr. Ford publicly accused me of committing a serious wrong more than 36 years ago

      This just reminded me of some people having doubts on Dr. Ford as to why she didn't speak up before and why she is talking about Bret now after 36 years. So, I want to remind the public that talking about "Sexual Assault" is not easy and it takes a lot of courage for a women to speak about it. Also, Dr. Ford was seeing a therapist after the incident many years ago.

  4. Sep 2018
    1. Technology is therefore no mere means. Technology is a way of revealing. If we give heed to this, then another whole realm for the essence of technology will open itself up to us. It is the realm of revealing, i.e., of truth.

      Technology opening itself to us giving us the essence of technology to which we--as a species-- can conquer the mysteries of the natural laws around us. As many fears for the day of the technological singularity, they should not worry since by the fact that that piece of information is unlocked for researchers to tinker then there will always be a counter measure to such an event. Knowing the truth of the machine allows for loopholes of the machine to be exploited and neutralize.

  5. Aug 2018
    1. Rationality and transparency are the values of classical liberalism. Rationality and transparency are supposed to be what make free markets and democratic elections work. People understand how the system functions, and that allows them to make rational choices.

      But economically, we know there isn't perfect knowledge or perfect rationality (see Tversky and Khaneman). There is rarely every perfect transparency either which makes things much harder, especially in a post-truth society apparenlty.

  6. Jul 2018
    1. Instead, I would encourage the social platforms to include prominent features for filtering and flagging. They should work with journalists and social psychologists to invent a new visual grammar so that when content is fact-checked, debunked, corrected, or verified, those processes are transparent and available to anyone seeking to understand more about the origins of a story.
    2. Jeff Jarvis wrote over the weekend, we need to be careful what we wish for: We don’t want Facebook to become the arbiter of truth.
  7. course-computational-literary-analysis.netlify.com course-computational-literary-analysis.netlify.com
    1. On the day before, Mr. Godfrey Ablewhite arrived at his father’s house, and asked (as I know from Mr. Ablewhite, senior, himself) for a loan of three hundred pounds. Mark the sum; and remember at the same time, that the half-yearly payment to the young gentleman was due on the twenty-fourth of the month. Also, that the whole of the young gentleman’s fortune had been spent by his Trustee, by the end of the year ’forty-seven.

      The facts elicited by the inquiry were stated by Sergeant Cuff in the most discreet and circumspect manner. The Sergeant, though placidly retired at this moment, still retained his habitual discreetness when writing his report. He took a particular attention to the due dates and sum of money, which, evidently were the keys to unravel the mystery shrouding Mr.Godfrey Ablewhite's conducts.

  8. Apr 2018
    1. Shewrote.Shewrote.Shewrote

      We see this many times in Orlando, where time passes by very quickly. Here a whole year passes by while Orlando is writing and the narrator says that with Orlando only writing and thinking about love there is not much to write about in this year of her life. The narrator leaves it to our imagination and just tells us that Orlando writes and thinks about love and that there is not much to say besides that. When there isn't any evidence, any way to write exactly what happened and when the person the biography is being written about is doing unimportant things, time passes by very fast. This also shows us how there is a varying level of fact versus fiction in biographies because we can not be absolutely sure what is happening at every moment of the persons life.

  9. Feb 2018
    1. Be honest, you don’t need that AR-15. Nobody does. Society needs them gone, no matter how good you may be with yours. Kids are dying, and it’s time to stop fucking around.
    1. the prolifery of breakthrough innovations that came pouring out of Doug's lab in the 1960s and '70s, probably more breakthroughs than any other lab in the history of computing before or since

      Well ain't that the truth!

  10. Nov 2017
    1. These are the objects of that higher grade of education

      While so much of UVA's aims as a university has changed since this writing, I feel that the objectives (referred to in the document as "objects") remain today. These goals are essentially to transform the students into the best versions of themselves, both for themselves and their community, and I think UVA still does this today. The objectives taken in the context of the time of the writing, however, changes not so much the meaning of the objects, but the gross, cruel, senseless exclusivity of them, pertaining to only white men. As we have discussed in my class, Telling the Truth, the historical context can greatly alter the complete truth of something. I feel that these objects today are true as we read these differently from the writers of the RFGR, specifically we include all races and genders in the definition of words such as citizen and equal, and we see these groups as people with rights as well. While the objects have not changed themselves, their exclusivity has, so in that sense they remain as true to part of the schools basic principles and goals. -Drew Parks

    2. a sound spirit of legislation, which banishing all arbitrary & unnecessary restraint on individual action shall leave us free to do whatever does not violate the equal rights of another.

      I think all would agree that this kind of legislature, being implemented with the aim of promoting freedom and the equal rights of one another, is for the best, yet this idea holds a fair amount of hypocrisy in the time of this documents writing. As they set the foundations of UVA in the ideology of freedom and equality they simultaneously have slaves constructing the grounds. I also picked this quote because I thought it related to my current engagement class, Telling the Truth, where we analyze the interplay between the beauty of a medium of information and the truth. Metaphors comparing this legislature to "a sound spirit" evokes a wholesome mood, yet this beautiful writing in a way hides the deep flaws and hypocritical nature of this statement which claims to establish equality. -Drew Parks

  11. Sep 2017
    1. I call bullshit

      I think that summarizes enough of my sentiment. Anyone can be said to make, design, user, interface, entertain, pervade, insert-verb-of-choice-here. That persons class it as male and female is only making me think they need to drop out of their career fields and move to some farm by themselves. "Make and care-give for yourself and others."

      These people should be focused more on using the training they have and taking their pride and shoving it up there collective assholes. Just my opinion... Obviously it's better than theirs. just as theirs is "better" than the people they want to see as worth less than themselves. Are culture is always going to have people on top who don't deserve credit taking credit for those they see as point flies in the ointment. just ignore them and wait your turn.

    1. Widespread claims by government health authorities that fluoride is completely safe at current exposure levels are false

      Arguing against mainstream thoughts/government structures.

    2. how we are all essentially being lied to about the safety of artificial fluoride chemicals in our water.

      Not explaining what lies occur.

    3. holds nothing back when it comes to telling it like it is, even when "it" goes against the prevailing schools of thought within his profession

      Portraying mainstream media as the enemy, "Real Truth" is hidden away.

  12. May 2017
    1. But let's properly define the problem. History and experience tell me it's not a post-truth era: Facts have always been hard to separate from falsehoods, and political partisans have always made it harder. It's better to call this a post-trust era.

      We are not post-truth, we're post-trust.

      Kind of. A lot of people "trusted" the Denver Guardian because it fit within their pre-existing narrative framework. Maybe we are "post-trust" with the institutions and organizations that got us this far: traditional mainstream media, higher ed, researchers and scientists.

    1. Step one: You lie yourself, all the time. Step two: You say it’s your opponents and the journalists who lie. Step three: Everyone looks around and says, “What is truth? There is no truth.”

      A pretty accurate picture.

  13. Apr 2017
    1. Nobody uses fine language when teaching geometry.

      Ought the truth make the language as fine as the unacceptable rhetorical junk?

    2. That is, he draws attention to his appearance, to his surface, and the suggestion of superficiality (a word to be understood in its literal meaning) extends to the word "act"; that is, that which can be seen.
  14. Mar 2017
    1. Each of us is a narrativ

      It seems that the writers are increasingly collapsing boundaries and challenging notions of Truth. Rhetoric is less about seeking absolute truth and more about how we construct ourselves and the world around us. This also connects with Foucault.

    2. s not by nature limited, valueless, ignorant, despicable, or "merely subjective." It is human.

      So are we supposed to understand "human" to be something more than "merely subjective?" That is to say, there is some underlying truth to the "fiction of our lives" because it is a human response to existence?

    1. Rhetoric focused on motives for speaking that were not intended to reach the ab-solute truth.

      Doesn't this assume that the motive for speaking is to reach the absolute truth?

      Also, is this Truth, or just truth?

    1. Also showing Lamy's inllucncc is Astcll'!. view that one needs little stylistic ornament because people arc naturally attracted to truth if they can sec it clearly.

      You shouldn't need to wear too much makeup/use too much rhetoric, you are naturally beautiful/telling the truth.

      Would I be wrong in assuming that she expects the reader to use rhetoric strictly for noble purposes?

    1. And obvi-ously the interests in actual control of the agency that allocated the rights and resources of atomic development could have all the advantages of real ownership, however international might be the fictions of ownership. Where the control re-sides, there resides the function of ownership, whatever the fictions of ownership may be.

      Throughout this section, Burke calls attention to the ways we use universal truths to act out discriminatory practices. In doing so, there's an inconsistency between the name we give something and the function it serves. The "truth" of the thing doesn't equal the way it operates in the world. In the case he presents here, the power is named "United Nations," but the power is acted out through the "United States." (Would claims to religious freedom to deny service to, say, LGBT couples be included in something like this? The fiction is "religious liberty" but the function is "discrimination"?)

      How can we connect this back to Willard and Nietzsche? What do they say about fiction and power that resonates here?

    1. His objection is to objectivity itself.

      This is a core issue: not just disagreeing about facts, but disagreeing that facts even exist, locating "the truth" in the understanding of "you and I", the "common people", despite that there's no guarantee that our understandings are accurate.

  15. Feb 2017
    1. That is to say, il is a thoroughly anthropomorphic truth which contains not a single point which would be "true in itself' or really and universally valid apart from man.

      Essentially, it is not a truth because "it" does not exist outside of our (man's) constructed world. It exists materially, or exists within our understanding of human qualities, but not in abstraction. (Actually, now I have a question, does this mean that Nietzsche thinks that real "truth" only exists in a vacuum, or does he just think that it exists beyond our own capacity and faculties?)

    2. Just as the Romans and Etruscans cut , +w.-up the heavens with rigid mathematical lines and,. Ci\. l~ confined a god within each of the spaces thereby ,,,,..lb~op_h'. delimiied, as within a temp/um, 16 so every people of,\~ \>l"'-has a similarly mathematically divided concep-tual heaven above themselves and henceforth :., l' ' thinks that truth demands that each conceptual god be sought only within his own sphere.

      This could actually be read as a really fascinating criticism, or I suppose observation, about the relationship between man and society and religion. In that man carefully constructs, or calculates, truth and god(s) and heaven and all other ruling social concepts. It's a weird mix of math/science/logic with religion/heavens/abstraction.

    3. And just as every porter wants to have an admirer, so even the proudest of men, the philosopher, supposes that he secs on all sides the eyes of the universe tele-scopically focused upon his action and thought. It is remarkable that this was brought about by the intellect, which was certainly allotted to these most unfortunate, delicate, and ephemeral beings merely as a device for detaining them a minute within existence.

      There’s a really interesting link to be made with Willard here. Nietzsche is taking on the philosopher (as well as Enlightenment thinking), as philosophers tend to position themselves at the center of universe because they are on the search for truth. He challenges the science of it, saying that the telescopic (read: narrow) inquiry is futile as they are on a search for something that is not there. In other words, the more a philosopher tries to focus in on “the truth,” the more a philosopher loses sight of the purpose of the inquiry.

      Likewise, Willard takes on patriarchal exegesis as though it, too, is a science. By using the telescopic metaphor (similar to Nietzsche), she makes it clear that a search for truth in such a narrow sense is useless to the human endeavor. From “The Letter Killeth”:

      “We need women commentators to bring out the women’s side of the book; we need the stereoscopic view of truth in general, which can only be had when a woman’s eye and man’s together shall discern the perspective of the Bible’s full-orbed revelation…while they turn their linguistic telescopes on truth, I may be allowed to make a correction for the “personal equation” in the results which they espy” (1126).

      Although Willard does suggest that the truth can be reached (a “full orbed revelation”), it is not until both halves — the woman’s and the man’s — is taken into account. Again, the more a male preacher tries to focus in on "the truth," the more he loses sight of the purpose of the inquiry. Really, all of humanity is a stake for Willard.

      I don't know. There’s something going on with eyes and telescopes and science and philosophy and exegesis, but I’m not quite sure how to articulate it…

    4. Truths arc illusions which we have forgotten arc illusions; they arc metaphors that have become worn out and have been drained of sensuous force, coins which have lost their em-bossing and arc now considered as metal and no longer as coins.

      I really liked this metaphor to present "Truth" as something that once had value because of the way we recognized it. With time, however, familiarity makes it obscure to us, and we can no longer see that they are constructs.

    1. Rhetoric conveys the re-sults of thought, but it is not itself a form of thought. Hill relies on the modes of dis-course-narration, description, and argumentation-and he wishes to focus rhetoric on iL'i proper subject, excluding all that is peripheml.

      Like Enlightenment thinking, this suggests that knowledge and truth is objective, separate from social interaction. We don't actively create truth through communication, but rather passively gain and disseminate truth through three modes "narration, description, and argument" (Hill) (or four modes if you're Bain).

    1. trut/1

      Although, it may not be entirely relevant, this seems to be like a very interesting representation of the "Truth" that we kept alluding to after our first set of readings, but adapted to a more understandable scenario.

    1. Truth never learned to read or write

      It's awesome enough to read Truth's work in an African American history or feminist context, but I'm struck reading about her in an overview of rhetoric and thinking about how oratory/rhetoric was dominated by highly educated white men, and she wasn't even literate. And she spoke in dialect during a time when standardization was emphasized. We've read about rhetoric as a way to access and convey the truth, and it seems that she does share that interest but expresses herself in a very different way.

    2. substance

      I suppose Astell would allow a little style and effect, as long as the substance was true.

    1. “kernel of truth”

      Nay, even in those performances where truth, in regard to the individual facts related, is neither sought nor expected...truth still is an object to the mind, the general truths regarding character, manners, and incidents. When these are preserved, the piece may justly be denominated true, considered as a picture of life; though false, considered as a narrative of particular events. -Campbell (906)

    2. “connect the dots to make a picture.”

      "Truth itself is elusive" - Campbell

      This conspiracy theorist suggest that the "elusiveness" of Truth is dependent on one's willingness to "connect the dots."

    1. Analogous to this, there arc two things in every discourse which principally claim our aucntion, the sense and the expression; or in other words, the thought and the symbol by •. J. which ii is communicated.

      I was having a hard time making sense of this analogy. This passage on the next page clarified it a bit:

      Now, if it be by the sense or soul of the dis-course that rhetoric holds of logic, or the art of thinking and reasoning, it is by the expression or body of the discourse that she holds of grammar, or the art or conveying our thoughts in the words of a particular language. The observation of one analogy naturally suggests another. As the soul is or heavenly extraction and the body of earthly, so the sense of the discourse ought to have its source in the invariable nature of truth and right. whereas the expression can derive its energy only from the arbitrary conventions of men, sources as unlike, or rather as widely different, as the breath of the Almighty and the dust of the earth.

    2. Now, it is by the sense that rhetoric holds of logic, and by the expression that she holds of grammar

      Is "sense" really a stepping stone for (T/t)ruth?

    3. despotic sovereign

      I don't know what to make of this at this point, or if it is even worthwhile to think about, but it interests me that Campbell describes abstract truth as a "despotic sovereign" and an orator's power as "superior even to what despotism itself can can bestow" (904).

    4. truth

      No capital "t"? (I don't necessarily have an argument with his point, I'm just surprised at the use of the lowercase.

    5. Truch, as such, is the proper aim of ,.1 L-· the examiner
  16. Jan 2017
    1. s for the aim of all kinds of intellectual pur-suits: one only is kept in view, one is pursued, one is honored by all: Truth

      Here Truth is mentioned entirely unqualified/defined and with a capital "T"!

    1. A very delicate palate, on many occasions, may be a great incon-venience both to a man himself and lo his friends: But a delicate taste of wit or beauty must always be a desirable quality; because it is the source of all the finest and most innocent enjoy-ments, of which human nature is susceptible.

    1. After the French Revolution, this new form of ‘seeing’ afforded physicians and anatomists a more accurate perception and experience of body’s variation allowing them an unparalleled proximity to the ‘truth.’

      Can we perhaps track times that "truth" appears explicitly? I think that might be a useful tag to collect, if we could figure out a way to track all the different invocations of "truth" throughout the semester -- when it appears in scare quotes, when it is capitalized, etc.

      It might turn out to be too big a thing to track, though.

    1. transformation of truth

      I've heard of writing being used as a way to get to the truth, but not as a way of transforming truth, so this is an interesting twist.

    1. TheStrongDefensearguesthat,sincetruthcomestohumankindinsomanydiverseanddisagreeingforms,wecannotbaseapolityuponit.

      This is really something to think through. It challenges much of Western thought as well as the goals of higher education. I cannot help but think of the current phrase post-truth in this context.

    1. It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

      I would amend this to say that we never grasp the universe as it really is, but that some of our delusions are startlingly accurate (by design).

  17. Dec 2016
    1. When we speak of perception, we are speaking of your interpretation of the reality that you can experience. What you experience is interpretive. It is very rare that people have a direct experience of anything! Direct experience means that you are experiencing a reality that is beyond your interpretation. A very rare and great experience this is. It could be the common denominator of your experience, but in fact it is quite rare and phenomenal because 99.9% of your experience is interpretation of the reality that you can experience. When I say "the reality that you can experience," I mean that you can only experience a little bit of reality because of your limited capacity and range of perception. So, it is not merely the interpretation of reality at large; it is interpretation of the reality that you can experience.
    2. he world needs the truth you have within yourself. The world cannot give it to you. But once you give it, the world will bear witness to Knowledge because Knowledge is everywhere. A mind without fear can see this. A mind with fear can only see its own thoughts and interpretations. It is not free to see or to know. It is out of relationship with life. Your life must be beyond this world for you to experience this because you are here such a short time. It is very important, then, to think about your life beyond the world.
    1. What is the practical effect of this new truth on everyday life? Well, consider one example. In Turkey today, we are obliged to indulge a debate about whether minors should be married to their rapists. It is predicated on the “real people’s” truth that in rural areas girls get married even when they are just 13, and thus have sexual maturity. It is, we are told, a thoroughly elitist argument to insist that a minor cannot give consent.
    2. this mobilised and organised ignorance has no time for any kind of intellect, even that which helped it capture the political stage in the first place.
    3. We found, as you are now finding, that the new truth-building process does not require facts or the underpinning of agreed values. We were confronted – as you are being confronted – by a toxic vocabulary: “elite”, “experts”, “real people” and “alienated intellectuals”. The elite, with experts as mouthpieces of that oppressive elite, were portrayed as people detached from society, willing to suppress the needs, choices and beliefs of “real people”.
  18. May 2016
    1. Perhaps you cannot see this yet, and of course cannot believe it until I fully prepare your mind byconvincing your intellect of its truth.

      If I do not see and know consciously who I really am it means that my mind and body have not yet been fully prepared to receive the Truth.

    2. Then, as the Sun of Know-ing begins to rise on the horizon of your consciousness;Then, will you feel the swell of a wondrous strange Breath filling you to the extreme of all yourmortal members, causing your senses almost to burst with the ecstasy of it; then, will there comesurge after surge of a mighty, resistless Power rising within you, lifting you almost off the Earth;then, will you feel within the Glory, the Holiness, the Majesty of My Presence;And then, then you will KNOW, I AM, God.You, -- when you have felt Me thus in such moments within, when you have tasted of MyPower, hearkened to My Wisdom, and know the ecstasy of My all-embracing Love, -- no diseasecan touch, no circumstance can weaken, no enemy can conquer you. For now you KNOW I AMwithin, and you always hereafter will turn to Me in your need, putting all your trust in Me, andallowing Me to manifest My Will.You, when you turn thus to Me, will always find Me an unfailing and ever present help in timeof need; for I will so fill you with a Realization of My Presence and of My Power, that you needonly Be Still and allow Me to do whatever you want done -- heal your ills and those of others,illumine your mind so you can see with My eyes the Truth you seek, or perform perfectly thetasks which before seemed almost impossible of accomplishmen

      To come to truly Know that God is within me, to Know it as a felt Reality............ And in all and every circumstances turn within to Me... turn to God and trust that support will unfailing...

  19. Apr 2016
    1. 2Listen!I AM You, that part of you who IS and KNOWS;WHO KNOWS ALL THINGS,And always knew, and always was.Yes, I AM You, Your SELF; that part of you who says I AM and is I AM;That transcendent, innermost part of you which quickens within as you read, which responds tothis My Word, which perceives Its Truth, which recognizes all Truth and discards all errorwherever found. Not that part which has been feeding on error all these years.For I AM your real Teacher, the only real one you will ever know, and the only MASTER;I, your Divine SELF

      The message shares immediately that my True Self is my teacher

    2. THE IMPERSONAL LIFEJoseph S. BennerI AMTo you who read, I speak.To you, who, through long years and much running to and fro, have been eagerly seeking, inbooks and teachings, in philosophy and religion, for you know not what ---Truth, Happiness,Freedom, God;To you whose Soul is weary and discouraged and almost destitute of hope;To you, who many times have obtained a glimpse of that "Truth" only to find, when youfollowed and tried to reach it, that it disappeared in the beyond, and was but the mirage of thedesert;To you, who thought you had found it in some great teacher, who was perhaps the acknowledgedhead of some Society, Fraternity or Religion, and who appeared to you to be a "Master", somarvelous was the wisdom he taught and the works he performed; -- only to awaken later to therealization that that "Master" was but a human personality, with faults and weaknesses, andsecret sins, the same as you, even though that personality may have been a channel throughwhich were voiced many beautiful teachings, which seemed to you the highest "Truth;"And here you are, Soul aweary and enhungered, and not knowing where to turn ---To you, I AM come.Likewise to you, who have begun to feel the presence of that "Truth" within your Soul, and seekthe confirmation of that which of late has been vaguely struggling for living expression within;Yes, to all you who hunger for the true "Bread of Life," I AM come.Are you ready to partake?If so, then arouse yourself. Sit up. Still your human mind and follow closely My Word hereinspoken. Or you will turn away disappointed once more, with the aching hunger still in yourheart

      The message clearly points out that it is speaking to me! And asks me to still my mind and listen.

  20. Jan 2016
  21. christmind.info christmind.info
    1. You do not have to understand analytically, logically. It isn’t the understanding which is important. It is the experience of your Peace. It is the experience of your congruence. It is the experience of your Integrity—which is a feeling. And in the presence of that feeling, which is uncluttered by conflict, you are the transparency for Truth. You are “the understanding” expressed and expressing. But the understanding is not a possession. So, if you want to understand, don’t try to understand. Invite the Knowing.

      ":It is the experience of your Peace. It is the experience of your congruence. It is the experience of your Integrity—which is a feeling."

      The felt experience.... and in this the transparency of Truth!

      Knowing can only be invited...

    2. Now, I encourage you to pay more attention when you are doing the private conversations, because when you are doing them, you are also experiencing this fulfillment, this congruence. But you have not gleaned from it its full benefit because you have not been aware of the fact that it has been you standing as the Door, and as the Door, being the presence of the Voice for Truth which constitutes your real conscious experience of Being. You have seen it as a pleasant side-effect, you might say, of something else1 which is Real that is going on, rather than the realness of You.

      I relate to this when working with clients, being present with them supports me to be at the Door, being the presence of the Voice for Truth... consciously Being......

  22. Dec 2015
    1. You must be alert at the inception. Then you will not waste your time attempting to do something which is already done by virtue of the immovable completeness of your Being. Indeed, your Being will be identified completely, and is identified completely—and that means manifest completely. Otherwise, the omnipresence of your Being would be only partial, which is an impossibility. You must be willing to face the suggestion of lack, and meet it head on, with the recognition that such a suggestion is an exact opposite of the Fact. If you will reverse the suggestion and be conscious of the specific truth which you will discover in that Place where you are right now, and abide with that truth, then you will be able to respond appropriately. Everything you do will identify the Fact. It is not enough to know what the Fact is. You must also include consciously in your awareness of the Fact that It is not omnipresent if It is not present as that which identifies your completeness. This must be done from that Place wherein you are experiencing the omnipresence of your Being as Conscious Being. It is essential that you keep this in mind.

      Use time wisely: don't try to fix what is not true.

      Be willing to face illusion - head on, recognizing that it cannot be true from the place of conscious Being.

      What is True (not illusion, not FACT) is present only from that place of being conscious of Being. Here Truth is what identifies your completeness.

      He is not talking about a concept of Truth but and experience of Truth.

    1. RAJ: Don’t add that “but.” Stay with the simple Fact you have just stated. The “but” is the hooker! “All is infinite Mind and Its infinite manifestation.“1 There aren’t any “buts” about it! Being is “neither behind the point of perfection nor advancing towards it. It is at that point and must be understand therefrom.“2 It will never be understood from the standpoint of the three-dimensional frame of awareness (ego). You must stop looking for clues, helpful hints, or reassurances objectively. Being doesn’t need them, and “ego” only needs them in order to hook you. Remember, as you “do battle,” that there is no battle going on at all. It is a process by which you are becoming less slipshod in your self-identification. It seems as though it is an attempt to influence you in the direction of misidentification, but you are at a point where the thrust truly cannot reach you because you are hidden in the Secret Place of the Most High. You have experienced It.

      The expression - "But" is to express the belief that there is an exception to what was previously stated. This is like saying The Truth is not True always, which, of course, cannot be True.

      Here is where the fight is - to NOT ALLOW suggestions of ego to have any credibility whatsoever!!

      Or, from a positive perspective, to lean on your experience of Being and identify with nothing less than that.

      This is an inside job.

      The Battle is one of self-identification. A diagram of this would be a good method of illustration.

      Quote: There aren't any "buts" about it!

  23. Nov 2015
    1. However, it must become clear that the apparent relationship of a three-dimensional consciousness becoming the Door and then the Christ-Truth—the direct perception of Reality as It is—flowing through that Door as the conscious experience of a three-dimensional, finite man, does not then become the new “norm.” Man, as he conceives himself to be three-dimensionally, does not simply forever remain the “conduit” for Reality to flow through. The fact is that the more consistently he is willing to stand as the Door, the more consistently he will begin to experience himself less and less as “a three-dimensional man standing as the Door.” He will become consciously aware of himself as that conscious experience of Reality which includes no distortions of any kind—the Christ-consciousness, the means by which God, or Conscious Being, experiences Its Infinity.

      I hear this as 'stay at the edge of my mat' so to speak... desire, faith.....

    1. I want you to begin an extremely thorough study of the functions of your Mental Body. Dissect it. Look at it. Don’t be afraid to delve into every nook and cranny you find. It is you, and yet it is the infinite Reality you have been looking for in all your studying and listening for the Truth.

      The importance of understanding our mind and psychology.

    1. PAUL: How does Substance function? RAJ: It functions by being the omnipresent omniaction of Being. The substance of Mind is Consciousness. The substance of Truth is Principle. The substance of Principle is Intelligence/Law. The substance of Soul is Love. The substance of Love is Life. And the substance of Life is Mind.

      "Substance functions by being the omnipresent omniaction of Being. The substance of Mind is Consciousness. The substance of Truth is Principle. The substance of Principle is Intelligence/Law. The substance of Soul is Love. The substance of Love is Life. And the substance of Life is Mind."

    2. PAUL: Very well. My first question is: What is Substance? RAJ: Your first answer is that Substance is infinite, nondimensional, and pure Energy—the Life Force, as it were. It is Intelligence. It is Soul. It is Spirit. It is Principle. It is Love. It is Life. It is Truth. It is Mind. It is, in the final analysis, what is meant by the word God. It is omnipresent. It is omniactive. It is the nondimensional or Universal “stuff” of which all that is made is made. It is that which constitutes You and your entire experience as Conscious Being, whether you are being “out from Mind” or not.

      Substance is; Infinite, Nondimensional, Pure Energy, Life Force, Intelligence, Soul, Spirit, Principle, Love, Life, Truth, Mind, Omnipresent, Omniactive. Nondimensional or Universal “stuff” of which all that is made is made. That which constitutes You and your entire experience as Conscious Being, whether you are being “out from Mind” or not. It is GOD!

  24. Oct 2015
    1. Paul, it is impossible for your world to become integrated if you do not understand what the Substance of that Totality is. This is why we are discussing this point this morning. The only Substance there is throughout the Universe—and throughout all dimensions—is Light. This Light, in Its various aspects, is Life, Truth, Principle, Mind, Soul, and Spirit. It is also Intelligence and Substance. In everything you do, I want you to begin to be conscious of this idea that all there is to you—and all there is to everything—is this Light of Living Love. There are not two things going on. This Light is eternally living Itself as the intelligent expression of Conscious Experience, universally and specifically.

      My world cannot be healed unless I come to understand that the totality of all things is Light, which is Love.

      Here he equates Light to Life, Truth, Principle, Mind, Soul, and Spirit.

      He gives Paul an exercise. To begin to be conscious, in everything he does, that all there is to him - and to everything - is Living Love (God!!!!)

      There is not two things going on, there is not the perceived drama of life and Living Love. And this is where the practice is important because it the insanity of the world seems to be true.

    2. Paul, it is impossible for your world to become integrated if you do not understand what the Substance of that Totality is. This is why we are discussing this point this morning. The only Substance there is throughout the Universe—and throughout all dimensions—is Light. This Light, in Its various aspects, is Life, Truth, Principle, Mind, Soul, and Spirit. It is also Intelligence and Substance.

      Light IS everything.

    1. Our conversation right now is not the result of a thinking process at all. When you stand at the Door as the Door, the Wisdom, the Truth, the Knowledge that flows through and as your conscious experience of Being, is not the result of thought processes, nor of reasoning. Because It continues to flow on past you, It truly does not become a stored body of knowledge from which you may draw in the future. Standing as the Door means that, in this so-called “future,” whatever Knowledge and Understanding is applicable to the unfolding at that time will be there in exactly the same manner that It is here right now.

      Again from previous sharing he comes back to supporting Paul to understand that this type of communication is in 4d, not 3d.... I hear Raj say that when we stand at the Door, in our Conscious Being, this is where Wisdom, Truth and Knowledge flow from and this isn't stored in our thinking mind yet is available to us always if we are Conscious.

  25. May 2015
    1. Peoplelokbacktotheirtimeasdualisticthinkers,andto theirfaiththatiftheyjustputenoughefortintoproblem solvingsolutionswouldalwaysapear,asagoldeneraof certainty.Anintelectualapreciationoftheimportanceof contextuality and ambiguity comes to exist alongside an emotional craving for revealed truth.

  26. Mar 2015
    1. Beloved friends, as we speak of these things, though, let not seriousness enter the mind. For in Truth, all we are really doing is describing for you what you need to do, and can do, in order to release the burden of illusion that seems to cause you to feel a heaviness upon your countenance, a sense of a lack of safety in the world. You could think of it as taking your rheostat and turning it up a bit by enlightening you, taking your burden of guilt and judgment from you.
    2. Therefore, beloved friend, when you judge, you have moved out of alignment with what is true. You have decreed that the innocent are not innocent. And if you would judge another as being without innocence, you have already declared that this is true about you. Therefore, to practice forgiveness actually cultivates the quality of consciousness in which, finally, you come to forgive yourself. And it is, indeed, the forgiven who remember their God.
    3. It is, then, through you that I come to discover all that God is. And as a man, when I walked upon your plane, I began to realize that the greatest gift that I could ever receive would only come to me as I chose to surrender every perception that I might conjure up about you, my brother or sister, that would veil the Truth that is true about you always.
  27. Jan 2015
    1. After 2004, I believed the story that the protesters in Ukraine and elsewhere were mobilized through text messaging and blogs.

      believes the story ... it's a story he believes.

    2. We were supposed to be saving the world by helping to promote democracy, but it seemed clear to me that many people, even in countries like Belarus or Moldova, or in the Caucasus, who could have been working on interesting projects with new media on their own, would eventually be spoiled by us.

      Applies to these activities wherever undertaken, including any country in the West, he just so happens to be interested in former Soviet Block countries

  28. Nov 2013
    1. What then is truth? A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and; anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions- they are metaphors that have become worn out and have been drained of sensuous force, coins which have lost their embossing and are now considered as metal and no longer as coins.

      truth

    2. The venerability, reliability, and utility of truth is something which a person demonstrates for himself from the contrast with the liar, whom no one trusts and everyone excludes.

      The idea that truth exists only in contrast to its opposite, with no fundamental autonomous, self-determining, independent, or sovereign foundation.

    3. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions- they are metaphors that have become worn out and have been drained of sensuous force, coins which have lost their embossing and are now considered as metal and no longer as coins.

      Forgetting the emblematic property of words as concepts, we adhere false "essence" to concepts and call it "truth" for the construction of convention and thus empty rhetoric, metaphors, and illusions. Not that we can actually construct convention that is not void of essence, but we might consider the folly of acting as if "truth" is real.

    4. But the further inference from the nerve stimulus to a cause outside of us is already the result of a false and unjustifiable application of the principle of sufficient reason. If truth alone had been the deciding factor in the genesis of language, and if the standpoint of certainty had been decisive for designations, then how could we still dare to say "the stone is hard," as if "hard" were something otherwise familiar to us, and not merely a totally subjective stimulation!

      Rhetoric cannot be escaped through rhetoric.

    5. It is only by means of forgetfulness that man can ever reach the point of fancying himself to possess a "truth" of the grade just indicated.

      Memory, selection, and choices.

    6. It is in a similarly restricted sense that man now wants nothing but truth: he desires the pleasant, life-preserving consequences of truth. He is indifferent toward pure knowledge which has no consequences; toward those truths which are possibly harmful and destructive he is even hostilely inclined.

      "tell me lies. tell me sweet, sweet lies" The maintenance of convention. Truth and/or consequences.

    7. That is to say, a uniformly valid and binding designation is invented for things, and this legislation of language likewise establishes the first laws of truth. For the contrast between truth and lie arises here for the first time.

      "... as it were, to engage in a groping game on the backs of things."

      Creating the very basis from which a lie, or the act of lying, can become manifest, vis-a-vis, truth telling. The $25,000 question: "What is Rhetoric?"

    8. This peace treaty brings in its wake something which appears to be the first step toward acquiring that puzzling truth drive: to wit, that which shall count as "truth" from now on is established.

      Not actual truth, but a contraction of that which is generally accepted as the place of balance between good and evil, right and wrong, etc., yet is in fact, fluid and contextually based, evolving with human/societal values. convention.

    9. a continuous fluttering around the solitary flame of vanity-is so much the rule and the law among men that there is almost nothing which is less comprehensible than how an honest and pure drive for truth could have arisen among them

      Good point. On the other hand, this "drive for truth" could arise from an innate need to see beyond the constructs of the ego.

    10. And he requires shelter, for there are frightful powers which continuously break in upon him, powers which oppose scientific "truth" with completely different kinds of "truths" which bear on their shields the most varied sorts of emblems.

      The idea that "truths" are not Big or Little T truths, they are simply an act of perception.

    11. A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and; anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions

      This is not his view on truth, just his view of "truth." I wonder what his view on empiricism would be. Probably something terrible...

    12. He says, for example, "I am rich," when the proper designation for his condition would be "poor." He misuses fixed conventions by means of arbitrary substitutions or even reversals of names. If he does this in a selfish and moreover harmful manner, society will cease to trust him and will thereby exclude him.

      This seems like a punishment, but we are looking at it with our moral lens.

    13. if he will not be content with empty husks, then he will always exchange truths for illusions

      I think that definitely depends on how one define's truth, and where they believe truth comes from

    14. man now wants nothing but truth: he desires the pleasant, life-preserving consequences of truth. He is indifferent toward pure knowledge which has no consequences; toward those truths which are possibly harmful and destructive he is even hostilely inclined

      This is actually an interesting observation that I can see being true about much of mankind

    15. The liar is a person who uses the valid designations, the wo rds, in order to make something which is unreal appear to be real.

      This shows the power in words. The ability to deceive and the ability to at least describe truth.

    16. We don't understand the laws of nature but only how we can relate to them

    17. In the same way that the sound appears as a sand figure, so the mysterious X of the thing in itself first appears as a nerve stimulus, then as an image, and finally as a sound. Thus the genesis of language does not proceed logically in any case, and all the material within and with which the man of truth, the scientist, and the philosopher later work and build, if not derived from never-never land, is a least not derived from the essence of things.

      I'm not sure exactly what he is trying to say here. Is he saying that while language is not pulled from out of know where, words and language are built upon connections to other words instead of the intrinsic nature of a thing?

    18. It is this way with all of us concerning language; we believe that we know something about the things themselves when we speak of trees, colors, snow, and flowers; and yet we possess nothing but metaphors for things--metaphors which correspond in no way to the original entities.

      Truth = the original entities

    19. The "thing in itself" (which is precisely what the pure truth, apart from any of its consequences, would be) is likewise something quite incomprehensible to the creator of language and something not in the least worth striving for. This creator only designates the relations of things to men, and for expressing these relations he lays hold of the boldest metaphors.

      Language vs. Truth

    20. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions- they are metaphors that have become worn out and have been drained of sensuous force, coins which have lost their embossing and are now considered as metal and no longer as coins.

      Money was originally precious metals, and then signs for precious metals (paper money), and then signs for the signs for precious metals (debit/credit cards), and is now turning into signs for the signs for the signs for precious metals (apps that represent debit/credit cards). Just as money underwent this transition, so did truth. We now take truth to mean something fixed, but we have just forgotten that truth is a sign for a social illusion.

    21. to wit, that which shall count as "truth" from now on is established. That is to say, a uniformly valid and binding designation is invented for things, and this legislation of language likewise establishes the first laws of truth. For the contrast between truth and lie arises here for the first time. The liar is a person who uses the valid designations, the wo rds, in order to make something which is unreal appear to be real.

      Truth vs. lie

    22. This peace treaty brings in its wake something which appears to be the first step toward acquiring that puzzling truth drive: to wit, that which shall count as "truth" from now on is established. That is to say, a uniformly valid and binding designation is invented for things, and this legislation of language likewise establishes the first laws of truth.

      Truth without morality. Truth because of social conventions.

    23. What men avoid by excluding the liar is not so much being defrauded as it is being harmed by means of fraud. Thus, even at this stage, what they hate is basically not deception itself, but rather the unpleasant, hated consequences of certain sorts of deception.

      We think we dislike deception, but we really hate the consequences of that choice. It has not yet gained the moral distinction.

    24. first laws of truth

      definitions

    25. as if "hard" were something otherwise familiar to us, and not merely a totally subjective stimulation!

      Truth is subjective

    26. It is only by means of forgetfulness that man can ever reach the point of fancying himself to possess a "truth" of the grade just indicated. If he will not be satisfied with truth in the form of tautology, that is to say, if he will not be content with empty husks, then he will always exchange truths for illusions. What is a word? It is the copy in sound of a nerve stimulus.

      Truth is an illusion, an imitation of a previously known idea.

    27. And besides, what about these linguistic conventions themselves? Are they perhaps products of knowledge, that is, of the sense of truth? Are designations congruent with things? I

      I wanted to highlight "Is language the adequate expression of all realities?"

      Without language, what exists?

      If deception is only deception because of a negative result, is deception without a negative result still deception?

    28. What men avoid by excluding the liar is not so much being defrauded as it is being harmed by means of fraud. Thus, even at this stage, what they hate is basically not deception itself, but rather the unpleasant, hated consequences of certain sorts of deception.

      Men don't dislike the act of deception, but rather the consequences of deception.

    29. His moral sentiment does not even make an attempt to prevent this, whereas there are supposed to be men who have stopped snoring through sheer will power.

      A man's morals do not prevent him from the illusion and deceptions of the world, is it possible that will power alone will wake his desire for truth.

    30. This drive is not truly vanquished and scarcely subdued by the fact that a regular and rigid new world is constructed as its prison from its own ephemeral products, the concepts

      We limit ourselves by formulation a frame for truth and then filling it, not seeing anything outside it.

    31. "the correct perception"-which would mean "the adequate expression of an object in the subject"-is a contradictory impossibility. For between two absolutely different spheres, as between subject and object, there is no causality, no correctness, and no expression; there is, at most, an aesthetic relation:

      No absolute truth, all subjective and relative. Reality much more complex

    32. unstable foundation, and, as it were, on running water. Of course, in order to be supported by such a foundation, his construction must be like one constructed of spiders' webs: delicate enough to be carried along by the waves, strong enough not to be blown apart by every wind

      Foundation of truth. Society, it is unstable and built on concepts and generalizations meant to only make ourselves feel more secure

    33. What then is truth? A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and; anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions- they are metaphors that have become worn out and have been drained of sensuous force, coins which have lost their embossing and are now considered as metal and no longer as coins.

      Definition--ironic he uses metaphors to define truth as metaphor

    34. Just as it is certain that one leaf is never totally the same as another, so it is certain that the concept "leaf" is formed by arbitrarily discarding these individual differences and by forgetting the distinguishing aspects

      Modifying Platonic ideas of truth. Truth is the farthest from reality because it conflates individuality and real circumstances and specificity

    35. empty husks, then he will always exchange truths for illusion

      Shadows, dreams

    36. It is in a similarly restricted sense that man now wants nothing but truth: he desires the pleasant, life-preserving consequences of truth. He is indifferent toward pure knowledge which has no consequences; toward those truths which are possibly harmful and destructive he is even hostilely inclined.

      We want only what benefits us. Operant condition.

    37. That is to say, a uniformly valid and binding designation is invented for things, and this legislation of language likewise establishes the first laws of truth

      Truth socially constructed, desire to be part of the "herd"

  29. Oct 2013
    1. unarmed against falsehood

      Is the logic of truth not enough to defend against false?

    2. And assuredly it is preferable, even though what is said should be less intelligible, less pleasing, and less persuasive, that truth be spoken, and that what is just, not what is iniquitous, be listened to with pleasure.
    3. who will dare to say that truth in the person of its defenders is to take its stand unarmed against falsehood?

      For one that does not intend to give a treatise on rhetoric, he sure gives a very strong point as to why rhetoric is important.

    4. But as some men employ these coarsely, inelegantly, and frigidly, while others use them with acuteness, elegance, and spirit, the work that I am speaking of ought to be undertaken by one who can argue and speak with wisdom, if not with eloquence, and with profit to his hearers, even though he profit them less than he would if he could speak with eloquence too.

      truth before eloquence

    1. We must not, therefore, start from any and every accepted opinion, but only from those we have defined -- those accepted by our judges or by those whose authority they recognize

      "Truth" as defined by social opinion.

    1. If any statement you make is hard to believe, you must guarantee its truth, and at once offer an explanation, and then furnish it with such particulars as will be expected.
    1. as if you had failed to do right rather than actually done wrong. You may be able to trust other people to judge you equitably.

      Persuading oneself that one isn't actually in the wrong. Rhetoric can be used to change one's own perspective, it seems.

    1. Rhetoric is the counterpart of Dialectic.

      Is rhetoric NEVER concerned with seeking Truth? I believe rhetoric to be a useful tool in helping us explain and understand Truth.

  30. Sep 2013
    1. The true and the approximately true are apprehended by the same faculty; it may also be noted that men have a sufficient natural instinct for what is true, and usually do arrive at the truth. Hence the man who makes a good guess at truth is likely to make a good guess at probabilities.
    2. The true and the approximately true are apprehended by the same faculty; it may also be noted that men have a sufficient natural instinct for what is true, and usually do arrive at the truth.

      Different from Plato. Insists there are half truths and men are drawn towards it naturally

    1. The honest rhetorician has no separate name to distinguish him from the dishonest.

      What profession does have a name to separate the honest from the dishonest?

    1. If all who are engaged in the profession of education were willing to state the facts instead of making greater promises than they can possibly fulfill, they would not be in such bad repute with the lay-public.

      Interesting statement in view of Isocrates' later defense in Antidosis. There, he states that he is in poor repute with the lay-public due to calumny.

    2. And yet those who desire to follow the true precepts of this discipline may, if they will, be helped more speedily towards honesty of character(24) than towards facility in oratory.

      This presupposes an inherent truth.

    3. Now as for the sophists who have lately sprung up and have very recently embraced these pretensions,(20) even though they flourish at the moment, they will all, I am sure, come round to this position

      Ignorance will always be displaced (eventually) by truth).

    4. the teachers who do not scruple to vaunt their powers with utter disregard of the truth have created the impression that those who choose a life of careless indolence are better advised than those who devote themselves to serious study.

      Is this stating that traditional teachers that hesitate to boast their knowledge without regard to the truth (possibly meaning the same thing as plato's "experience") inadvertently seem less educated than those who choose a life of careless indolence (sophists?)?

    1. me and the truth

      This is interesting in that he aligns himself with truth (or Truth); he claims truth is on his side.

    2. I want neither to descend to the level of men whom envy has made blind nor to censure men who, although they do no actual harm to their pupils are less able to benefit them than are other teachers. I shall, however, say a few words about them, first because they also have paid their compliments to me; second, in order that you, being better informed as to their powers, may estimate us justly in relation to each other; and, furthermore, that I may show you clearly that we who are occupied with political discourse and whom they call contentious are more considerate than they; for although they are always saying disparaging things of me, I shall not answer them in kind but shall confine myself to the simple truth.

      Truth... but with an agenda. Although I recognize it is impossible to not have an agenda when defending oneself.

    3. But when my eyes were opened, as I have said, to the fact that a greater number than I supposed had mistaken ideas about me, I began to ponder how I could show to them and to posterity the truth about my character, my life, and the education to which I am devoted, and not suffer myself to be condemned on these issues without a trial nor to remain, as I had just been, at the mercy of my habitual calumniators.
    4. Be assured, therefore, that you shall hear from me the whole truth, and in this spirit give me your attention.

      Building credibility, trying to appeal to truth, honesty, relate to audience

    5. But it occurred to me that if I were to adopt the fiction of a trial and of a suit brought against m

      Can fiction generate a "true image" or truth? What is the relationship between truth and fiction

    1. those who know

      I want to know how Socrates tells the difference between belief and knowledge. Capital letters Truth and Knowledge seem pretty important to him, but in this statement he's assuming that the ignorant and the knowledgeable are easily distinguished.

    2. And which sort of persuasion does rhetoric create in courts of law and other assemblies about the just and unjust, the sort of persuasion which gives belief without knowledge, or that which gives knowledge

      experience versus Truth

    3. SOCRATES: And now let us have from you, Gorgias, the truth about rhetoric: which you would admit (would you not?) to be one of those arts which act always and fulfil all their ends through the medium of words? GORGIAS: True.

      Rhetoric alway uses words.

    4. And I am afraid to point this out to you, lest you should think that I have some animosity against you, and that I speak, not for the sake of discovering the truth, but from jealousy of you. Now if you are one of my sort, I should like to cross-examine you, but if not I will let you alone. And what is my sort? you will ask. I am one of those who are very willing to be refuted if I say anything which is not true, and very willing to refute any one else who says what is not true, and quite as ready to be refuted as to refute; for I hold that this is the greater gain of the two, just as the gain is greater of being cured of a very great evil than of curing another.

      Socrates again showing concern with ascertaining truth (love of truth/knowledge). Interested in a dialectic, not a debate concerned with being right.

    5. And here let me assure you that I have your interest in view as well as my own

      not arguing for the sake of argument, but clearly in pursuit of truth - the psychology of his approach - his method

    6. in short, he can persuade the multitude better than any other man of anything which he pleases, but he should not therefore seek to defraud the physician or any other artist of his reputation merely because he has the power; he ought to use rhetoric fairly, as he would also use his athletic powers.

      Who determines the proper behavior of the rhetor? What if the rhetor believes it is necessary to defraud of the physician? obviously, the physician and others may oppose. There is no constant truth, so there is no constant fairness that the rhetor can exercise. POLITICS. This is ideal, but it is not practical.

  31. Aug 2013