Materialistic notion of knowledge relies on the cognition of a specific set of facts. However, the developmental understanding of the world attains a higher resolution, emphasizing skill oriented proficiency.
It encompasses the ability to predict the consequences of consciously and unconsciously (including awarness of those) taken actions.
It entails possessing a comprehensive framework of comprehension that sustains one's existence for approximately 80 years, free from excessive and superfluous burdens of anguish, and engendering benevolent endeavors.
Nevertheless, the world does not bow down before an individual; One attends to a relentless fight, designed to extinguish one's life. Hence, a schema is necessary to comprehend its randomness, chaos, and the malevolence of pure chance. It is a schema that enables one to wrestle with all forms of evil without turning their back on the world. Otherwise, one's suffering is bound to end sooner than mentioned 80 years. The laws of world are a dangerous partner in this dance, uncomperhensably lethal.
Escaping this dance is impossible – only death awaits. The dance itself will be the cause of one's demise, perhaps after enough steps in a harmonious, romantic, and passionate dream to leave it happy with person's roule played in it.
At some point - it becomes self evident that only one's offspring, and subsequently theirs, can continue this dance. We, as mere mortals, are not fluent enought in this constantly evolving dialogue.
Thus, when the time comes, one will exit the dance – softly, blissfully, if one heeds its call. If thee try to avoid it - it will find a way to draw you in, even employing the belly of a whale to do so. Running from it is pointless - destiny, fufillment and death or just death is human fate.
Appropriate knowledge provides guidance regarding the actions one must undertake to persevere. It entails understanding oneself as an intricately woven individual within the ceaseless tapestry of civilization, a constituent of the social fabric. As a species, our existence is intended to be sustained. Thinking anything else is pointless - it will only become worse, and then only conciouss spiecies, only ones able to CHOSE good will die. Thus, procreating and shaping progeny into virtuous, productive contributors to society, fostering their contentment, is objectively good.
The extent of favorable outcomes resulting from one's endeavors depends on the profundity of their comprehension of the world – comprehending its brutality and the justness of existence. Being developed means being acclimated to the intricacies of the world.
However, why should one regard working, sustainable things as true? Because they are based on true underlying propositions. it's like calculating the circumference of a circle - you have to know how, know the equation. Since nothing constantly operates as it should, we must strive to develop truly, 100% true fundamental ideas of existence, down to the highest resolution of detail – an impossible task for us, mere mortals.
That is why we must strive to achieve it, even though we won't succeed. Yet, life is about striving for perfection, striving to live in a well-watered, nourishing, flourishing, and constantly evolving walled garden. It is a place where the water is as clear as the sky above, and the walls keep us safe while allowing us to experience new things in appropriate, perfect amounts. It is a striving to achieve Paradise.
This, however, leads us to the question of deliberate actions leading to the annihilation of the world's pattern, which aids individuals. Such actions are a misapplication of being fluent in operating within the world. They can be explained by errors in development (biological or psychological), trauma, or other patterns woven into the brain, destructive efforts by individuals or cultures contaminated by the dangerously poisonous ideology of nihilism.
On truth
On rights
One's only human right is to seek self-improvement without impeding or unnecessarily hindering the development of others. It can be violated when thee do the same for others. You do no have right to comfort, hapiness, house, car, food, water.
You only have responsibility to strive for it.
On faith
The preservation and transmission of extracted traditions and knowledge from past generations are perhaps among the most significant assets we possess. However, their mere reenactment can render them empty, tyrannical, and devoid of their originaly intended meaning – perhaps even leading to actions precisely opposite to their essence.
This is how I perceive the current institution of the Church. The Bible provides an immensely high - resolution picture of the world - perhaps one of the most pristine. Perhaps.
Yet, exploiting customs for the sake of maintaining a sense of calmness, outsourcing difficult moral decisions to the authority of the Pope, bishops, priests, or other figures, is a lack of backbone. It is a shame upon all those who abandon their responsibility towards the world, the betterment of oneself, and, consequently, the betterment of the world for the mere comfort of blindness.
Explaining all of world in a simplistic terms, simplistic narrative - struggle of class/ battle between genders/ negative energy explaining all evil - is just ideological reductionism.
Truly, it is a disgustingly pathetic state of affairs. Affairs with sin.
Faith in the inherent goodness of the universe is a fundamental presupposition for a complete and contented life. But was this faith born from a virgin birth and subsequent crucifixion?
Yes, in some sense.
In the same sense that the Earth is flat.
Indeed, it truly is!
Except when one not only needs to walk but also make a rocket.
Then, this presupposition falls short.
One must not trifle with it.
If God exists, we can contemplate Him correctly or erroneously. But does right or wrong even exist in such an abstract realm?
As long as we perceive God as the laws of reality, we can describe Him through symbolism.
Why should this proposition valid?
Because we think in this way, mathaphoricaly, narratively, why personificating all that's meaningfull.
So, if God exists, what is He like?
Omnipotent and omnipresent – the laws of reality do not bend, something rightly associated with masculinity traits.
Portraying Him in three parts makes sense:
"Can He create a rock He cannot lift?"
He can create and lift it.
He is the rock.
He cannot lift it, yet remains unwaveringly rooted in reality without becoming resentfull.
Indeed, how clever.
That is why I am not a fan of the idea that "we do not know which God exists, and does He exists, so any might be real".
The notion of God reflecting the raw essence of reality is more probable than that of a spaghetti monster.
The Bible is right – it is as precisely accurate as can be. It is right in the same way that the Earth is flat and women are "sugar, spice, and everything nice." However, its correctness serves as a tool, much like a red light signaling when one has missed the mark while searching for better feature.
Nevertheless, God, the laws of the universe, or fate – they do not care whether one wears a garment made of two fabrics.
Inclusion of something in the Bible does not serve as an argument for its validity.
Perhaps Christ is a historical figure, or perhaps not. However - this does not alter the truthfulness of life's descriptions in the Bible.
No one will be condemned to hell for believing that Christ is God, never existed, or is merely a charlatan.
Furthermore, why should one even care?
It misses the point.
Putting world into narrative may well be necesary - however - fightjng it is nessesary too.
What is mind even good at?
Numerous individuals contend that the mind serves as the paramount sage and erudite custodian of the cosmic laws.
Conversely, there are those who assert that the mind possesses inherent limitations, and excessive intellectual endeavors lead to a perilous path reminiscent of satanic inclinations, akin to a manifestation of pristine reason.
Indeed, the present state of Western thought, often denoted as a "secular religion," ostensibly embodies rationality within its core values, does it not? When confronted with decay, we expeditiously excise it from our midst.
In response to this discourse, I submit that the mind's capabilities are curtailed by its conditioning, primarily shaped by logical reasoning. Nevertheless, the discerning employment of intellect is inherently constrained by the purity residing within one's heart.
And then mind can be, indeed, supreme.