Where is miko???
Once in Nov 2002 someone (Dare) posted something that effectively asked if demons were real. It was a philosophy forum and it was a very popular female with a sincere question. But obviously, critical thought will tell you demons are not real Therefore, the next 9 responses all assumed she was speaking figuratively and not literally. But each was careful not to step on the toes of the other posters
Of course demons begs the question what IS real (ontology/being). A theme in all my postings is that the only reality a mind can ever know is a function of agreement with other minds. We agree to use the word dog to signify 4-legged creatures that bark and wag their tails. Trees, dogs, houses, people, all categories in our minds only. The category is not the thing. The map is not the territory. This agreement is the only reality available to a mind and it is cast out in words. Agreement on particulars of phenomena to x number of decimal places. But at some point any and every 2 minds will NECESSARILY disagree. My orange-red becomes your red-orange. How we objectify the world is a function of how our minds have been programmed by the sum total of all our past experiences (Something everyone will agree with, with or without reincarnation).
From a recent post on the nature of reality as known by a mind in that vane -(I love these hidden/symbolic puns)–
Now this is a big problem. If reality is based on agreement between minds, then this means that we can vote into law that the Emperor IS wearing clothes. We can vote anything into law we please and call it reality. We can vote bad things to be good and good things to be bad. If we please our listeners we can get away with anything. This means that if reality based on agreement, then how we use words is important. We need to use words that convince our audience of the truth of something such that they vote according to what we would like to be called true. We must play politics with other ego-minds to establish truth. Rhetoric is important. We need to appeal to the biases of our listeners to persuade them to vote on truth as we want it to be. I will vote what you want to be true if you will vote what I want to be true. Pork-barrel politics with the truth.
Demons continued —
So whether demons exist or not depends on how well I can convince ‘you’ as to the truth of their existence. What something is, depends on how well I describe it.
But that means I must appeal to any and every variety of vanity. Here is how you go about bringing reality to demons. I was taught how to do this on another philosophy group my response to the 9 posts that created 9 versions of figurative demons----
Dares Demons —
could demons be that “strange set of circumstances,” that leads to ego
performing in harmful ways
Let us water down our demons. Lets make them logical
and palatable and specifically tailored to be politically
correct on this NG. Let us pigeon hole our demons.
Of course they are symbolic! Of course. Of course I
will be politically correct. Of course I am looking for
a consensus on logical demons. Even Behavioral
Psychologists will agree with my demons. So will
Buddhists. And atheists and agnostics and Materialists
and Physicalists and Existentialists. So that what we
have here is a genuine electable demon. In fact I could
take him down to McDonalds cause all the kids would
love him by the time my demon walks away from
alt.philosophy. It is all about forming coalitions.
Alliances. Political correctness. Heaven forbid I may
say something someone may disagree with. Maybe
my demon is wearing the wrong color shirt? What do
you think? It is not what you know. It is who you
know. Homogenized - yes I like this word. Stick it
up on the web so that by the time your demon walks
away - you won’t even recognize him yourself! He
may not be scary anymore - but hey - he will have
jumped through all the hoops like a trained circus
End Dare’s Demons
It occurs to me, this procedure can be generalized to persuade any group of people to believe anything you wish. Unfortunately, there are literal demons (like the original demon she (Dare) wanted to know about) and there are figurative ones the inventions of the next 9 replies. Since no one talked about the figurative demon, figurative demons must not exist. It is implicitly agreed that only figurative demons exist. This is reality. This is what was agreed upon. Dont rock the boat or you will be tarred and feathered. What is real is what the majority believes and that is objective reality irregardless of how far removed it is from the truth.
In other matters it is not so clear cut as figurative and literal. One or the other. There are varying degrees in which something is known by minds. For instance if you never tasted apples you might not know what it is but you might know it is not the taste of 100 other different things because you were told they were not. But that does not convey appletaste. You are still short 1 experience too many to know that one. In the case of the apple, it is easy to verify what you are applying your taste buds to is an apple. Not so in other things. If you are not sure about having a certain experience, perhaps it is best to just assume you have had this experience so as not to appear to other minds to be inexperienced. It might make sense all around to tell yourself you have had this experience as it solves a lot of problems. Besides, you may experience it soon anyway. This would work fine until someone that has had the experience comes along and starts talking about things you dont understand. Or more likely you say something…telling.
Once my sisters husband Rick gave my brother a 30-30 rifle to try out in the woods. To our surprise he shot a sign. Rick said we better go. My brother realizing maybe he shouldnt have done that said Dont worry Rick. If anybody asks, I will tell them I dont even know anybody that owns a 30-30. Me and Rick looked at each other. We took his beer and dumped it out and got in the truck and left. You TELL on yourself.