You have to look at the logic / rules, used with the words, in conversation. As for example, I can go left or right, I choose left, I go left. So this shows that the definition of choosing is to make one of alternative possible futures the present.
Then you still have the problem that people may use different rules from each other, or use rules inconsistently. Then you resolve that by throwing out the rules that don’t work, and denote those as error. So you critically evaluate the rules used, and denote any error in it, and as much as possible throw out the errors.
Existence of true definition won’t mean there should be one true language or correct language. Definitions are representations or any word can represent those definitions.
The question is how can I know what actually those disputed words represent? Or what is there actual definition?
If you say we can’t know what is their actual definition, then how I should treat words like “consciousness”, “intelligence”, “justice”, “free will” and many abstract and contested words which has many different definitions and people and experts are arguing for millennium for their actual definition. If we can’t know their actual definition then how we should treat those words?
The question is how can I know which definition of consciousness is true?
“Consciousness is subjective feelings, experience, and awareness.”
“Consciousness is just observation.”
“Consciousness is self awareness.”
And like that many words have multiple definitions and people argue their is true and others are false. For example words like “intelligence”, “justice”, “free will”, and many more. And my question is how can I definitely know which definition of those words is true and all others are false. So, I can reach the conclusion of this definition debate happening for millennium?
Just for the record and to add a bit of clarity so individuals can understand consciousness.
You are either aware or unaware of the vibratory nature of the consciousness experience and you either control the consciousness experience or you don’t.
As many individuals believe that they are a misrepresentation of reality (an illusion) they don’t introduce psychological control.
Bring yourself into the moment and try and stay there.You won’t be able to stay there, you will default back into the out of the moment consciousness state until you take control and bring yourself back into the in the moment consciousness state again.You have to take control of consciousness if you want to control the psychological or you will merely function automatically because the consciousness experience IS vibratory.
The in and out of the moment consciousness states are related to the vibratory balanced attractive and repulsive electromagnetic forces which are balanced out in the cosmos by the formula N/S=N/S.As all matter vibrates due to balanced attractive and repulsive electromagnetic forces you do experience this vibration as a consciousness “toggling” in and out of the moment experience.
But when comes to Intelligence, consciousness, and many other things. The person have different definition then me and during this moments it doesn’t seem it is a communication it is a truth problem. Which definition is right or correct problem.
Consciousness can be experienced…IS experienced….IS experience itself.
Americanized morons have been so dumbed-down that they can no longer define what a ‘woman’ is, nor admit that consciousness is experience…..and will is also experienced.
They need to keep these concepts abstract, so that they can escape what they would imply if they were to be grounded in reality.
Definitions are propositions, and, like all propositions, they must be validated. How do you validate them? Correspondence to reality. That’s what truth is: A conformal relationship between the contents of one’s mind and reality.
Yes, it is true. There are two possibilities: 1. truth is what the facts are, or 2. truth is what we say it is. Truth is the word we have given to a state of affairs where a proposition conforms to the facts of reality. That is what truth is.
Absolute nonsense ….its true that you need to exist to claim that you don’t exist OR even to claim the nonsense you have just posted.You can’t claim anything at all unless you first exist to claim it.
The BS individuals post on forums to try and escape from God is hilarious.They merely delude themselves.
You exist!!!
The question is ….are you claiming to be a misrepresentation of reality (an illusion) OR are you claiming to be a representation of reality (a non illusion) in your EXISTENCE!!!
You could claim ……vvgyjdipfsejmmmmooo?....!,mmoooostyuqmhki …but you still need to exist to claim it in your illusionary or non illusionary state.
Don’t claim that you are an illusion if you not sure.Think of another word to describe yourself in your existence like spirit!!!
There is no escaping from God.
It’s a scientific fact that attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force ABSOLUTES do not cancel out in the cosmos and mainstream science LIES!! by claiming that they do.So as force absolutes exist in the cosmos and have always existed and will always exist until God says otherwise …then we can assume that good and bad moral absolutes exist as well and have always existed and will always exist until God says otherwise.