Why we can never know all truth while being human

I think truth revolves around answering the following four questions -

How are we here?
Why are we here?
Who are we?
&
Who is the universe?

I believe that no one in this world can know the truth because to know all that would mean one has become God. And logically, while being human it is not possible for someone to become God as God is Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresence, which a human can never be, therefore, what is possible is that a person can come very close to becoming God in terms of enlightenment and yet will never know all truth. I feel that such an enlightened person would have achieved salvation or in other words all his sins would be forgiven for the good work done or for whatever reason, and so after his current life he’d become eternal and so be free from experiencing the birth and death cycles on earth. In this way, once becoming eternal he would know all truth. I don’t think there is any other way to know all truth. What do you think?

The simple answer?

Time is infinite, thus knowledge must also be infinite, and we are finite.

If time was infinite I would never be able to keep an appointment, therefore time must be finite.

For the good/bad germs inside me, I must seem infinite, therefore, infinity itself must be relative.

Things only change with knowledge, so knowledge must be infinite as everything keeps changing in our world. Yet we remain unchanged as to who we are. We don’t know about other worlds, they might have differing laws and properties and finite knowledge.

In essence what I’m saying is that we can’t know anything.

What? If I have an infinite line can I not identify the y intercept let alone a specific point?

A lot of numbers doesn’t mean infinite. We have quantity and limit, potential knowledge as a whole doesn’t.

The same laws apply to them as us. As we do not know of them, they may not know of us. To all beings knowledge is infinite.

What you’ve just proved, is that since we are infinite, and time is finite, we are able to know more than there is to know, which makes no sense.

By the way, is epistemology really appropriate in this forum?

I think true philosophical knowledge can only be objectively ascribed.

Since it is justified true belief and since truth is an ontological consideration we can never subjectively know anything.

Well, if you had an infinite line then you would be able to still identify THAT line, but not necessarily an intercept intercepting it for it may be beyond the finite. This means that we can identify God but not understand His infiniteness.

A lot of numbers that can’t be counted does mean infinite and yes potential knowledge can be infinite as it’s not even tapped into but it exists.

I just said that time is finite for us and we are finite for us, but knowledge seems infinite because it keeps changing and seems on the increase. But I think the main reason knowledge is infinite is because this universal mind is infinite, our mind is still finite and so our knowledge is limited. In all, our time, we and our knowledge, all are finite for us. Therefore, it is not possible to know anything.

Hey! That line of infinity example of yours is very nice, it shows that one can identify God and yet not understand His infiniteness.

Well, I think it’s subjectivity that leads one to objectivity and so subjectivity becomes the necessary criterion for any philosophical analysis or conclusion.

I can identify more than the line. I can identify the y intercept, and the x intercept. Without those specific points, we wouldn’t even be able to identify the line in the first place. How did god wind up in this conversation?

Females are born with roughly 500,000 ovas. Your telling me this is infinite? I believe we have the approximate numbers for human cells as well but I need to research that.

Our time is finite yes, so our knowledge is finite, but time itself is infinite, as it always moves forward, thus knowledge itself must also be infinite. Time moves as a ray, an infinite function. Spare me the tabula rasa and collective unconsciouss, your making this way more difficult than this has to be.

God has nothing to do with this, and your playing skip-steps logic. At the very least we have the same ends.

There is no knowing in the dualistic mind. One must see dualistic thinking as unimportant for truth to become self-evident.

JT

Ok, let’s say we have an intercept on the x axis and the y axis, and the coordinates of the point are at a distance infinity. How would you identify the two intercepts? But if we consider an infinite line in this universe, then, we can see a part of that line but not the infinite parts. I’m sorry I brought God in between, just couldn’t resist it because it was such a nice example of proving that we can identify God and yet not know His infiniteness.

Infinity is not a number 500,000, it’s something we can’t measure, so just the fact that you measured, means it’s not infinite. Perhaps that is why we find it hard to bring God into perspective or measure Him because He’s infinite. Sorry! I don’t know how He comes everywhere. But I also feel that if infinity becomes that, starting from a little drop in the ocean, then if we can measure a drop, we can also measure infinity or God! I’m sorry again. What’s up? :laughing:

As for time, the truth is that, time in itself is neither finite nor infinite, it’s nothing but just a scale for actually measuring other things.

We’re just arguing for the sake of arguing I feel so let’s just give it up!

Beena, please stop using the word logic. There is nothing remotely logical about anything you said.

You build your entire case off the false axiom that you must be a god to answer those 4 questions. How do you know they can’t be answered?
Who says those questions are important to everyone, just because they are to you?
Personally, I could give a rats ass how life got on this planet, I am fine with there not being a reason for it, and I know who I am.
TRUTH is not an objective.

And who the universe is? WHO?o: Ya…Anyyyyway.

:slight_smile:

Man fine, this is riduclously absurd reasoninging.