What are your thoughts about "truth?"

[Navidad]

I am writing the first volume in a book series I am creating. The first volume is entitled “Truth as a Journey: A Path We Walk—Not an Object We Own.” I would appreciate any of your thoughts, ideas, and beliefs about the nature of truth. I am not limiting this to religious truth. Of course, if you think there is no truth outside religious truth, please share away. I appreciate your input. Thanks!

[3DOP]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

I am writing the first volume in a book series I am creating. The first volume is entitled “Truth as a Journey: A Path We Walk—Not an Object We Own.” I would appreciate any of your thoughts, ideas, and beliefs about the nature of truth. I am not limiting this to religious truth. Of course, if you think there is no truth outside religious truth, please share away. I appreciate your input. Thanks!

Hey Navidad.

I still believe the scholastic idea that "truth is the conformity of the mind to reality". The difficulty is that this seemingly simple definition is found objectional by many who do not believe in "objective truth". Reality cannot be discovered if all knowledge is subjective. If all knowledge is interior we cannot have accurate knowledge of exterior objects. There are strong arguments for this that I have heard here that have not pushed me off my position, but I think I have begun to understand the rationale for it. It is not absurd or ludicrous to me. I have certainly begun to accept the importance of interior experience in all of our lives.

I am rooted because of my belief that the heavens declare God's glory. One Church Father, I think it was St. Hilary remarked that all of creation is declarative. In light of this belief, it is God who gave us our senses to observe God's creation, which is certainly exterior to us. For what purpose would God place rational creatures where there is a declarative creation, when we do not have the ability to accurately (if not comprehensively) discern objects outside of us? We can know enough about Creation to bring praise to the Creator. That does not mean we must have the same knowledge as the Creator. Creation, like the Creator is more shrouded and hidden in mystery than can be truthfully known by us through our limited sensory perception. 

Truths of faith are those which could never be known by the exercise of the mind on exterior objects. We only know these because God has revealed them through His word. They are therefore subjective. Faith is a gift to us, and I would be tempted to say that it is something we must own and guard. I would agree that truths of faith are not objects that we own. In some sense though, I would suggest that truths of faith, subjective to us, should be owned as a gift from God. I hope that is compatible with your ideas on all truth not belonging to us, except with faith as a gift of truth that can be retained or forefeited. Maybe we could say that we are the owners of this kind of truth (faith), while knowing that we are in no way anything but are blind beggars who should only be grateful for what we have received without lording it over those who haven't...yet.  

The scholastic idea could be amended in our era to say that "Truth is the conformity of the mind to objective reality." I do not say that we can own an object that is outside of ourselves. All truth is God's truth and all creation is God's declaration of His glory. I can own nothing objective. But Shoot. I don't even own myself! Paul says somewhere, "You are not your own."   

[JLHPROF]

D&C 93:24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; 25 And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.

[manol]

The more I learn, the less I “know”. Many's the time I think I've arrived at the highest concept I can conceive of, and then the next thing comes along, and I have to re-draw my map, or at least that part of it. So at this point in my journey, I think in terms of “utility” rather than “absolute truth”.

I think it would be a mistake for me to take any particular idea and carve it in stone; I do not want to become fossilized at that level of thinking no matter how enlightened it seems at the time. Imo this is the problem with a belief system based on a set of carefully thought-out creeds: Those same creeds can hold us back when we are otherwise ready for whatever lies beyond them.

So I could probably list several ideas in which I find “utility” at this time, but I don't feel qualified to claim that they are the highest level of truth on the subject. Nor do I feel qualified to prescribe them as necessarily having similar “utility” for someone else, as I don't really know what anyone else's curriculum is, nor what classes they are taking at this time.

[Navidad]

16 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Hey Navidad.

I still believe the scholastic idea that "truth is the conformity of the mind to reality". The difficulty is that this seemingly simple definition is found objectional by many who do not believe in "objective truth". Reality cannot be discovered if all knowledge is subjective. If all knowledge is interior we cannot have accurate knowledge of exterior objects. There are strong arguments for this that I have heard here that have not pushed me off my position, but I think I have begun to understand the rationale for it. It is not absurd or ludicrous to me. I have certainly begun to accept the importance of interior experience in all of our lives.

I am rooted because of my belief that the heavens declare God's glory. One Church Father, I think it was St. Hilary remarked that all of creation is declarative. In light of this belief, it is God who gave us our senses to observe God's creation, which is certainly exterior to us. For what purpose would God place rational creatures where there is a declarative creation, when we do not have the ability to accurately (if not comprehensively) discern objects outside of us? We can know enough about Creation to bring praise to the Creator. That does not mean we must have the same knowledge as the Creator. Creation, like the Creator is more shrouded and hidden in mystery than can be truthfully known by us through our limited sensory perception. 

Truths of faith are those which could never be known by the exercise of the mind on exterior objects. We only know these because God has revealed them through His word. They are therefore subjective. Faith is a gift to us, and I would be tempted to say that it is something we must own and guard. I would agree that truths of faith are not objects that we own. In some sense though, I would suggest that truths of faith, subjective to us, should be owned as a gift from God. I hope that is compatible with your ideas on all truth not belonging to us, except with faith as a gift of truth that can be retained or forefeited. Maybe we could say that we are the owners of this kind of truth (faith), while knowing that we are in no way anything but are blind beggars who should only be grateful for what we have received without lording it over those who haven't...yet.  

The scholastic idea could be amended in our era to say that "Truth is the conformity of the mind to objective reality." I do not say that we can own an object that is outside of ourselves. All truth is God's truth and all creation is God's declaration of His glory. I can own nothing objective. But Shoot. I don't even own myself! Paul says somewhere, "You are not your own."   

Thanks my friend. Great summary. Truths of Faith is a chapter in my  little book. Take care. 

[MrShorty]

The idea of a journey versus an object really resonates with me. As I've been working through a "faith crisis" or "faith deconstruction/reconstruction," I've encountered many who describe these kinds of processes as "journeys." It makes room for my current state of belief and practice to be just as "true" as the state I was in 20 years ago, and doesn't prescribe what my beliefs and practices will be in 20 years. "Sufficient to the day is the evil (or good or faith) thereof." It makes space for grace for the things I couldn't have known in my youth, and things that I don't know I don't know now, and the epistemic humility to acknowledge that I will probably never know all truth. It encourages me to ground myself in today.

[The Nehor]

20 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

D&C 93:24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; 25 And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.

That is a dangerous definition. It makes much of the Bible untrue.

It also doesn’t really solve any philosophical conundrums. We have only a glimpse of how things are, a distorted view of things as they were, and no view of things as they are to come.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

That is a dangerous definition. It makes much of the Bible untrue.

It also doesn’t really solve any philosophical conundrums. We have only a glimpse of how things are, a distorted view of things as they were, and no view of things as they are to come.

Can you explain how it would make much of the bible untrue?  I'm not sure what you mean by that.  And does the definition have to solve philosophical conundrums or be currently proveable to be valid?  

[MiserereNobis]

I miss mfbukowski. 

[Navidad]

In Old English, the word truth and tree come from the same root word. I really like that. I think being on the journey to truth means someone is grounded, steady, and reliable, yet open to movement. It may have little to do with being "correct." The word truth in English didn't start to mean "correct" until the mid-16th century. Then it took years to come to the meaning it has today. Its earlier use was as a verb or adverb- something we do or are; not something we have. That is the theme of my book. When I truth my wife, I am like a tree with her. I like that metaphor. The Greek New Testament was heavily influenced by Hebrew. I think then, the meaning of truth in the New Testament is very different from how we portray it, using our modern concept of truth. It would be totally foreign to a Hebrew, Greek, or even Arabic culture. Different from Maya, Swahili, Hausa, and early Chinese - pre-Mandarin. 

I have a question. I love some of the comments already on this thread. I am ignorant on the policy for quoting or using comments from the forum. Will someone please enlighten me? A phrase like, ""It  makes space for grace." That is powerful. My inclination is to ask permission of the poster. If I receive permission, then how do I attribute? Or is doing that simply a"no-no"? Or???

[3DOP]

14 hours ago, The Nehor said:

That is a dangerous definition. It makes much of the Bible untrue.

It also doesn’t really solve any philosophical conundrums. We have only a glimpse of how things are, a distorted view of things as they were, and no view of things as they are to come.

Hey The Nehor.

I agree that we have to admit that our view of reality is mostly shrouded. All of reality is beyond our complete comprehension. I think I always sensed as much. But I learned some lessons about how I need to express myself from mfbukowski. You too and a few others.

I would understand the quote from D&C to not be saying that we know everything about anything. Rather that we can know little parts of some things. Those things that are knowable are the most important.

Animal knowledge will always be mostly partial with the rest mysterious.

People animals are made with the strongest innate desire for knowledge of all reality. 

Discovery of any small part of reality can be delightful or a warning or practical. 

Our cats seem to experience knowledge when they sniff a gin and tonic. They have gained through their sense of smell, a real knowledge that they don't want to drink that liquid. I cannot know why. I don't know what their smell smells like. It is almost a complete mystery to me. But I have real practical knowledge that I can leave alcoholic drinks unattended, and the cats will leave it alone. Who would challenge my claim to this knowledge about our cats?  

mfbukowski would frustrate me when I would talk about a nature, whether, it be plant, animal, mineral, or God. He was more right than he was wrong when he said that we don't know any nature. I need not have been frustrated. I think he was thinking glimpses, distortions, and nothings as to the future. St. Paul said of faith knowledge that is far far from complete and perfect. But does that mean we are skeptics about knowing anything?

We can only scratch the surface of created reality by using our senses. Faith knowledge is even less comprehensive without or usual way of learning, through the senses, which I admit can always  be deceiving. But we can learn that a mirage in the hot desert sun is not indicating that something is wrong with the distant highway, but heat waves. So yeah, we have to be on guard against our sometimes faulty instruments. But that doesn't mean we have to be total skeptics about having limited knowledge of things that are outside of us.

Can we know anything about some things? I am almost a skeptic. Almost all reality is hidden from us. But I am on the side that says that we can know few things about some things. This agrees with D&C, as well as older way of putting it. Truth is the conformity of the mind to reality. How rare and precious are the truths that our feeble senses can tell us about created reality. 

God is even more hidden than creation. Just as sense knowledge is rare, so is the knowledge we gain from God through His Word. More than precious, it is invaluable. How much we ought to treasure it, and every little thing that God has made us to know, when almost everything is hidden. 

If we cannot learn it, it is non-essential. Most reality is not necessary for us to know. We need to be discerning in what we try to discover. Ethics are important in our knowledge. We can learn real truths that can be harmful to ourselves and others. Of course, we learn from our first parents the dangers of learning about some things, prohibited knowledge.

Edited May 22 by 3DOP

[Navidad]

7 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Truth is the conformity of the mind to reality

I think this phrase is using the modern definition of truth, is it not? Truth as something correct, the real facts about something. I don't think this definition of truth correlates to 'emet in Hebrew or to aletheia as in the New Testament or veritas (to a lesser degree) in Latin and on and on. In modern times we have distorted the idea of truth as held by virtually every ancient (pre-modern) language and cultures I have reviewed. Therefore when we place our modern word truth on any older construct -the Arabic name of God as truth, for example, we err. Almost all preachers use modern constructs for ancient constructs. "I am the way, the truth, and the life." Do we really think of the meaning of any of these three terms as used in Biblical times? Is the modern word truth, the best word for Hebrew-influenced Greek aletheia? I think not. I think faithfulness, sincere, steady, consistent, revealing that which was hidden, would all be better words than truth.  

Edited May 22 by Navidad

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Navidad said:

I have a question. I love some of the comments already on this thread. I am ignorant on the policy for quoting or using comments from the forum. Will someone please enlighten me? A phrase like, ""It  makes space for grace." That is powerful. My inclination is to ask permission of the poster. If I receive permission, then how do I attribute? Or is doing that simply a"no-no"? Or???

This is from the board guidelines:

Release for use: As a poster on Mormon Dialogue and Discussion you are granting us permission to use any material posted on this site whether it is multimedia or print and that you are the rightful owner of said material.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act: We respect your intellectual property, if you feel that this site is violating your copyrights please contact us (Board Administration) by using this LINK. We do not host physically host any images here with the exception of avatars. Make sure your image is hosted here and not linked to another venue before making a request. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 512©, to be effective, the Notification must include the following:
(i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
(ii) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.
(iii) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be
removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit us to locate the material.
(iv) Information reasonably sufficient to permit us to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an email address.
(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.

 

My suggestion is to contact nemesis through the report option; just report yourself in other words.***

You could ask nemesis for permission to use any material on the website and how they want it attributed. And then I would also contact the specific individual through the personal messaging option—or just on this thread if necessary as some posters don’t use the PM option—and ask their permission and how they want it attributed.

As for me anywhere on the board, feel free to use anything I say without attribution as your own thought…because that is what it would be at that point.  If you feel uncomfortable with that, just say something like ‘a friend said this’.  It highly, highly unlikely I will ever publish anything personally beyond this board, so I feel no need to claim ‘original thinker’ on anything.  Besides that probably wouldn’t be true anyway as likely my ideas come from others, just shaken up a bit   

***This is not me telling everyone to use report if curious about something or to complain about some trivial thing. I would be careful on using it.  Anyone using it for frivolous purposes or to harass Nemesis is asking to be banned imo.

 

Edited May 22 by Calm

[Kevin Christensen]

On 5/20/2026 at 7:45 PM, Navidad said:

I am writing the first volume in a book series I am creating. The first volume is entitled “Truth as a Journey: A Path We Walk—Not an Object We Own.” I would appreciate any of your thoughts, ideas, and beliefs about the nature of truth. I am not limiting this to religious truth. Of course, if you think there is no truth outside religious truth, please share away. I appreciate your input. Thanks!

I occasionally post this because I find it so useful.  The Perry Scheme for Cognitive and Ethical Growth.  When I was living in Kansas, Veda Hale sent me this summary she created and used for a Sunstone Presentation analyzing Levi Peterson's novel, Canyons of Grace, in its light.  I used it extensively in my response to Riska's Deconstructing Mormonism in an Interpreter essay.  I made the case that by precept and example, Joseph Smith tries to lead us to Position 9.

Quote

 : kskchris@sunflower.com
From: Veda Hale vhale@infowest.com
Subject: Perry scheme

I was cleaning up my email and wondered if I ever sent this to you. 
 Whatever....here goes.
Veda

PERRY SCHEME OF COGNITIVE AND ETHICAL GROWTH
TABLE OF TRAITS BY POSITION AND TRANSITION
POSITION 1 - Basic Duality.  (Garden of Eden Position: All will be well.) 
The person perceives meaning divided into two realms-Good/Bad, Right/wrong, We/They, Success/Failure, etc. They believe that knowledge and goodness are quantitative, that there are absolute answers for every problem and authorities know them and will teach them to those who will work hard and memorize them.
Agency is "Out there". The person is so embedded here that there is no place from which to observe themselves, yet they have a dim sense of there being a boundary to Otherness somewhere that gives their Eden-like world view boundary.
Transition 1-2 - Dualism modified.  (Snake whispers.) The person starts to be aware of others and of differing opinions, even among authorities. This started the feeling of uncertainty.  But they decide it is part of the authority's job to pose problems.  It takes hard work to deny the legitimacy of diversity and to keep the belief in the simplicity of truth.

(It should be kept in mind that in any of the transition states it is easy for the person to become depressed.  It takes time for the "guts to catch up with leaps of mind."  When a sense of loss is accorded the honor of acknowledgement, movement is more rapid and the risk of getting stuck in apathy, alienation, or depression is reduced.  When one steps into new perceptions he is unlikely to take another until he comes to terms with the losses attendant on the first.)

POSITION 2 - Multiplicity Prelegitimate.  (Resisting snake)

Now the person moves to accept that there is diversity, but they still think there are TRUE authorities who are right, that the others are confused by complexities or are just frauds.  They think they are with the true authorities and are right while all others are wrong.  They accept that their good authorities present problems so they can learn to reach right answers independently.  

TRANSITION: 2-3 - Dualism modified

Now the person admits that good authorities can admit to not knowing all the answers yet, but they will teach what they know now and teach the rest when they have it.  They accept that disciplines are divided into the definite and the vague, but that in the end even science fails. Though they have given up dividing meaning into just two realms, they still feel knowledge and goodness are quantitative and that agency is "out there".

POSITION 3 - Multiplicity Legitimate but Subordinate. (Snake's logic considered)

The person still feels that the nature of things naturally produces differing opinions, but it's as it should be, because the Authorities will figure it all out and hand on their conclusions eventually.

ALL OF THE POSITIONS ABOVE FEEL ABANDONMENT IN UNSTRUCTURED LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS. WHEN CHANGES IN THINKING START TO HAPPEN, IT CAN BE A DANGEROUS TIME.  (The forbidden fruit has been partaken and one is out of the Garden of Eden.)

There are seven ways a person can go.        

Transition 1.  The person can make the transition by modifying dualism  drastically to where one no longer trusts authority to have any answers, and they think it will be a long, long time before they will; therefore, there is really no way to be judged by them.  Bitterness sets in, as it seems as if rewards don't come by hard work and rightness, but by good expression and arbitrary factors.  With an inability to distinguish between abstract thought and "bull", disillusion settles and blinds the person to where they become dangerously cynical and take advantage of any opportunity to get gain.

Transition 2.  The person could decide that, if there are so many different answers a depending on individual perspective, that it is impossible for any true judgment; therefore anything goes.  All is of equal value.  To have an opinion makes it right.

Transition 3.  Same as above, except it dawns that there are some facts that, if known, can make for a better choice among the many.

Transition 4.  Anger and frustration win out. Instead of becoming cynical and opportunistic, person acts out negatively.

Transition 5.  The person is moving closer to accepting relativity.  He trusts authorities to have valid grounds for evaluations.  To get along, one needs to accept that authorities are using reasonable information in making their answers.  So the person tries to discover what it is authorities think and want.

Transition 6.  Person realizes that on some matters, reasonable people  reasonably disagree, that knowledge is qualitative and is context-dependent.  They begin weighing factors and approaches in ways that force comparison of patterns of thought, they think about thinking and this occupies the foreground.  But they still tend to want to conform so much that they have trouble thinking independently.

Transition 7.  This position between multiplicity and relativity is now closer to relativity.  The person sees that thinking relatively isn't just what the authorities he has been dealing have reasoned out and want him to accept, it is the way the world works, in most cases.

NOW UNCERTAINTIES OR DIVERSITIES MULTIPLY UNTIL THEY TIP THE BALANCE AGAINST CERTAINTY AND HOMOGENEITY, PRECIPITATING A CRISIS THAT FORCES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW VISION OF THE WORLD, BE IT ONE MARKED BY CYNICISM, ANXIETY, OR A NEW SENSE OF FREEDOM.

POSITION 5  Relativism discovered.

The person accepts that all thinking is relative for everyone and are much taken with this new perspective.  It could be a time of profound anxiety as the person struggles to understand how to make right choices.  They decide they can and must do something about this new world view, but they may spend a long time before sensing a need for commitment.  They can take responsibility for a task at hand, but don't yet realize they have a responsibility to choose commitments.

THIS POSITION COULD MAKE FOR A PERSON WHOSE AGENCY FOR MAKING SENSE HAS VANISHED ENTIRELY.  THEY COULD ALSO REACT BY POSTPONING DECISIONS, FALLING INTO APATHY OR GOING INTO A RAGE.  IT COULD GET SO BAD IT COULD APPEAR THE PERSON NEEDS CLINICAL HELP.  THE POTENTIAL FOR CYNICISM COULD BECOME EQUALLY ALARMING EDUCATIONALLY. 

If the person RETREATS, rage takes over and he loses agency to make sense. He survives by avoiding complexity and ambivalence and regresses to Dualism, position 2, (multiplicity prelegitimate).  He becomes moralistic righteous and has "righteous" hatred for otherness.  He complains childlike and demands of authority figures to just tell him what they want.

If the person at this point doesn't retreat, he may go into a state of TEMPORIZING.  His agency for making sense has vanished, but he postpones any movement.  He may reconsign agency to some possible event.  If so, Guilt and shame accompany the uneasiness about a failure of responsibility they feel hopeless to cope with.

Or if not either of the above then the person may try to ESCAPE.  He becomes apathetic.  His agency for making sense has also vanished, but in his feeling of being alienated, he abandons responsibility and uses his understanding of multiplicity and relativism as a way to avoid commitment. He is drifting and has some sense that later he will find himself to be living a hollow life.  This drifting with insecurity about "goodness" of his position can make for such a detachment that precludes any meaningful involvement.  He starts to rely on impulse.  THIS CAN BECOME A SETTLED CONDITION.  "For the students reporting their recovery of care,...their period of alienation appears as a time of transition.  In this time the self is lost through the very effort to hold onto it in the face of inexorable change in the world's appearance.  It is a space of meaninglessness between received belief and creative faith.  In their rebirth they experience in themselves the origin or meanings, which they had previously expected to come to them from outside." (page 92 of the Perry Scheme.)

POSITION 6. Commitment Foreseen.

FROM HERE ON THE PERSON WILL FEEL FRUSTRATION IN TOO-STRUCTURED OF AN ENVIRONMENT. 

Now the person thinks he is alone in an uncertain world, making his own decisions, with no one to say he is right.  He makes choices aware of relativism and accepts that the agency to do so is within the individual. He sees that to move forward he must make commitments coming from within. He foresees the challenge of responsibility and feels he needs to get on with it.  He also senses that the first steps require arbitrary faith or willing suspension of disbelief.  He knows he needs to narrow his focus, center himself and become aware of internal, what could be called, spiritual strength.

He starts to see how he must be embracing and transcending of: certainty/doubt, focus/breadth, idealism/realism, tolerance/contempt, stability/flexibility. He senses need for affirmation and incorporation of existential or logical polarities. He senses need to hold polarities in tension in the interest of Truth.

He begins to maintain meaning, coherence, and value while conscious of their partial, limited, and contradictable nature. He begins to understand symbol as symbols and   acknowledges the time-place relativity of them. He begins to affirm and hold absolutes in symbols while still acknowledging them to be relativistic. He begins to embrace viewpoints in conflict with his own. Now the person has a field-independent learning style, has learned to scan for information, accepts that hierarchical and analytic notes are evidence of sharpening of cognition.  He is willing to take risks, is flexible, perceptive, broad, strategy-minded, and analytical.

The TRANSITION position between Position 6, "Commitment Foreseen", and position 7, "Commitments in Relativism developed" is as follows:

Besides the above, the person feels he is lost if he doesn't decide, that if he can once make one decision, everything else will be OK.

POSITION 7.  Commitments in Relativism developed.

The person makes first commitment while being aware of Relativism, and has a vivid sense of CLAIMING AND POWER. He now more fully feels that agency is within him and foresees responsibility with excitement and anticipates more empowering as he makes more commitments and choices. The TRANSITION between Position 7 and Position 8, sees the person having made his first commitment but feeling that everything else is still in limbo and he is foreseeing problems coming from trying to juggling responsibility. He senses need to be: wholehearted--but tentative, to be able to fight for his own values--yet respect others. Now, besides the other ways of studying, the person begins to read not to conciliate Authority, but to learn on his own initiative.

POSITION 8.  Commitments in Relativism developed continues.

The person makes several more Commitments while realizing he must find balance and establish painful priorities of energy, action and time. He starts to experience periodically serenity and well-being in the midst of complexity.  He has a sense of living with trust in the midst of heightened awareness of risk. He accepts fact that order and disorder are fluctuations in experience. He searches for models of knowledgeability and courage to affirm commitment in full awareness of uncertainty. HE STILL NEEDS TO RECOGNIZE THAT EVEN
 THE MODEL MUST BE TRAN SCENDED, AND HE SENSES HE NEEDS TO DEVELOP IRONY. The TRANSITION between Position 8 and 9 brings trauma.  The person feels everything is contradictory and he just can't make sense out of life's dilemmas.  But he begins to develop sense of irony and sees he must embrace viewpoints in conflict with his own, not in the old multiplistic way of "separate but equal" or "live and let live" but truly embrace them with what might as well be called "love".

POSITION 9.  Commitments in Relativism further developed.

The person now has a developed sense of irony and can more easily embrace  other's viewpoints. He can accept life as just that "life", just the way IT is! Now he holds the commitments he makes in a condition of "PROVISIONAL ULTIMACY", meaning that for him what he chooses to be truth IS his truth, and he acts as if it is ultimate truth, but there is still a "provision" for change. He has no illusions about having "arrived" permanently on top of some heap, he is ready and knows he will have to retrace his journey over and over, but he has hope that he will do it each time more wisely. He is aware that he is developing his IDENTITY through Commitment. He can affirm the inseparable nature of the knower and the known--meaning he knows he as knower contributes to what he calls known. He helps weld a community by sharing realization of aloneness and gains  strength and intimacy through this shared vulnerability. He has discarded obedience in favor of his own agency, and he continues to select, judge, and build.

veda
 

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Tooele, KS

Edited May 25 by Kevin Christensen
Typo