In a blog dated 12/15/2013 I wrote about "irresponsible doubt." I spoke abut the character on the Red Green show, Hap Shaughnessy played by Gordon Pinsent that you cannot trust. Who plays with the truth in such a way it all sounds true, but your not sure. You have doubts.
The idea has begun to take form in the piece you see above. Most important for me was how playing with the truth makes things dangerous, both in the short run and the long run. Therefore another word like "precariousness" also becomes important in this respect.
I ran across a magazine and a book on Illusions and because of my brain working on this project, drew my attention. I've always loved illusions as I used to do magic for the kids in my camp career. It was such fun. Here are a few examples.
The idea has begun to take form in the piece you see above. Most important for me was how playing with the truth makes things dangerous, both in the short run and the long run. Therefore another word like "precariousness" also becomes important in this respect.
I ran across a magazine and a book on Illusions and because of my brain working on this project, drew my attention. I've always loved illusions as I used to do magic for the kids in my camp career. It was such fun. Here are a few examples.
How far did you read this before realizing you made some assumptions about what is true?
With our experience of the trial for the murderer of our daughter, our desire for "truth" has been very important. Now, that the trial and it's truth has been overturned by the appeal process, the truth issues has again come to the for-front. It seems understanding what is actually a real "truth" is not as simple as it sometimes seems.
This tells me that when we read we see a few letters, even so few as only the first and last letter of a word we "assume" it must be a certain word. That is because we came to it with a history. A history that has confirmed for our minds the truth that these particular letters will be this particular word. The "Optical Illusion Pack" explains it this way. That "Our minds do not read each letter by itself but the word as a whole, so if the first and the last letters are correct, the word can be read."
What does this say about truth and our perceptions of it?
With our experience of the trial for the murderer of our daughter, our desire for "truth" has been very important. Now, that the trial and it's truth has been overturned by the appeal process, the truth issues has again come to the for-front. It seems understanding what is actually a real "truth" is not as simple as it sometimes seems.
This tells me that when we read we see a few letters, even so few as only the first and last letter of a word we "assume" it must be a certain word. That is because we came to it with a history. A history that has confirmed for our minds the truth that these particular letters will be this particular word. The "Optical Illusion Pack" explains it this way. That "Our minds do not read each letter by itself but the word as a whole, so if the first and the last letters are correct, the word can be read."
What does this say about truth and our perceptions of it?
Here is the explanation under this illustration. "In this square the pink lines do not look parallel - but in fact they are. The illusion is created by the black and white blocks which are not in straight lines but, instead zigzag across the square." (Optical Illusion Pack)
What does this say? What does this mean?
I went to the dictionary for a definition of truth and was surprised by how complicated the definition of truth actually seems to be. Here I'm reading about a whole whack of theories I've never heard of before, like; substantive theories, correspondence theories, coherence, constructivist, consensus pragmatic, minimalist, preformative, redundancy, pluralist theories etc. What happened? Do I have to go to university to understand a simple thing like, what is truth?
To add to all that, there is a sentence explaining further we must also consider, "the roles that faith-based and empirically based knowledge play; and whether truth is subjective or objective, relative or absolute." (Wikipedia)
Wow!
What I'm thinking now is that this is a dangerous track to walk on. That when our defense lawyers take advantage of us by using illusionary tricks and tactics of presentation that actually include lies and half truths, they are on a precarious path that is leading us away from true justice in our land. I am worried and feel more restrictions need to be placed into the system to preserve the purity of the search for real truth. Not what can I get away with. Not what illusions can I throw out there that the crown judge and jury won't catch and see as the illusions they really are.
What does this say? What does this mean?
I went to the dictionary for a definition of truth and was surprised by how complicated the definition of truth actually seems to be. Here I'm reading about a whole whack of theories I've never heard of before, like; substantive theories, correspondence theories, coherence, constructivist, consensus pragmatic, minimalist, preformative, redundancy, pluralist theories etc. What happened? Do I have to go to university to understand a simple thing like, what is truth?
To add to all that, there is a sentence explaining further we must also consider, "the roles that faith-based and empirically based knowledge play; and whether truth is subjective or objective, relative or absolute." (Wikipedia)
Wow!
What I'm thinking now is that this is a dangerous track to walk on. That when our defense lawyers take advantage of us by using illusionary tricks and tactics of presentation that actually include lies and half truths, they are on a precarious path that is leading us away from true justice in our land. I am worried and feel more restrictions need to be placed into the system to preserve the purity of the search for real truth. Not what can I get away with. Not what illusions can I throw out there that the crown judge and jury won't catch and see as the illusions they really are.
Therefore I am creating a "precarious" illusion. It will be a cloth, looking
like silk, rising on one end holding up at the top an additional sculpture
illustrating something representing truth that is just truth. That after
all the arguments, still is truth and is unshakable and is simply there. The illusion is in the idea that a cloth of silk cannot just hold something up like that. How can it do that? And if it does that, it should also tip over
considering the size and weight of the item on the top of the raised portion of the silk cloth. The cloth in effect represents the justice system and it's precarious situation in using such tactics to actually risk or actually destroy the chance of the real truth of the matter coming out.
Here is what I know is true right now. It's early Sunday morning, and I really need a coffee! No "illusions" about that.
like silk, rising on one end holding up at the top an additional sculpture
illustrating something representing truth that is just truth. That after
all the arguments, still is truth and is unshakable and is simply there. The illusion is in the idea that a cloth of silk cannot just hold something up like that. How can it do that? And if it does that, it should also tip over
considering the size and weight of the item on the top of the raised portion of the silk cloth. The cloth in effect represents the justice system and it's precarious situation in using such tactics to actually risk or actually destroy the chance of the real truth of the matter coming out.
Here is what I know is true right now. It's early Sunday morning, and I really need a coffee! No "illusions" about that.
RSS Feed