whenever a philosophical dillemma, conjectiure, premise or statement is delved on, do you feel that it leads to and is necessary for clearer ideation, or it is counter productive to clarity?
share your thoughts on this with an example if you like.
best,
Dushwari
Re: CLARITY
Peace
What if the clarity is of the philosophical dilemma?
Re: CLARITY
Peace
What if the clarity is of the philosophical dilemma?
Dude, that's deep.
Re: CLARITY
brother psyah,
what if the clarity is what it is, because the philosophical dillemma is not conceptualized yet? & so still, to know how the dilemma must be solved or rationalized, it will help to de-subjectify what clarity might be.
Re: CLARITY
Dude, that's deep.
Peae MatineeSiren
Sorry I was being obtuse ... it ws not intended to be a deep statement ... more of a leader question?
Re: CLARITY
brother psyah, what if the clarity is what it is, because the philosophical dillemma is not conceptualized yet? & so still, to know how the dilemma must be solved or rationalized, it will help to de-subjectify what clarity might be.
And Sister
You have argued well. Though I do not fully understand what it is you are really asking. And by you clarifying the question it brings to light more information. There are some ends which cannot be solved rationally but they can be resolved in the heart. There are some things which require external analogies to understand without seeing evidence within those scenarios.
Clarification sometimes comes with rhetorical language if the more direct language cannot serve the subject well.
The precursors to be in a state of clarity is to draw the curtains open, to clean the window both from the inside and outside and then to train the eyes to see what they need to see. Then to see as an active process.
Looking back at the model I sent through some time ago regarding the sources of knowledge ... well our intelligence can generate for us clarity as far as understanding the rational and objective stimuli but we have no way to access our fitrah from our intellects directly to be able to reconcile that clarity in the heart and attain the state of comprehension.
I would like to reuse the johari window to explain.
(K)Know, (DK) Don't know vertically and (A) Aware and (NA) not aware run horizontally.
KA = Full clarity
KNA = To be unconscious or subconsciously associated with the input
DKA = To be aware of the unknown i.e. belief in God.
DKNA = to be ignorant of in all aspects
There will always be things that we cannot possibly know, but the idea is that we are aware of them. Awareness is therefore more plausible to resolve than Lack of Knowledge, but humanity resorts to finding as much knowledge as possible, which is fine, but we need to be aware of the limitations of that ... full clarity comes from being aware of what we know and aware of what we don't know.
Wassalam
Re: CLARITY
excellent explicative, brother psyah.
i will write in back in detail, later.
best,
Dushwari
Re: CLARITY
Many apologies ...
I should have added at the end ...
After being aware of what we know and don't know then we should work out what we aught to know and what cannot be known. I guess the implications of acquiring clarity falls into this.