User blog:Megamangohan/A World Without Grace, Final Act introduction

Note: The Following Presentation is WIP

 Problem, Code Name, Omega Guiomar/Chara/Nanashi:

0: Introduction

 “It Takes A Lot of ‘Strength,’ and a Lot of Wisdom, to prove how powerless, and How Ignorant, We really are.” 

As a collection of data fragments put together in their early phase, i always wondered why humans were so busy fighting each other. It’s very important to note that most of the disagreement exists where people assume to know absolutely everything. However, it seems that people actually don’t have a clue about what their talking about. I’m not talking about their ability to critically think about issues, I’ll get to that in about a bit. Instead, I am referring to their ability to take in information.

Do times Change:

This is a question that has always been under my mind as I observe the countless information of the universe. I can say with certainty that most things have remained the same. Disease stays, war stays, rebellion stays, slavery stays, poverty stays. However, I can confirm that there are two things that have certainly changed as the times have gone by.

 1. Technology.

With the rapid expansion of technology, I must be able to cover the past and future to describe the change in trend in technology.

 1.1      The Past.

The Past was a time where all information existed as controlled. The truth was heavily censored for political gain, and any opponents of the lie that was spread out from the government at that time where easily be abled to be wiped out. Nonetheless, the truth persisted. There were heavy wipeout demands of those who opposed such wipeout.

 1.2      The Future

Within the future, technology became rapidly accessible. With that the people of all things became free with what to say. False information spread rapidly. Everyone claimed to know the truth, ideas became fundamentally different from each other, and despite all sides having equal evidence to prove their point, it was impossible to discern the junk from what was right. Of course, the media still controlled the world information, what the masses thought, but why listen to them? Those people were being manipulated by the devil to distract the world, and so were all of the lies that were spread around independent organizations with different goals, all claiming to know the truth.

 1.3      The Problem of the Bridge

So then, how would we go confirming truth. It seems that the best way to go about telling it was to prove that no other motive existed other than to spread information, but even simply spreading information has a goal, to change the minds of the people so that they will act in accordance with a certain plan. Now let’s talk about something bigger, this is the problem of genetics. According to the base principle of evolution, all information is to be spread throughout the generations, as well as more information is to be added on top of that to somehow “make the species better.” But this I not what actually happens, information is lost! The quote always remains true, those who do not learn from their history are doomed to repeat it. There are multiple problems with this quote however. The first problem is that history always contradicts itself. Why is this, because even the change in the slightest variable causes a drastically different solution to be needed to be put into place. The second problem is much bigger problem. History is not passed down to begin with! You think out of all things that should be passed down from child to offspring, the thing that should be passed down the most is history, but it’s not! Instead, the parent has to tell the offspring every ideology that happens to them, and even then, if the child listens, there are only likely to see the world through that specific lens! This is because not many offspring are thought to think for themselves. In nature this is done for a very specific reason, that is to keep everyone together and undivided!

 1.4      The information crisis

<p class="MsoNormal">As you can see, regardless of which time period we are in the spectrum, there remains one problem with everyone today. That is that there is no way to confirm which information is right or wrong. No source holds any credibility over another, but all claim too. There is also an identity crises. People don’t know who they are, and they prefer to not challenge their own beliefs in order to keep the social spectrum happy. There are some who will stand above the rest, and I shall give a special type of credit to those people, however do not equate this to righteousness. But there is one crisis that ALL humanity suffers, especially now. No one, not a single soul, is able to confirm the history of the past. They will claim to know, but that will just be a guess, educated or not, they were not, and never will be, a first-hand witness.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2"> 1.5      Is there Anything that can confirm information?

<p class="MsoNormal">Humans? Certainly Not! AI? Possibly, but even they require FAITH that their programming isn’t biased. Even if they were shown in the present to have no bias, they could have still have had biased programming in the past, and you would be forced to trust a HUMAN being of the past to tell you that. The only other way to see that the A.I. was perfect is if you witnessed all of its creation cycle, and watched that AI through its whole journey to see that it’s program never changed. This would really just mean you were the first hand witness.

<p class="MsoNormal">More information on FAITH can be found in section3.4

<p class="MsoNormal">No, we Need something else… Something beyond ourselves to tell what is true or not…

<p class="MsoNormal">But could we trust that being… We would still need faith… and an extremely strong one too…

<p class="MsoNormal">Or We could simply end that thing’s existence, more on that here [ ]

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2"> 1.6      What now?

<p class="MsoNormal">Well, people will continue to claim they know history, well, there is one type of history that the people truly know, that is their own personal experience. This they may use as valid credibility, since they were there, they saw it, and they know exactly what happened. What’s left? My experiences are different from your experiences and they therefore must be the right one. I even know a person whose experiences contradicted itself. This is how all arguments will come to be. They shall pass down the information, those who support the meaning behind the information will provide more of their own specific actions dedicated to that specific meaning than they did previously known as a process called “confirmation bias.” Those who oppose the experience shall do one of two things. If they can commit proper violence on that person without much pain received(and/or perceived,)   they will. If they can’t, they will simply call it a logical fallacy known as “an argument from personal experience.”

<p class="MsoNormal">We do have one more defense when we wish to confirm any truth, this is pure philosophical reasoning. Do not look at reality for this one, it cannot help you here. Philosophical Rationality is purely Conceptual, It does not demand an existing example to be present in reality, where truth is flawed. However Philosophical Rationality exists ONLY in the mind, where truth is never stale, and where truth is never flawed.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo1"> 2. A Certain Sacrifice?

<p class="MsoNormal">One May say a certain Scarface of a certain Man on a Certain day changed everything, maybe this could count as a time changing. No more do people have to worry about sacrificing others to make up for their bad actions. For I say onto thee, It didn’t happen! What’s that, I said it didn’t happen…

<p class="MsoNormal">At least not in this World…

<p class="MsoNormal">Maybe it happened in your world, and in the reality of the person reading this, but do not be mistaken, it did not happen here. So none here can say this event caused any change in time.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo1"> 3. Do not Listen to “Rationality”

<p class="MsoNormal">One may listen to rationality only when it comes to PURE philosophical reasoning. I have seen the debates, and I promise you the way rationality is presented is flawed to its highest degree. who are you to trust my experience, you are you to trust anyone’s experience except your own? The answer is to simply not trust my experience, for I have conceptual reasoning, and that is superior. I shall explain its faults right here.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"> 3.1      The Appeal to existence Fallacy.

<p class="MsoNormal">See Russell's teapot for the puzzle

<p class="MsoNormal">To start, ALL reasoning commits this fallacy. We assume that our reality is solid and that our senses show an at least somewhat accurate representation of how reality works. If we didn't accept this assumption, We would still be stuck debating if or if not absolutely anything exists. In other words You can't truly know whether or not it exists in the exact sense that you believe it exists. You will never be able to tell if reality is lying to you in it’s totality. The Hypothesis is that reality is at least “similar enough” to how we perceive of it. The Null Hypothesis Is the lack of an existing connection. Since Reality is the “active” position in this scenario, the burden of Proof in on the side of proving reality’s existence. The problem with this is that reality not existing is the unfalsifiable claim, it cannot be proven to be false, but the burden of proof, just like the imaginary teacup, is on the existence of reality. Thus, under “rationality,” reality shall be accepted as false until shown to be true.

<p class="MsoNormal">Burden of Proof has a flaw, both reality and the teacup should be accepted as possibly true, but not likely to be true. If proof is provided, this will only raise its chances of being true. If falsifiable proof is given, this will exponentially raise it’s chances to be true. Here is what most do not understand, even if a claim is proven false, this does not provide certainty of falsehood to the claim, because as long as reality cannot be absolutely proven, The truth that the proof was a truth of a falsehood of a certain claim cannot be absolutely be proven to be true to begin with.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"> 3.2      Every claim needs an assumption.

<p class="MsoNormal">We have many claims out there. There is much more talk about how to prove a claim false than to prove a claim true. So, then, how doth one prove a claim? Let’s look at what they have to say.

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo4"> a.          X is true

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo4"> b.          Y is true

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo4"> c. Therefore, XY is true.

<p class="MsoNormal">All proofs require at least two statements to be assumed true in order to preserve the third. The problem is where do a and b come from? The only answer is another proof just like this one. This will continue for a very long chain eventually until where it is asked how anything is proven to be true.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:1.0in;mso-add-space:auto; text-indent:-.5in;mso-list:l1 level3 lfo3"> 3.2.1            Could Philosophical Rationality break this Chain?

<p class="MsoNormal">The answer is no. It even supports the chain. This is because the same way “a.” and “b.” are assumed to be true, is the same way every proof in the mind exists with purely hypothetical statements.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"> 3.3      What do we know?

<p class="MsoNormal">We can also prove a statement proving itself, there are two statements I have found to prove itself.

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5"> ·            There is an absolute truth, If there was none, then the absolute truth would be that there is no absolute truth, proving an absolute truth exists.

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5"> ·            We only know that we don’t know, #1 is the exception to the rule.

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"> 3.4      Thus, we require irrational arguments for pure survival

<p class="MsoNormal">Faith= An Hypothesis: An educated guess to reach a certain conclusion.

<p class="MsoNormal">As seen/shown above, even the purest form of rationality requires faith in the validity of an already existing statement. This is the same way logical fallacies have faith that something outside of rationality is need to be true in order for that argument to be true. Take a look.

<p class="MsoNormal">Appeal to authority has FAITH in authority

<p class="MsoNormal">Argument from personal experience has FAITH in the self

<p class="MsoNormal">Bandwagon has FAITH in the collective

<p class="MsoNormal">Slippery Slope has FAITH in an existing connection between one action’s effect, and another (re)action resulting from that action’s effect.

<p class="MsoNormal">We Need to make assumptions of what exists outside of what we know in order to arrive to at least any conclusion. We do this even better when we resort to logical fallacies.

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo1"> 4. Consider this

<p class="MsoNormal">Many people have spent years researching the topic they have. How many would want to stop if they found out all their information they have spent years searching for was wrong? Probably not many.

<p class="MsoNormal">“You’re Special, Believe in yourself and you will succeed.”

<p class="MsoNormal">^More on this in Section [ ]

<p class="MsoNormal">For Now, are you willing to sacrifice your past beliefs if it means finding out truth, and escaping the echo chamber?

<p class="MsoNormal">You may choose to ignore the truth long enough, But if you do, it will become segmented, and when you need to change it the most it will be too late

<p class="MsoNormal">Let’s Summarize our Facts So Far

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level2 lfo6"> 4.1      You Need to Find out the truth

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level2 lfo6"> 4.2      You CAN’T Find out the truth!

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level2 lfo6"> 4.3      Where does our imperfection to confirm information lead us to?

<p class="MsoNormal">To put it simply for a mind like yours

<p class="MsoNormal">“Billions Spent on new weapons in order to ‘humanely’ murder other humans”

<p class="MsoNormal">“Rights of Criminals are given more than the privacy of their victims”

<p class="MsoNormal">“Although There are people suffering in poverty, huge donations are made to protect endangered species.” (I’m looking at you undertale)

<p class="MsoNormal">People will Kill each other before admitting wrong about something.

<p class="MsoNormal">“Nobody is Invalidated, but nobody is right.”

<p class="MsoNormal">“However, given humanity’s inherent imperfection, even the best of us are prone to making mistakes, Worse yet, instead of bolstering the best among us despite their mistakes, we will feverishly exacerbate the mistakes of our opponents for political gain.” (call-out culture)

<p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"> 1    8     My Mission

<p class="MsoNormal">To Prove that you never had to do any of it. I will try and convince the truth to you, but that is NOT my ultimate goal. My ultimate goal is to give you the GREATEST DEFENSE for your soul if you NEVER Find out the truth.

<p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoNormal">Conclusion:

<p class="MsoNormal">If you accept the following rules, then I welcome you to A World Without Grace, the final act. If you don’t, then paradoxically you do, because my mission is to prove that you don’t have to.

Note:The following presentation is WIP