what is correct?

[Angelo Cannata]

there is a correct mix and amount of concrete used on highway pavement to withstand the expected load

Let’s consider this example of yours. Who established the correct mix and amount? Let’s say the builders, engineers, society? Well, everything was determined by those people, what is correct was established by them, according to their purposes, culture, mentality, everything. Their perspective is not the world, it is just their perspective. Is it written in the DNA of the universe that the correct mix of concrete was that one? No, it is just their thought. From other perspectives, the correct amount is different. For example, from the perspective that humans should disappear, because they are ruining the universe, the correct amount is one that makes the highway not working. We don’t even need to go so far. Another person might think that we need to try different mix of concrete to test new possibilities, even if this will mean a dangerous highway. Another one might think that we need to introduce art in that mix. Somebody else might think that highways ruin nature, so, let’s build highways that are not so durable.
Now you will think that these hypotheses are unreal, but this happens just because we still evaluate things from our traditional human perspective.

Like this example, any other can be easily criticized and demolished, simply by considering that anything can be considered from a lot of different and even opposite perspectives.

[bahman]

Whatever you do as far as it is personal. There is a reason for what you do? Isn't it? You need to consider the right of others when it comes to interrelational actions.

[trokanmariel]

ok then, what's the correct Compartmentalization or way of accomplishing that?

The gist, of the idea, that I have in my head, regarding the unfolding of the correct compartmentalisation, is that people's collective unravelling of truth is the inability to describe the collective not being a self-aware part of the unravelling.

If the collective isn't self-aware, that does harmony to the notion of the compartmentalisation's framework, because individual parts become pointless in light of self-awareness being the whole.

In practice, what does this mean?
Presumably, there needs to be a truth-signal, of the non-self-awareness using the whole; but, what on earth could be the truth-signal?

sorry but it doesn't sound like anything one should practice. even if you want to compartmentalize you have to have the correct in formation to do so. but on the same token once all is compartmentalized then you live with your preconceived notions, hence seeing only what you believe which is your compartmentalization of things and not necessarily the truth of what is actually there or happening.

I understand your commentary. Undertaking with the absence of self-awareness is a meaningful opposition to logic. And the preconceived notion aspect makes perfect sense, because of part and belief going hand in hand; my emotional aim, or angle, of the undertaking of singularity, or transcendence, is the magic society unit, being created or recognised through identical trigger points.

So, for example: the APEX reality, which to me is a blue haze/mist reality of cybertronics - what is its identical trigger point?

[mickthinks]

guessing you way through life?

Socrates is believed to have put it like this; The only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing. I don't have a problem accepting that. If you do, I suggest you take it up with Socrates.

[attofishpi]

How do you know what is correct, what is the correct action to take, what to place one’s belief and trust in?

R U HAVING A LARF ?

[RCSaunders]

How do you know what is correct, what is the correct action to take, what to place one’s belief and trust in?

Nothing is just correct or incorrect.

Correct, like good, right, important, necessary, etc. is a value term. It has no meaning whatsoever without specifying some objective, purpose, end or goal relative to which something is correct (good, right, important, or necessary) to achieving or realizing the chosen objective or goal.

The idea that some can just be correct, for not reason whatsoever is called intrinsicism--the absurd view that something can be a value, innate or inherent, "just because it is," or, "just because God said so."

The intrincisc view of values is the problem with almost all discussions of moral, for example. Nothing is just right or good if it is not good for something to someone.

What's the objective? When you have named that, then you can ask, what's the correct way to achieve it.

[RCSaunders]

there is a correct mix and amount of concrete used on highway pavement to withstand the expected load

Let’s consider this example of yours. Who established the correct mix and amount? Let’s say the builders, engineers, society? Well, everything was determined by those people, what is correct was established by them, according to their purposes, culture, mentality, everything. ...

The word, "correct," only identifies a relationship and some objective, like discovering how much one spent on their groceries. If one knows the price of each one of the things they bought, they can add up the prices. There can only be one correct answer. It won't matter what anyone else thinks, or some society believes, or wants, or would like the answer to be, the correct answer is determined by what is so.

In engineering, every aspect of a design must be specified to achieve the objective of the design. If any aspect, the parts specified, the dimensions, or the order of assembly, for example, are not done within the limits of the principles of physics, electronics, chemistry or whatever other science and technology apply, it will not be correct and will not work. What is correct is never determined by consensus, tradition, society's whims, wishes, or beliefs. What is correct is determined by a specified objective and the nature of reality that determines what must be done to achieve that objective.

[Age]

How do you know what is correct, what is the correct action to take, what to place one’s belief and trust in?

'Correct' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

Once this is KNOWN, then the 'action', or MORE 'correctly', the right or correct 'behavior' to take, can then be DECIDED.

There is ONLY one 'thing' to place 'belief' IN. EVERY other 'thing' is completely UNNECESSARY, and just a complete waste of BELIEF, itself.

'Trust' comes with KNOWING. So, only when one KNOWS, FOR SURE, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT, then what to place 'trust', is ALSO KNOWN.

[Angelo Cannata]

The word, "correct," only identifies a relationship and some objective, like discovering how much one spent on their groceries. If one knows the price of each one of the things they bought, they can add up the prices. There can only be one correct answer. It won't matter what anyone else thinks, or some society believes, or wants, or would like the answer to be, the correct answer is determined by what is so.

In engineering, every aspect of a design must be specified to achieve the objective of the design. If any aspect, the parts specified, the dimensions, or the order of assembly, for example, are not done within the limits of the principles of physics, electronics, chemistry or whatever other science and technology apply, it will not be correct and will not work. What is correct is never determined by consensus, tradition, society's whims, wishes, or beliefs. What is correct is determined by a specified objective and the nature of reality that determines what must be done to achieve that objective.

I assume that you used your brain to write your answer, then whatever you wrote depends on your brain, it is not just the nature of reality. The day you will be able to tell me something without involving your brain and me being able to understand it without involving mine, then I will admit that it is just the nature of reality, otherwise it is something that is radically conditioned by your or/and my interpretation.

[RCSaunders]

The word, "correct," only identifies a relationship and some objective, like discovering how much one spent on their groceries. If one knows the price of each one of the things they bought, they can add up the prices. There can only be one correct answer. It won't matter what anyone else thinks, or some society believes, or wants, or would like the answer to be, the correct answer is determined by what is so.

In engineering, every aspect of a design must be specified to achieve the objective of the design. If any aspect, the parts specified, the dimensions, or the order of assembly, for example, are not done within the limits of the principles of physics, electronics, chemistry or whatever other science and technology apply, it will not be correct and will not work. What is correct is never determined by consensus, tradition, society's whims, wishes, or beliefs. What is correct is determined by a specified objective and the nature of reality that determines what must be done to achieve that objective.

I assume that you used your brain to write your answer, ...

No! Actually I used my fingers to type my answer.

... then whatever you wrote depends on your brain,

No! I used by mind, my ability to learn and hold knowledge, think, and make conscious choice to determine what I would type. My brain has no knowledge, does not think, and is not conscious, it's just the instrument of my conscious mind.

The day you will be able to tell me something without involving your brain and me being able to understand it without involving mine, then I will admit that it is just the nature of reality, otherwise it is something that is radically conditioned by your or/and my interpretation.

The conscious mind uses the brain and the entire physical organism to do all that it can consciously choose to do (the autonomic nervous system, endocrine systemse, reflexes are strictly biological actions, not conscious behavior). Of course one cannot see without physical eyes, or hear without physical ears, or type their thoughts without a physical brain to control the muscles of the physical arms and finger, but you would not imply because you cannot see without eyes, that it is the eyes that do the seeing or that because you cannot type without physical muscles, it is the physical muscles that determined what you type would you?

Not that what you, "admit," or don't admit matters. If you are certain you are unable to think for yourself and what you think and believe is determined by something other than your own conscious choice, well then you do, and any further discussion is a waste of time, because you can't think for yourself and just repeat whatever it is you think and believe, because, (how did you put it?), it is something that is radically conditioned.

There you go.

[DPMartin]

there is a correct mix and amount of concrete used on highway pavement to withstand the expected load

Let’s consider this example of yours. Who established the correct mix and amount? Let’s say the builders, engineers, society? Well, everything was determined by those people, what is correct was established by them, according to their purposes, culture, mentality, everything. Their perspective is not the world, it is just their perspective. Is it written in the DNA of the universe that the correct mix of concrete was that one? No, it is just their thought. From other perspectives, the correct amount is different. For example, from the perspective that humans should disappear, because they are ruining the universe, the correct amount is one that makes the highway not working. We don’t even need to go so far. Another person might think that we need to try different mix of concrete to test new possibilities, even if this will mean a dangerous highway. Another one might think that we need to introduce art in that mix. Somebody else might think that highways ruin nature, so, let’s build highways that are not so durable.
Now you will think that these hypotheses are unreal, but this happens just because we still evaluate things from our traditional human perspective.

Like this example, any other can be easily criticized and demolished, simply by considering that anything can be considered from a lot of different and even opposite perspectives.

na, points of view means nothing. its what is correct for. there's what is correct, and anything else is incorrect. trial and error is just the search for what is correct (in this case what works), because human beings don't inherently have the correct thought or information. the correct concrete mix is what is correct for the purposes and circumstances at hand proved by trial and error, simple as that.

[DPMartin]

guessing you way through life?

Socrates is believed to have put it like this; The only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing. I don't have a problem accepting that. If you do, I suggest you take it up with Socrates.

though its true those who think themselves wise prove to be not wise by the thought thereof. yet knowledge is knowledge and understanding is understanding and only fools disregard knowledge and understanding with distain. the wise always value knowledge and understanding they don't know or have.

isn't that so?

[DPMartin]

How do you know what is correct, what is the correct action to take, what to place one’s belief and trust in?

R U HAVING A LARF ?

i had to look that up, funny that you're so familiar with such terms, isn't it?

[DPMartin]

How do you know what is correct, what is the correct action to take, what to place one’s belief and trust in?

'Correct' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

Once this is KNOWN, then the 'action', or MORE 'correctly', the right or correct 'behavior' to take, can then be DECIDED.

There is ONLY one 'thing' to place 'belief' IN. EVERY other 'thing' is completely UNNECESSARY, and just a complete waste of BELIEF, itself.

'Trust' comes with KNOWING. So, only when one KNOWS, FOR SURE, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT, then what to place 'trust', is ALSO KNOWN.

this seems to be under the presumption that if one is made aware of the correct information, that will believe it and trust it to be what to act on. correct information can be available and yet no one will use it, or at the least very few will use it.

[Age]

How do you know what is correct, what is the correct action to take, what to place one’s belief and trust in?

'Correct' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

Once this is KNOWN, then the 'action', or MORE 'correctly', the right or correct 'behavior' to take, can then be DECIDED.

There is ONLY one 'thing' to place 'belief' IN. EVERY other 'thing' is completely UNNECESSARY, and just a complete waste of BELIEF, itself.

'Trust' comes with KNOWING. So, only when one KNOWS, FOR SURE, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT, then what to place 'trust', is ALSO KNOWN.

this seems to be under the presumption that if one is made aware of the correct information,

I have ALREADY asked 'you' to CLARIFY what the 'correct' word is in relation to, EXACTLY?

If you do NOT provide this answer and CLARIFICATION, then NO one is being made aware of the so-called "correct information".

that will believe it and trust it to be what to act on.

What I said above was NOT under ANY presumption AT ALL.

correct information can be available and yet no one will use it, or at the least very few will use it.

So, what IS the so-called "correct information" to the ACTUAL CLARIFYING QUESTION, which I posed and asked you?