Knowledges, truths, errors



" … whereas they see, in one man, and one day, and one house, different things to be fit for different members, and a thing formerly lawful, after a certain time not so ; in one corner permitted or commanded, but in another rightly forbidden and punished. Is justice therefore various or mutable ? No, but the times, over which it presides, flow not evenly, because they are times, …,

But why doth “truth generate hatred,” and the man of Thine, preaching the truth, become an enemy to them ? whereas a happy life is loved, which is nothing else but joying in the truth ; unless that truth is in that kind loved, that they who love anything else would gladly have that which they love to be the truth: and because they would not be deceived, would not be convinced that they are so ? Therefore do they hate the truth for that thing's sake which they loved instead of the truth. They love truth when she enlightens, they hate her when she reproves. For since they would not be deceived, and would deceive, they love her when she discovers herself unto them, and hate her when she discovers them. (cf. Confessions - Saint Augustine - book III 7, 13  –  book X 23, 34)".

"Because you should not underestimate yourself, we are an automaton as much as a spirit. And from there comes that the instrument by which the persuasion is made, is not the only demonstration. How much there are few demonstrated things !" (Cf. Pascal - Thoughts - frag. 671).

Pertinent observations expressed by this great minds who had however only an elementary world's understanding compared to the current comprehensions.
Still it is necessary to extract quintessence of our knowledges ! 

------------------

One century ago, H. Bergson (1859-1941) was asserting :
"… into superior centres of the bark or marrow the nervous elements do not work with the aim of the knowledge : they are only sketching suddenly a plurality of possible actions, or are organizing one of it." (cf. Matter and Memory – Paris, Alcan 1910). 

A curious declaration which incites to smiling today.
Evidently, the nervous elements do not work with the aim of the knowledge, but they are not sketching and are not organizing.
They are of biologic structures which enable, among other facts :
- use of value’s references,
- transmission of processes organizations with biologic effects, of processes organizations with behavioral effects, even with deadly effects,
- and possibility to have necessary knowledges which enable the creation acts required for development of the life’s phenomenon.
Nuances ! 

As for A.N. Whitehead, he saw in knowledge, the permanent symbiosis which is existing between its two sources : the imagination and the lived experiences and which is participating of our cosmic foundations.
Actually, our foundations in the universe are more subtle,
- on one hand, because knowledges which emerge from consciousness state, necessitate transcendent activities and of ceaseless transmissions of information (of "sense") until quantum level,
- on the other hand, because of the permanent substitution of the body's elements.
More exactly we are ceaselessly reconstructed of two manners :
- at the macro level of the body by renewal of cells,
- at the quantum level by continuous renewal of elementary particles which compose the biological molecules. 

Thus, how do not see in the man, an exceptional pôle (centre) of transcendent activities necessary to universal dynamics ?

The astronomer Fred Hoyle would not contradict us :
"The current knowledges in cosmology managed to suggest with enough force that the daily situations could not persist without the remote parts of the universe, that all our ideas of space and of geometry would be completely invalidated, if this remote parts were being isolated.
Our daily experience, even in its inmost details, seems to be so strictly integrated on the universe's scale as it is almost impossible to consider that the both domains : the inert matter and the living matter, are existing separately." (Cf. Frontiers of Astronomy), 

comprehensions that we express by interrogation :
is not the man a divine necessity rather than a God's specific project on earth ? !

With regard to the processes organizations and information in general, how not to be surprised when we see that the philosophers have not answered yet, in a credible way, to problem of the "sense" : its recognition, its transmission and its memorization ?
It is true that philosophy is, more than yesterday, "fed" with concepts, we do not hesitate to say it : more and more hazy ; that's why it has lost a part of its credibility and nobility.
We think thus, to "vital impulse" proposed by Bergson, to Sartre's expression : "consciousness which imagine", to the auto-power recognized to imagination by numerous thinkers, to understanding of the intention which would result according to Whitehead of "interaction of primary feelings", ... feelings", ... 

According to us,
"… it seems that there are two things which are required always to judge well : the first that our knowledges must be, as much as possible, in harmony with the reality's behaviors, and the other that the memory which enables remembering and access to these knowledges, remains faithful..." (cf. Paraphrased extract of a letter of Descartes to Elisabeth - Egmond, September 15th, 1645),
nevertheless,
"… it remains that conscious knowledge has two extremities which join itself :
the first extremity is that the men to the birth, have a total ignorance of the primordial causes,
the other is the one where arrive the men after to have found all that their intellect enabled them to discover, and who consider that they know nothing and are in the same ignorance of the primordial causes..." (cf. Blaise Pascal - Thoughts - paraphrased extract - Reason of the effects, frag. 77). 

Indeed, we have an only absolute reference : the present moment which is the same during all existence, and an extremely partial and relative world's understanding.
Why that ?,
the conscious comprehension, why is it poor compared to internal knowledges necessary to development of the body and life’s phenomenon (for example, the understanding which is inherent to cells) ?
Given that the world has a sacrificial character, is not because the creative entity of transcendent order, by definition of divine character, who recognizes herself in the I (ego, subject, spirit) and who, eternally, leads univers, is not omnipotent ?

Theologians, to your writing desks !