With Argumentation A also seems true B also seems true… But truth can be 1… only either A or B and not both?


, , ,

With Argumentation A also seems true B also seems true… But truth can
be 1… only either A or B and not both?

Lets assume there is only 1 road to reach New Delhi… and Subject XYZ
quotes to have taken the only road…

But another person PQR wants to check via argumentation whether XYZ took
another radially straighter route… He assumes that possibility…

Here mind has the capacity to assume any premise irrespective of the
same being true or false. Now in such cases via argumentation how will
one ever reach the fact? Mind will keep assuming strange factually true
like scenarios and there could be no end to such assumptions…

Now, the fact can only be what has happen in the past? And assuming any
other permutation and trying to argument over its possibility will lead
to truth? One’s mind will assume endless possibilities and the fact
cannot be reached.

So in such cases what is being done in real life? Looking back at what I
studied and what various scientists are doing … they seem to be
assuming various permutations and call that theory and keep juggling
with that all the life … ? With Argumentation A also seems true B also
seems true… But truth can be 1 only either A or B and not both?

I guess philosophers should have identified this problem and could have
already arrived at solutions to the same… trying to understand what
are those solutions already identified.

Bug in reasoning with argumentation & formation of new cult

Bug in reasoning with argumentation: If we try to find “A” is true or “B” in all cases we will find logical arguments pointing validity of “A” and “B” as well? Assume “A” and “B” are two opposite scenarios or they are two different possibility and only one can be true!

don’t think with just reasoning and argumentation the truth will ever arrive because with reasoning we can always come up with many imaginary permutations that will point to the validity of either of the arguments. So there has to be some real life basis to what we talk or otherwise only with imaginary premises we can be taken completely astray?

Debates like Hen or Egg, GOD or no GOD will lead to no answers just on the basis of argumentation? We only need to resort to what was previously told and hold them as true until the tread that was previously told is fully refuted. But here in the modern days we are suddenly following many new premises with no proof just because things come in mind?

All it takes is for someone’s mind to put lens and show an incorrect premise over what is systematically told… that person starts to argue over it and gone… that person goes astray and then others follow and we have a new cult…

Regarding Exceptions – Visesha dharma

While scriptures are written to address average problems there are exceptional situations as well mentioned in the scriptures itself. “Only Visesha dharma has to be used under exceptional cases. But it should be dharma and not to suit one’s own convenience.” (Quoted by an expert). This is because at times the exceptional action required could be exactly opposite to the average action. Using standard practices during these times is Adharma. E.g. If while disbursing benefits inside a family it has to be starting from the weak to the strong … so it will start from Parents, Children, Wife and One Self… but in exceptional cases it would differ. While the child is an infant who is breast feeding during scarcity of food wife needs to be fed first as she would then need to feed milk to the infant. During such times if you feed aged parents because it is mentioned in the scriptures will amount to Adharma since the child who is the weakest could die on not feeding the wife.

Philosophy on Order of Disbursement

In what order are benefits attained to be disbursed and why? E.g. From oneself to one’s family and one’s near ones? or from oneself to deserving ones. If it is from oneself to deserving ones what is one’s duty towards one’s family and near ones? Would you like if you do not get a job because other’s family members were around in-spite of you being more deserving? The obvious answer is “No”. Then what is one’s duty towards their family?

Who created GOD while GOD created us?

If is an often occurring question.

Ans: As per the Vedic texts neither GOD was ever born, neither we were ever born.

Going by Logic: Has science till date able to prove during what time were we actually born? Were we born while we came out of our mother’s body? Certainly not… How to determine the exact time of our birth?

While we have not proved ourselves and the same looks indeterminate, how can we prove GOD? Again do we not accept our existence even while it cannot be proved? &just because we are beyond reasoning do we cease to exist? 

Where are we inside our body?
1. Eyes?
2. Head?
3. Somewhere else?

Why not us determine the birth and existence of our own self first, which is much nearer to ourselves, then trying to determine GOD’s birth? If we know methods to find ourselves only then we think about scientifically finding GOD?

What is a perfect solution to a problem? The one which is 100% harmonious?


What is a perfect solution to a problem? Is it a solution that solves our problem, or is it a solution that solves the problem 100% harmoniously? Unless and until our solution is not harmonious at 1st others around tend to get harmed… and eventually the implementer of the solution tends to get directly harmed or is eventually pained on realizing the harm, and suffers an emotional harm.