Questions to the authors of the Truth Contest site

by Dimitris Papadakis
initially posted in this blog article


I stumbled on your site, and I think I’m more perplexed than compelled to participate. I couldn’t agree more about the search for the ultimate and absolute truth, being the one and only need of mankind. However, among the numerous questions that come to mind about the nature and purpose of this website, include:

1. Isn’t each respective branch and field of science trying to find the (ultimate) truth, ultimately, anyway? Doesn’t this defeat the very scope of this website? Why not adhere to the latest scientific finding?

2. Who are this “group of college students”? Which College? How did they decide to embark on such a project? What will happen to submitted work? Who will review it, who will publish it, who will criticize it? What’s the word on credibility relating to this whole project?

3. What’s the Agenda behind your website? What’s the purpose? And how will all the information you collect from people be used?

4. This seems to me more like a “unification of all religions” scheme, whereby public opinion is assorted, screened, gauged, analyzed, polled and relayed and fed back to the public, whereupon it will be accepted more. As, such it pertains not to any such ultimate truth, but it is using the process of finding the truth as a means to an end, namely to create a unified religion, unified culture, and unified system of belief, ergo globalization, based on which it is much easier to sway and control public opinion, given that, as you so accurately state “there will be NO cognitive dissonance” whatsoever. Correct me if I am wrong, and if I am, state this clearly on the website. Besides there being vestiges of a “unified religion based on all religions” sort of trajectory on which this website is held, which is bad for a number of reasons that go beyond the search for any truth, as is the case that everyone knowing the (ultimate) truth presupposes absolute lack of division, there also seems to be an element of new age and perhaps scientology in what the writer(s) contend. Once, again, correct me if I am wrong. And I quote: “You can feel better than you would feel if you just won the lottery everyday. Why not? It is just a state of mind, or state of no-mind. It is your life; just take what is coming to you. You can be fulfilled whenever you want. The present is for you.” This seems to be based on utter selfishness, and through selfishness there can be no truth whatsoever. This seems to me to be purporting, and being based on, utilizing the truth to serve your own means, rendering it an extremely dangerous and questionable statement.

5. The site makes statements that are including some truths and some half truths, particularly in “the Present” section, based on which statements, someone is impelled to assume the whole of the website content is true, in context. This is a classic example of fallacy logic, and utterly counterintuitive to the whole process of seeking for the ultimate truth that the website purports its ultimate purpose is. As loosely as I can put this without going into great detail, there seems to be a relay of the hermetic and dialectic system of belief under the guise of a series of select and out-of context quotes of famous people to add credence to the corpus’ thesis, a series which seems to come from as varying sources as possible, be it from within religion, science, philosophy, or intelligentia. Characteristic is that extant throughout the writings are several allusions to the “as above so below” and the such, otherwise known as the theory of the extremes through which one can produce simulacra of reality that materialize through the exponential interaction of two opposite things, i.e. materialization in the eye of the beholder. Nearly all quotes I have read in one way or another allude to this or lead to this. You either know exactly what I’m talking about, or you pretend to know not what I speak of. In Hellenistic Greece of Alexandria, ( a time bent on unifying religions) this is a type of magic that can be utilized either for chthonic or heavenly purposes. It seems to me that the ultimate goal of unveiling any such truth is to indoctrinate towards a particular course, by revealing only half the truth.

6. The central axis of what is being discussed in the website is the triptych: individuality, relativism and living the moment. This trilateral core characterizes the very opposite means of a system of belief that is quintessential to finding the ultimate truth, but it certainly does grant you the same wielding power to managing your own reality as would the opposite triptych core. Yet the main agenda behind the former is globalization, to say the least.

7. Transubstantiation or metensarkosis is present in your text “the Present”. Explain. Where does it stem from?

8. “The living truth = that which is.” This can only remind me of ONE thing: “EI”… Explain.

9. “Definition of ultimate truth: It is knowing the truth of life. It is knowing the fundamental, eternal laws of nature, and the nature of the mind which distorts and hides the truth. It is an accurate and complete understanding of “that which is.” Let me make a quick reference to the story in Plato’s cave, or its modernized version “the Matrix”, where the true Truth is impossible to be known nor be told, but must be experienced. The laws of nature are best be left as they are, to be understood by science. Merging the metaphysical with the physical is not the path for finding the ultimate truth, but it is going to open the floodgates to trouble. What is fact or reality is often incomprehensible, but can be shown to us r experienced.

10. “1. Our true history. 2. You are immortal. 3. Everything will balance. 4. You are a spiritual being. 5. The present is everything.” Prove all of it. be my guest. Such a quintuplet of statements may (or may not) be true, but you will have a very hard time proving any of what you said. What scares me though is a) where did you get this system of belief, and b) where does it lead to?

11. “Only the truth can stop the wars and make the world the paradise it can be.” This is utter horseshit. Knowing the truth does not presuppose that someone will not be tempted to use it to serve his or her own means to an end. If you know 98% of the truth and I now 99%, I can still beat you. Even if we both know 99% of the truth, or even 100% of the truth, maybe you will be better at applying what the truth grants you with to your advantage to beat me. Knowing the truth does not presuppose one is not more selfish than the selfishness that could lead him or her to selflessness and away from vanity after all this is the very definition of pure evil, namely that which stems from selfishness and greed, and there are numerous arguments for this by many a philosopher.

12. Your entire theory/thesis is reminiscent of deification of man, which in itself is reminiscent of satanism, as it has this principle at its very core. Don’t assume for a second i am a christian, a jesus freak or muslim or atheist or whatever label. However, be whatever my religious view may be, whenever I see, hear or read anything loosely resembling anything of the sort or embracing it as its central axis, I become skeptical at best. And in light of the dubious prupose f the website, I become even more apprehensive.

13. “The truth is the key to controlling your mind. The word “man” comes from ancient Sanskrit and means “mind.” Mankind is mindkind.” You are funny, so what? And in Greek “ανθρωπότης”ψομεσ φρομ ἁνθρωπος, which means a ton more than “man” in Sanskrit, as does “vir” in Latin, or whatever it may be in other languages. How does what a word means in English and where it may come from, be it from Sanskrit or whatever, lend it any credence to anything, even if it were true?

14. Is your “book”/”writings” a proposed religion free from doctrine and ritual? What is it? In one statement please.

15. “Computers: Let the machines do the thinking. Our goal is not to think, but to live, and we never have to worry about machines doing it better. Computers are being developed so that we can think less and live more. With the knowledge of the ultimate truth, you are no longer mankind, or mind-kind, because you are no longer going to live as a mind; you are a new being. You are going to live as an immortal spirit.” Tell me why this shouldn’t worry me?

16. “2 = 0: When you really see the opposites as a whole, they disappear, and the mind disappears also.” This is a very simple explanation of reverse hylomorphism in application. It cancels out all simulacra. Sort of like making a photocopy of a photocopy ad infinitum. Ok nice borrowing from nearly all religions… So far i’ve seen a mishmash of religions and philosophies.

17. “If you just get your mind out of your own way and let life happen, you will get what you really want.” Of course, you KNOW that everyone has this inner mandate pricking inside them to “get what they want”, but i ask again where is this whole thing getting at? This is why you are saying some of the truth in a very concealed way, slowly, meticulously and for a purpose. Tell me clearly, what is this purpose?

18. “The solution is the problem”. NO. The solution is the medium. Literally AND figuratively.

19. “First step: When you realize that you are the center of the infinite universe and always will be, you realize how special you are. You are always at the exact center of life. All life that comes to your center is just for you and no one else. You are living in your own unique universe where everything is just for you.” I can’t get into ranting about why this is a truly dangerous way of looking at life and a fallacy, because the universe is NOT infinite. It is really really vast, but not infinite. Perhaps you can call it infinite for all intents and purposes, but for the practical application to your metaphysical/”spiritual” way of viewing life, it probably has no effect whatsoever,

20. “Time machine: If you could get in a time machine and go back in time at the rate of a hundred years per second, you would only be mankind for about two minutes, and in a human body for about twenty minutes. For the next thirteen point eight (13.8) hours, you would be in the body of apes and monkeys.” Why do you presuppose metensarkosis is factual or verity, and even if there were a time machine, why do you suppose that it would de-render you every step of the evolutionary pathway and de-evolutionaize you (within your bod? in a time machine??) and do so in a linear fashion, as though ALL species are linked in a linear way, all the way back to a microbe? shall I laugh or is this some attempt at distraction from the real intent of this website? And why do you assume there is a recycling of spirits?

21. “Live a thousand years: We will have a very long life expectancy and never age, because aging is a disease that we will have cured. The medical evidence and the laws of probability say our lifespan will be about a thousand years. We will use genetic engineering to slow our aging to adulthood, so childhood will last as long as we want it to.” Why is this good? Justify it. Why are you trying to appeal to the desire for vanity? Justify it yet again. “You will be forever young, healthy, strong, beautiful, fearless, wise, witty, different, funny and completely fulfilled forever.” you are making me wonder… screams newage.

22. “Mankind will never be able to live together in peace and harmony. It never has and never will. It is impossible, because it is not in mankind’s true nature. Mankind’s true nature is the nature of the beast.” It’s the EXACT opposite. Better put, man has the ability to oscillate from the status of beast to the status of divine, through choice of actions. You are twisting quite a few things, and like I said earlier it is reminiscent of some cult religions or, in the worst case, satanism… Presupposing man’s true nature is base, reveals a lot about what you believe and what your ultimate goal is, but it also contradicts many of your claims.

23. Deferring to einstein’s views so often is leveraging the emotional disposition of the average man to acknowledge the validity of your arguments for need of feeling smart too.. nice, but standard trick.

24. “Fear is the mind’s greatest tool to control you, but if you take control of it, fear can be used as your greatest tool to free yourself from the mind. What is now your worst enemy can become your best friend. Make fear your friend.” I knew this was coming… and when I read it, I needed not read any more, I skipped right to the end. I knew exactly where this was going.

25. “The Beatles themselves were like other men, but the music and lyrics channeled through them contained magic and messages from beyond the mind.” You said it, literally..

26. Re: your thing about the beatles, not realizing the power of fashion in a global economy shaping society: “They were not just musicians; they were prophets. We do not need a new band; we still have them. We still have their music; we just have to really hear it.” shall we say this statement is, ehm, mental masturbation? Or are you sugarcoating the truth, just as the beatles did…? It IS religious material, but not the right kind. Either you are severely misguided my friend, or you are trying to purposefully misguide.

27. It strikes me that you may either be a sophomore or a smatterer, especially pertaining to the power of sound in altering the reality of the mind, or you pretend to be one.. “The divine magic is in all good music to some degree more or less, because it comes from beyond the mind and exists only in the present.”….

28. “My religion is the present and everything in it.” Then, my friend, you have truly lost eternal life, forever. And you know why, it seems to me. Because if you focus on the locus, you neglect its the extremities, past and future, out from which the present is created. Living the moment is the beginning of individuality. Living individualistically is the beginning to infinite fear and relativism, thus loss for the absolute truth,

29. “In ancient Egypt, a beetle was the symbol for eternal life; another coincidence?” No it is not a coincidence. Neither this nor that a great amount of the “beetle’s band” lyrics comes from the book of the dead and necromancy. They (those of the past who practiced this type of magic) believed that they could repose in the text or in the subtext of a song (between the lines as one would say) their soul, and by reading it, they could transubstantiate into your body and mind, gaining eternal life, and effectively, immortality. You would dearly desire this knowledge and power, if it were true, wouldn’t you?

30. “Most of everything is nothing.” Predictable… like I said it is clear where you are going with this. You are methodically twisting the very principles of truth and reversing them. But, you surely must have heard of “ex nihilo nihil fit” and Parmenides, as well as the law of conservation of energy…There is, however, benefit in BENDING the absolute truth, for your “metaphysical” theory, because it serves purpose… Like I said, you either are truly misguided, or you are deliberately trying to misguide others. later you say “You cannot make nothing out of something; it is impossible.”… decide what you want to say. These are utterly conflicting statements.

31. “It is interesting that the word “nowhere” is also “now here.” is this a joke?… and that is proof of….? what? How does playing word games give credence and offer any sort of validity to any argument? in a similar play on words, or ironically, perhaps the truth you are trying to hide, “now here” being equal to “nowhere”, if anything, proves me right above, that if you live in the moment, YOU ARE utterly in deep shit…

32. “2 = 0 says it all: Two being the balancing opposites, one positive one negative; they cancel each other out, equal nothing and everything, represented by the new symbol. That is the unified field equation. It also goes the other way, 0 = 2.” …uhm ok,maybe my mind is really shut on this one, I get the symbolising of what you are saying with mathematical formulas is cool and all… but what is it really trying to illustrate? Because mathematically it is utterly meaningless. Is it trying to make it simpler to understand what you are saying for the average bloke? If so, isn’t it kind of a bullshit way of doing this, because the average bloke (i.e. “me”) will likely laugh out loud in amusement?

33. “Everything is movement; thought creates everything in the physical universe.” τα πάντα ρει. Agreed. But like I said earlier, saying this and other such truths does not mean that he whole of what you say is true in its totality.

34. “A man is but the product of his thoughts. What he thinks, he becomes.” Ghandi is just regurgitating what he has read where he shouldn’t be poking about, but is utterly clueless as to how to go about this and its implementation. So are you.

35. You should apply what I said previously unto the view you have of the present’s importance… If you give the present priority over the past, and the future for that matter, you will end up empty.

36. “I hope I scared you. Be afraid; be very afraid. I hope you are as scared as much as you should be. You need to be scared enough to do something about it.” fear is one of the mediums through which a simulacrum materializes without your control. Maybe, you DO know what I’m talking about, after all.

37. Like I said before, infusing your texts with inspirational words by great men, does not validate your system of belief and your sermon in the least.

38. If you believe at least in one thing you have said, then doubt your very self, doubt what you believe, and doubt your system of belief, and start anew. The problem is the synthesis of all the pieces you have put together leads you to a religion-esque outlook of life, which is going to take you down a very wrong path.

39. “People think free will is a gift; the opposite is true. The gift is that you do not have to be in control.” Wrong. You have choice over choice itself.

40. “You do everything you do for self-preservation and self-gratification directly or indirectly. Every move you make is ultimately for yourself, no matter what you may think or how it appears to others.” Wrong. Flawed presupposition. You always choose to do this, and you have been well socialized to do so. This is why individualism is the wrong way, because it has created such a society of vice and vanity.

41. “The animal path: We all walk a path away from pain, discomfort and fear, and toward pleasure and perceived security.” This contradicts what you said previously, essentially without pain no gain. You are just saying what people want to hear.

42. “That is bad news for those that are on top in this life, and great news for those on the bottom, but the truth is, it is not good for anyone.” But I thought you said truth is good for everyone…. of wait, it is “good” only for those who are reading this book “the not’haves” who are interested in finding about the truth.. of course…

43. speaking about a supposed ‘rich/poor cycle” not only is an appropriation of the karma/hindu-crap, but it also appeals to the average Joe ever so greatly, who reads this stuff because he is so dirt poor and wants to “feel good”… like opening a hole in water. great result, isn’t it?

44. “If you cannot or will not believe them, just believe your own eyes. It is self-evident. CHECK IT FOR YOURSELF.” But you’ve said elsewhere not to trust our senses…

45. “I quote and reference Albert Einstein 72 times, Friedrich Nietzsche 43 times, Henry David Thoreau 33 times, The Beatles and many of the greatest prophets, philosophers, scientists, leaders, seers, poets and artists that have lived on this planet.” This does not give you any credence. Most of what they say is irrelevant to what you want to convey in its totality. I am sure i can quote Albert Einstein 73 times instead of your 72, USING THE SAME QUOTES, and argue that Buddha was right in everything he said. (I’m not saying you may necessarily have anything to do with Buddha, I’m just trying to make a point that you can use any quote or motto or slogan to suit just about any purpose, especially when it is out of context). Plus, you have not even used a single reference of WHERE these people have said any such words, and WHO translated their words, when these were uttered or written in languages other than English…

46. For the next step in your marketing scheme, e-mail me, I’ll let you into a new truth… if you care about the truth at least a tad bit much, and you are not a hypocrite, you will at least email me and address some of the things I say, and maybe find at least as much time as it took me to write this to respond to it… oh come on, please, at least satiate my curiosity, will you? How much money have you made by spreading “the truth”?

47. I love the symbolism: michael five-seven six… made me crack a smile. Loved it… It’s supposed to show how smart you are right?