Ming the Mechanic:
Truth Pattern Analysis

The NewsLog of Flemming Funch
 Truth Pattern Analysis2001-09-08 01:13
by Flemming Funch

One subject I'm really interested in doing something with, but which I haven't really gotten around to, is the analysis of information in order to learn the truth. Hm, I guess it is a little hard to express what I mean, but I'm talking about the ability to track down what is true and false by studying clues in the information available. There is lots of information that will indirectly reveal whether something else is true or false. Somebody who's trying to deceive and hide the real truth will reveal that fact in an assorment of ways.

Now, the reason I'm so interested in this is that the majority of the population has no clue about what is true or false, and is easily deceived. Most all media is built around that fact. All legal institutions are based on the principle that whoever argues the best for their version of truth, wins, and doesn't have any technology for actually finding truth. Likewise, science is built on models that large numbers of scientists can agree on and demonstrate the validity of, and will happily ignore huge chunks of reality that don't fit the agreed-upon reality.

I am claiming that the reality we live in is to a large degree a fiction that is constructed by the data we're presented with, and by the ways we've been taught to interpret it. And that version of reality is at best very incomplete, and very often very misleading, and leaving unexamined large chunks of reality that exist outside the public awareness. What makes the manufactured reality so compelling is that, to the untrained eye, it is internally consistent. I.e. it all sort of fits together, and anything that doesn't fit can easily be discarded.

I'm also claiming that there are agencies in the world that are masters in this area, and that are very skilled both in analyzing the patterns of what is really going on for their own use, and in manufacturing patterns for the rest of us to see, which will paint a mutual consensus reality for us. These agencies can hide enormous secrets from the rest of us without much fear of them being discovered, because their secrets make little sense within our consensus reality.

And I'm saying that the antidote is to develop disciplines of investigation that cut through the concensus deceptions and that can reveal thruth in a fairly systematic way.

The components of this would be a mixture of different disciplines, some of which don't quite exist. That ranges from different kinds of data analysis, pattern matching, psychological tools, body language, intuitive skills.

It is not quite true that I haven't gotten around to this at all. I'm trained in some things that go in that direction. For example, I'm a master practitioner in neuro-linguistic programming, and I know a lot of about body language. I can tell loads by how somebody's moving their body, how they're breathing, how their eyes move, their voice pattern, etc. That is in part what inspires me to go further with it. It is often very obvious to me whether somebody who appears on TV is lying or speaking the truth. But I also notice that for most everybody else it is a matter of a lot of abstract, preconceived opinions that really have nothing to do with what they can directly perceive.

I also have some minimal training in an obscure system of data analysis which involves the examination of "out-points" and "plus-points" in any stream of information. By noticing little things that are wrong, or that work better than expected, and by tracking down where they come from, one can usually discover a bigger story that isn't directly revealed. That will often produce results that are somewhat counter-intuitive. That is, a truth might emerge that is counter to what the casual observer would conclude. For example, one might examine a company and get surprising results concerning who is screwing things up and who is making things go right. It will often be different people that either take the credit, or that get blamed, than what is really going on.

Yeah, this is a bit vague, but I just wanted to express that this is one of my interest areas, and something that is in need of being developed and integrated.

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic]



11 Sep 2001 @ 04:04 by jstarrs : Truth Pattern Analysis
When debating in Buddhist philosophy, one always has to back up one's arguement with the sources. In this way, there's more chance of detecting the original source of information, verifying etc. You (Flemming) made a good point on my Chicken gun post about the source which would help verify the story or not. So, where possible, maybe a good thing is to include the source?  

13 Sep 2001 @ 11:17 by sharie : What is true...
Hello Flemming,

Thank you for bringing up this vital question. I grew up on a farm in a small town and life was rather simple. By the time I was 21, I'd dined and danced and sailed with the royal princes and prinesses of Europe, Africa and Arabia. I lived in palaces, castles, and lived a life that most people I known would've thought was impossible. I hadn't been particularly attracted to royalty or wealth, I just wanted to know the truth about everything and as the doors opened, I went in. I've also lived in log cabins, on a mountainside, sleeping in hammocks (with my young twin daughters), along the Pacific coast, in a hi-rise condo, and the list goes on. In all these places I sought the truth about everything ... spirituality, nature, energy, people, money, politics, law, banking, psychology, mental health, anger, lies, everything.

Here is my report: it's all a lie.

I totally agree that we live in a fiction.

We live in an artificially-imposed culture.

The only truth is within our heart. The only truth is the joy and love and peace and multi-faceted brilliance that we are within ourselves and share with one another.

Yes, many others have their own report.

This is my report.

Thank you for the opportunity to reply to your question.

with love,

15 Sep 2001 @ 02:30 by ming : Felt truth
I think there's both an analytical, logical way of approximating truth, and there's a truth one feels inside. And they're probably not really the same thing. The most deep and real truth is probably what one sincerely feels inside. And the other kind of truth is more about the analysis of data, an external activity, and will always be imperfect. Anyway, any kind of attempt to establish truth will always end up with a subjective feeling inside. No matter how scientific one's methodology is, it will always end up with somebody taking a subjective decision, based on how they feel, as to whether the requirements for truth-finding have been met. Scientific methodology includes the principle that several people would arrive in the same place, but that makes it no less dependent on subjective decision.  

15 Sep 2001 @ 02:40 by ming : Sources
The source of data is probably a vital piece of data in itself. Like, a piece of information doesn't exist by itself, separate from everything else. There's no such thing as a "fact" all by itself. It is important who said so, when and why, based on what data or what situation.  

16 Sep 2001 @ 00:45 by b : data analysis
Seperate the parts of a whole to look at differences and simularities. Examining each part to see if it fits with a prior observed pattern of a time,place,form, event. Tuning or polishing a piece then put the parts of the whole together and fit them into a catagory or subject of interest. Store or communicate pertaining results.  

17 Sep 2001 @ 01:39 by protech :
Flemming, one area you may not have explored for this (Truth Patterning) is Applied Kineseology, especially as laid out by David Hawkins of the Institute for Advanced Theoretical Research.

He proposes in his groundbreaking book, Power vs Force (See:
http://www.uni-verse.net/Website/Powerforce.htm ) that an ABSOLUTE 'true' 'false', or 'yes' 'no' answer is available/accessible through muscle testing.

My guess is that that binary 'knowing' may be possible to develop "intuitively" via ascending the logarithmic scale of consciousness that Hawkins identified (See above URL).

Great question!


17 Sep 2001 @ 03:08 by ming : Power vs. Force
Ah yes, I'm actually reading "Power vs. Force" right now. Indeed, it makes a good case for measuring the truth value of things with AK. I will explore it more. I haven't yet tried to experiment with blind AK tests, to see how it actually comes out.  

19 Dec 2014 @ 19:08 by Hiromitsu @ : xOCCbMpRRbLSfYw
Didn't know the forum rules allowed such brlinialt posts.  

Other stories in
2014-11-07 23:12: Welcome to the 5th dimension
2011-11-07 17:22: Notice the incidental
2010-07-14 13:35: Consciousness of Pattern
2010-06-28 00:03: Pump up the synchronicity
2009-10-29 14:03: Convergent or Divergent
2007-08-05 23:45: Perverse incentives
2007-06-22 22:18: Elementary magic
2007-03-21 14:20: Cymatics and group formation
2007-03-15 01:06: Structural holes
2007-02-27 23:50: Leverage

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic] [PermaLink]? 

Link to this article as: http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_article/_a000010-000015.htm
Main Page: ming.tv