I see what you are saying. However, I have no idea of what part of the world you are in, and perhaps you are living in a life which has not been affected by the pandemic.

My particular take on Cicero is based on a view that we are currently living in an extraordinary times, and thereby extraordinary circumstances are the prevailing ones. Any application of a thinker from the past is questionable because they lived their lives in a different social and historical context.

We can begin from the basics of the arguments of philosophers such as Cicero, but each of the philosophers was a person forming those views, so all attempts to apply their views to our times is imagination and interpretation, in relation to the general rather than the specific.

He was stating that, 'In times of war, the law falls silent', and it does express a truth for all times for us to consider, and is useful for seeing beyond the limits of law, especially in the face of conflict, and this can be a useful insight to guide our critical thinking.

.

I may be interpreted what you have said in a different way than you intended, but at the moment we are in a time of pandemic, equal to a world war, with sanctions, especially in England.In particular, new legislation is being introduced constantly and it is not even clear, because it keeps changing.

Today I have been struggling with the legalities of restrictions, feeling that we are being torn asunder, with conflicts of duty. I am struggling to go to my mother for Christmas. She has a number of serious health problems and I am the only relative, and I have to travel, on public transport from London to another town in the same tier, for Christmas. I fear how she will cope psychologically if I did not come, and the news suggested that sanctions may be in place for about 4 months, so
it is not simply about Christmas really.

However, I am worried about being arrested with travel restrictions amidst a more serious strain of being of Covid_19 being raised as a reason to introduce new laws ovenight. I probably would not be travelling based on my reading of regulations, and the concerns about viral contagion, but my mother's friend has persuaded me that I should go, even though as far as I see it is a grey area.

I am unsure if by travelling I am breaking the law, or if the law is becoming an increasingly unhelpful guideline. I have spent the whole of the day struggling over the ethical and legal issues, feeling that whatever choice I make it is probably wrong in some senses. I am sure that others are juggling such dilemmas and I cannot be the only one, and, really by beginning from my own personal issues, I wish to go beyond, as I cannot believe that many people are not struggling with dilemmas, probably on a much larger scale.

For the present time at least, the 9/11 terrorist threat is lesser, so I am wondering if the idea of breaking the law in the face of the pandemic is an important take on the story of Cicero. My own view would extend to querying to what extent should we be prepared or justified in committing crimes in the face of the pandemic, including to helping to address the needs of others, including those facing poverty and homelessness? We could even ask to what extent will violence be justified if government legislation fails to meet the concerns and needs of people?

But saying what I have said, I am only asking questions because there is still the issue of the reality of viral contagion. Also, on a wider scale the whole issue of violence to protect oneself and others, or even nations? What would happen if violence between global forces erupted in the process? How far would the philosophy of Cicero stand up, to protect our needs, and what role would law take in determining the fate of humanity?

I have a basic view which is similar to yours in your second rather than first one. However, the reason I spoke of voices in a negative way is because I have seen people devastated by voices. The voices can be commanded them to kill others and many have followed these. The many detained in forensic psychiatric unit is evidence of this. Also, I have seen others extremely distressed.

My own authentic view is that the matter is not black and white at all. A lot of the psychiatrists are so quick to want to medicate at the slightest trace of an unusual idea or belief. The nurses can also be very quick to condemn anything which seems out of the norm, and this included religious and non religious staff. Often, at work I used to say things which they looked a bit puzzled about. I think if I was working in mental health care at the moment and told some of the discussions I am having on this site they would query my sanity.

I am inclined to think that a lot of what is manifesting in mental illness in our times is related to deep levels of suffering and conflict in the mass psyche of humanity. I really don't think that there are any easy solutions.I am not against psychiatric medicine but think that a deeper level of healing wisdom is also needed on many levels.

I think that the subject of the unconscious mind and schizophrenia are relevant to the current discussion. That is because when we consider the nature of knowledge as a basis for truth it is questionable where this knowledge comes from or the variety of sources. Many philosophers have spoken of the role of reason and of empirical evidence. However, there is also the whole means of intuition.

The subject of schizophrenia comes in by the way of consciousness of intuition and knowledge of truth outside of sensory experiences. While the term schizophrenia is a label and can even be challenged, it does refer to a cluster of experiences which are often difficult for the individual. In particular, the person may hear voices and have other hallucinatory experiences which do not make sense to others. Often these are of a negative nature for the person, but in some instances it is possible that the person can be seeing aspects of wisdom which others cannot see.

This is a fairly tricky area because in many cases the nature of thought, because the people experiencing them are likely to take them in a literal way. I am thinking of the symbolic language of the unconscious which can be tapped upon as a means of intuition.I am also thinking of dimensions spoken of in religious texts, such as angels as divine messengers, and demons. This relates to the subject of mythology, as discussed with Athena and the understanding of myth expressed in the writings of Joseph Campbell.

Even though I have worked with people diagnosed with schizophrenia, I have not been aware of any professionals encouraging the individuals to think in that way. That is because it be unsafe and likely to result in colluding with delusions stemming from the voices or other hallucinatory. experiences

However, I have seen individuals recovering from a psychotic episode and seeing the hallucinations retrospectively as personal mythic truths.

I am sure that there could be various definitions of 'an artist' but the one I used is a generic one, in the sense of speaking of a person being a professional. This is in the same way that the distinction is used in writing circles, to distinguish from that of an amateur. Of course, it is not an absolute one because in some cases the amateur may be be as skilled or more skilled, and most professionals will not paint or write masterpieces, but I would be the last to deny anyone's basic creativity. The denial of such creativity is to rob a person of their essential humanity.

I am simply talking about an example of an artist living in daily life, in the way that you are speaking of your own experience. It is about speaking of the particular rather than the general.

I still think that there while there may be some cold determine artists, there are many who are not. I have one good friend who could be called an artist in the full sense, as she has regular exhibitions and makes her living through her art. She is the complete opposite to cold . She is determined, but that is because she has experienced so many obstacles in her path.

I have already said that I am not in any way wishing to undervalue your experience. I would say my choice of the term altered consciousness may have been not the best because it conjures up possible scenarios of intoxication. I chose it, because I was about to write elevated states of consciousness and this could be too simplistic.

I don't want to label your experience at all, but I would say ask the idea of enlightenment might be a more helpful one? I think that the whole question of creativity or enlightenment is central here, and probably this is away from the actual matter of the debate about whether art can be called creative. But another useful idea which could encompass what are categorical as heightened states of creativity or enlightenment is the notion of peak experiences.

I am not in any way wishing to undervalue your experience, but I think that there is a danger in making claims about whose or which experiences are superior. We are all aware of our subjective ones primarily and who can say who has reached the superior state ultimately?

Certain individuals might have been ranked as geniuses or enlightened ones by many, but perhaps even such views are linked to the cultural contexts in which they were esteemed. I am sure that many brilliant minds have been viewed negatively and undervalued. Some highly creative individuals have been labelled as mentally ill as well.

And I think that it is wrong to judge the artist as the supreme egotist. Some might be, but others are extremely humble, so it is not right to make generalisations. I would say that the issues of creativity and the visual arts are applicable to the other arts too.

I just read your link on Zen. It is interesting, but I think it would be mistaken to think that is more 'original,' or superior to all other states of consciousness. After all, if the states of mind des bribed are experienced by a succession of individuals you could end up saying that these will not be the 'original', creative ones, but replication.

Also, in your understanding of creativity in relation to art, I think that you fail to understand the creative process itself. Many of the great artists may have achieved profound altered states of awareness in the rendering of making art. The actual art is not identical to these states of consciousness but, nevertheless, through the communication in their art, may be able to convey aspects of those states to others.

You mention my thread on the idea of cultural collapse. When I saw the thread you created last night I wondered how they related, although even though mine was only a couple of months ago it actually feels like years ago, because even though people often speak of time speading up, I feel that this current one seems to have lasted about 5 years, because it has been extraordinary, with periods of lockdown.

If I think about my own thread, I think I was aware of some aspects of the debate you raise, but probably thinking more in terms of the economic collapse being primary to the collapse of culture.I was wondering if the pandemic is going to affect human civilisation so much that life becomes so much about survival that the arts and other aspects become redundant.

I think I was also thinking of the myth of the fall of Atlantis, but I am aware that this is myth, and not sure how this myth relates to history. But I do think that we are at a critical point in history, and we were so even before the pandemic, in terms of the way we have depleted human resources through overpopulation and consumer culture.

Only about a week ago, before London was put into tier 3, and is now on the highest level, I was walking in the city late at about 10 pm and it was so deserted, almost like a post-apocalyptic world. I grew up believing in the end of the world in a religious sense, but questioned my religious backgrounds but still have questions about the future of humanity, especially in relation to the damage which we have done to the planet.

Having read your post, I think that if we are on the verge of cultural collapse presently it would be different this time to the previous ones, and do think that it may be ',The End of the World As We Know it,' as in the REM song. I have to admit that sometimes I wonder if we are at the end of human civilisation. I hope that I am wrong, and perhaps we are just at the end of some cycle. I am aware that it is unlikely that the pandemic would be the actual end, but I think that there are some major nuclear risks in the world presently, especially given tensions such as between the US and China. However, I try not to think in complete doom and gloom thinking, and hope that there may be rebirth beyond the death of a likely end to consumer society.

As far as I am aware from when I used to believe in 'heaven', and life after death, going to heaven did not mean actually becoming God. So, when I made my comment I was only thinking of God in his heaven, although it could be asked what kind of bodies do human beings have in heaven too?
But, if you want to discuss the topic of life after death etc, whether it exists or not, and your views, I would refer you to my current thread in the main discussions on 'what happens to consciousness when we die?'

I probably summarised Hillman's argument very badly, especially as I don't have a copy of it to quote or refer to. What I probably failed to show was that he is talking about transformation on an inner level, not in terms of outer goals. James Hillman is influenced by Jung and wrote his books on archetypal psychology and is concerned more with the inner journey.

This is in contrast to the whole way in which I have seen recovery based mental health care which is structured around clear objective goals.
That is one of the difficulties I found with cognitive behavioral therapy, which is all about achieving clear goals and misses out the on what is going on with the unconscious.

When I was writing a paper on art therapy with suicidal clients my tutor spoke of enabling people to live without hope. Both the idea of setting clear objective goals or trying to live without hope both seem extremes. Probably the process of trying to sort out our lives is the most we can do. It is good that you found happiness even though you were grieving.

I liked your reference, about a week ago, to your real snakes, because sometimes there seem to be more snakes than ladders, but I do try to hold on to a sense of humour. That was especially important when working in mental health care.

The whole area of near death experiences is fascinating. It is unclear what they represent. I would say that I have some borderline sleep experiences, including a profound one at age 16. I was drifting into sleep and was aware of entering what appeared to be like a cathedral dome. There was a throne, and an orb, representing God. I could see angels on one side, and devils on the other. A voice spoke from the light(God), saying,
'You will decide in your own heart on which side of the altar you stand.'

I blinked my eyes open, but startled by it. I have puzzled over it, and did, wonder if it was a stark choice between heaven and hell. This worried me terribley because at that time I had not even begun to question the basics of my Catholic upbringing. Over time, I came to view the message as meaning that I had to determine my own choices regarding rather than have others tell me what to do to reach heaven and avoid hell.

But the reason I disclose it here, is that I was not dying at the time, but it was like a near-death experience and still makes me curious about the whole nature of near death experiences and what exactly they represent.

I was surprised that so many of the people in the jobs I was working in. There were so many staff requesting Sundays off, to the point where I think patients realised why certain staff were on or off on Sundays, because I remember a patient joking about the 'heathen team who cover the Sunday shifts.

I would say that my experience of the site is mixed. I don't really mind diverse views, but sometimes when people get into being offensive to one another, which I have seen more of on some other threads, I wonder what is going on. Mind you, I have worked in a few places where there was such hostility between people, that the whole atmosphere was completely toxic.

Yes, for me the whole problem of suicide would be the effects for others. I just imagine that people who do really kill themselves get locked into such a mindset that they lose sight of all else.I have also known many who have made suicide attempts and failed, including some who have ended up disabled permanently as a result.

I once read a fantastic book on the subject of suicide by James Hillman, called, Suicide and the Soul. Hillman speaks of the suicidal search as being one a wish to end the life one is living, and have a transformed life. He stresses that the art is for this not have to be in the concrete act of suicide itself, but the suicidal urge in itself as making way for transformation on some level in one's life.

[reply="Sir2u;481215"
I think that the idea being conveyed is that God is not limited to the restrictions of a physical body and its pleasures, but if (God exists at all), is way beyond our limitations of male and female, and bodies.

Yes, I was wondering how a belief could exist without a statement, because how else could it be articulated or said to exist if it is not stated. It would be like a big cloud or void of unknowing if not articulated or formulated.

When you talk about seeing the world as it is as in the material manifestation or in it's more subtle invisible aspects? That is where it gets so complicated, and the limits of our senses is apparent in some ways, but even the most materialistic thinkers would not deny invisible aspects, especially those in daily life, such as electricity and wifi.

The philosophy of Plato and Kant spoke of forms and transcendental aspects, which would could gain some grasp of, but were, nevertheless, beyond our awareness.

So, the whole question of seeing the world, which does involve the whole question of what is reality, is so complex, and one of the most profound philosophy questions. I would say that at most, each one us with the limits of our sensory faculties, and reason, can only say that our perception of the world is an interpretation.

In saying that, I do not wish to undervalue our perception and at least we can communicate with others to go beyond the limits of our iindividual minds. And of course, we are not, at the present time, able to know how the world is seen by other lifeforms.

Really, I was only challenging your sentence. I have just read what you wrote about the unconscious mind in the thread on whether art is creative. I was impressed by what you wrote i. I am starting to wonder if the reason the word schizophrenia crept into your sentence is because you are interested in the way in which the person who has schizophrenia has a more direct experience of the unconscious than people who rely simply upon the rational conscious mind. Do you think that is a more true picture of where you stand?

I was glad to hear someone else on this thread talking about art they make rather than just as a philosophical way.

One aspect of the matter, which I think that has not been touched upon in this this thread in much depth, is the whole difference between art that is based on the objects in the real world and that which is symbolic. I think Brett maybe touches upon it a little in the previous post, but not upon actual experience of art making.But I would go further and say that I have experimented with the process of drawing from the inner world, or what Jung describes as active imagination.

The whole process of making this kind of art seems so different from that of making art based on the material world, although I am talking about the way in which drawing symbolic realms does connect with more realistic drawing, in the sense that if I am drawing a person from my imagination I am using my past memories of copying people, which I have done since throughout my life, as I spent most of my childhood drawing pop singers from magazines. If anything, I would say that when I am drawing imaginary people I sometimes get concerned with getting all the proportions and perspective correctly too. Of course, the art arising from the symbolic does not have to be figurative at all, although I have not done art that is abstract entirely.

I am not sure that the art based on the imagination is more creative entirely, but the whole process does seem very different and does seem to arise from a different dimension to that which is based on depicting the everyday world. I think that Jung did are interesting, and I also feel inspired by the work of Cecil Collins and Alex Grey.

However, I have to admit that I do not do much art currently. I make all kinds of excuses about why I am not doing so.

[reply="Athena;481393"
Actually, I think it was easier for me to talk about religion with patients than people who had fixed views because I was able to listen and make general uncommitted comments. The people who had very set beliefs often came rather unstuck and often ended up self-disclosing but I am not really sure that they upset any patients, but they did upset me a few times by preaching to me.

I do get upset if people preach fundamentalist religious beliefs to me because I am do question life a lot. Discussions with other staff often happened on night shifts, when we were taking our breaks. The reason why they occurred was because they were in the office reading their Bibles and I was reading my philosophical books. I think they were rather astounded by some of the esoteric books which I read.

But, of course some of the staff I worked with were open minded, especially some of the psychiatrists. Perhaps that is not surprising because they had been trained in the sciences. However, I was rather surprised that some of the doctors had never heard of Carl Jung.

As far as the two friends I had who killed themselves, I don't know what happened exactly. The first one was not in London and I had not heard from him for a couple of weeks and it was only after hearing of his death that I found out that he had been admitted to hospital, but discharged the day before he threw himself out of a college window. He was only 19, and I don't know if he had been given a diagnosis.

My second friend was a few years older and had been in hospital a few times and the doctors seemed uncertain whether he should be diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar effective disorder. He frequently stopped taking his medication and even when taking it, he was often thinking God was talking to him and he had visual hallucinations a lot of the time. However, he also smoked cannabis most of the time. In the days before he killed himself, I think that he was smoking some strong skunk weed. I say this because I was not smoking it myself and I felt stoned through smoking it passively. But, I spoke to him on the phone a few hours before he also jumped out of a window, and he did not admit to any thoughts of suicide and had arranged to meet up with me the following day.

Of course, I think it is true that often the people who are thinking of suicide who are the ones who do, which makes risk assessment difficult. And of course, it is not just psychotic people who are at risk. I believe that the suicide rate and the people contacting help-lines has escalated due to the lockdowns and social restrictions. That is one of the reasons why the whole pandemic is so complicated.

Many extremely religious people are devastated by not being able to go to church, although some are open for smaller numbers. I just wish the libraries were open again and the coffee shops. I have books but usually do my reading and writing in libraries and coffee shops.

I think that Christmas is on the verge of being cancelled in London now, because there is a rather strong strain of the virus around. Personally, I am not bothered about Christmas but my mother will be extremely upset if I cannot go to her in Bedford, but I just don't know what the rule is going to be because London is just moving into the highest tier.

Let us just hope that life improves for everyone in 2021, but I think it is going to take a long time for the problems to be over, and life will be different from the way it was before. Let's just hope that it becomes better rather than worse eventually.

I agree that we need to wake up from the everyday unconsciousness of daily life, as Guirdjieff suggested, rather than even begin to worry about what happens when we die.

Thanks for the link on logotherapy. It sounds an interesting form of therapy.

The one area of therapy where there are jobs is cognitive behavioral therapy. It is also a form of therapy which is about enabling people to think more clearly by examining the assumptions behind their beliefs. However, from what I have seen in practice it seemed to go more in the behaviourist direction and less in the cognitive one, which I found a bit disappointing.

I think that we all live out contradictions in life, such as the one you make about eating meat while disliking cruelty to animals Perhaps it is about not questioning oneself enough, and layers of self deception. I would say we have splits in our our consciousness between reason and lack of it.

It probably requires a lot of honesty to admit to ourselves that this is true on a personal level, and easier to point out the contradictions of others.Personally, I am aware of many contradictions in my thinking and in my behaviour, and between the two. It is sometimes painful emotionally to engage in this level of self analysis and perhaps it is one reason why I am often awake in the night. The paradoxes are not the best remedy for sleeping.

When you speak of people being made homeless by their own freely made poor decisions,' I think that you are ignoring the fact that we probably all make poor decisions. We are all juggling with consequences of decision impacting on the future and I think that what some people on this thread are ignoring is that Covid_19 has led to a whole lot of people being potentially homeless, independent of whether they could be viewed as having made poor decisions, so it is becoming less easy to say that homeless people can be blamed for their own predicament.

I have already made my point, and it is ridiculous for us to keep discussing it endlessly.

So, setting the word you used aside, and focusing back on how we all go about our individual searching for truth, do you not think that it is fair to say that we all have splits in reason and lack of it?

The reason why I seem to waver in between an apparent ambiguity over whether I am misinterpreted you or not, is because I don't really follow the logic of your sentence. Whether or not that is your failure or mine, I am still puzzled about the term schizophrenia in the sentence. The reason I am getting a bit heated over the matter is because I have worked with people diagnosed with this mental health problem and see it as a sensitive issue.

You said,
'I imagine it's possible with someone with schizophrenia to apply their reason to their problems, and it would make sense to them, one step leading logically to the next, but it's based on irrationality, so it could no longer be called reason.'

From my understanding, even though you say that a person 'with schizophrenia' can use reason you are suggesting it is still based on irrationality. Actually, I think that all human beings have some contradictions between reason and lack of it, so schizophrenia has no bearing on the matter and did not need to be mentioned at all.

As you seem annoyed by my thinking you used the word schizophrenia out of context, perhaps you could clarify what you were meaning by the use of the word in the middle of a sentence about irrationality.

I am sorry if you think that I misinterpreted you. I just did not understand how the idea of schizophrenia, fitted into what you were saying at all.

I have been reading some of your discussion as I am in bed, unable to sleep. It seems that in your last post, you are concerned with what happens if a person stops believing in God and how do they replace this 'lost truth'. When someone has this experience it is because the idea of God does not represent the truth to them any longer. For some, it may feel sad, but for others, it may be liberating.

A couple of posts above, you brought in the term schizophrenia,for no apparent reason in the middle of an argument about irrationality. It just seemed a bit out of context and incongruous. There might be people on this forum who have been given this diagnosis. I am not implying that you do not understand the meaning of the term, but I still want to emphasise that the word, schizophrenia, should not be misused, in a colloquial sense, to imply a split personality.

I would just wish to add that in choosing the idea of 3D for my title, I am not wishing to limit the specctrum of known realities and awareness to be conceived only in terms of the idea of three dimensions as I believe in the existence of four, five and many other dimensions.

I would imagine that some groups which get together to discuss philosophy remain shallow and err in the line of popular philosophy. I am certainly not dismissing the value of online philosophy and have found this site to be fantastic for exploration.

I am simply offering speculation for thought, and trying to redress the balance of people being locked in their own philosophical bubbles online but in social groups as well. But I can speak with a smile on my face, laughing at how I have woken up a couple of times, dreaming about imaginary replies on the forum.

It is not likely that any of us will ever meet, person to person, as we are many miles and countries apart. But the fantasy might conjure up imaginative possible scenarios and interactions fot lighthearted daydreams in a gloomy world,.This is about our about fantasies for inspiring us as we go forward on this forum, and in the personal and wider aspects of our philosophical adventures.

Perhaps, I should say that I am both being serious and, at the same time, being both playful and surreal in the post I created.

I do wonder what would happen if these discussion happened in real life, and how they would differ from discussion on a website. I am not used to interacting on a website and probably would have never have done so if the pressures of social distancing had not led me into this direction.

However, I am left wondering about the nature of our exchange of our ideas and communication of ideas in the social context. Personally, I found that while I was training in psychotherapy, I took part in psychotherapy training which led me to the edges of exploration of what it is to be human. I had an experiential workshops in which the facilitator led me to cry, and that was the first time that I was aware of crying in public as an adult.

Here, I am speaking of the whole level of emotion which becomes apparent in groups. I do believe that the expression of emotion is a part of the whole relationships we have with others. Perhaps it is a social dynamic, or perhaps It is part of our biological nature. In this respect, I would say that chemicals, especially testosterone, but on a lesser scale, perhaps caffeine, stop us from crying as adults.

But getting back to my post question , in both seriousnes and jest, I am still wondering about the way in which daily interactions with others influence our philosophical explorations, and how this can be deconstructed because we are still human beings relating to one another in the raw level of day to day, dimensions of material reality.

I just do not understand what you are trying to argue. Are you a depressed artist? If you are, I do empathise because my greatest love is creating art, even above philosophy.

My first writing of this was a bit long, so I have edited it to make it an easier read, for relaxing on a Friday evening.

I see that you have written a serious and very appropriate site, while I have just been writing one which is probably frivolous and fantasy. But perhaps that is because, deep down, I am wondering about the whole question of the future, homeless, poverty and the whole world into which we are being thrown into and it is hard not to cave into a state of despair thinking about it all.

I am not in America but in London, which was thrown into tier 3, with no foreseeable way out of the deep mess. Businesses have collapsed and more will collapse. Many are turning to food banks and the whole idea of Christmas seems a complete joke.

Personally, I am not working and just managing to use savings without recourse to benefits for the moment, at least. I realise that the benefits system probably does not exist in America. However, even in England, there is a whole emphasis on protecting the NHS but apart from that, I think that the whole welfare state and benefits system will probably collapse at some point.

So, it is a complete mess, with all the prospects of long term mass unemployment, poverty and homelessness. It is almost unbearable to think of the future, unless some wonderful, creative solutions emerge somehow but I am now stepping into fantasy once again, but that is not without an awareness of the black hole in front of us.

When I spoke of art as being the source, and not simply the result of creativity, I was speaking of how others' artistic creations inspire us in our own art making.

I am not sure what point you are saying about the discussion I had with Possibility. I was simply making a reference to a comment she made to me on another thread. I am not aware of any dancing, and am a useless dancer, but love dance music to play when I meditate.

I just recommend the Waterboys song, The Whole of the Moon, to the Madfool as an ultimate philosophy song, and I would also recommend The Alarm's, Absolute Reality.

You can probably find them on You Tube, but I don't use this. There are hardly any music shops left, which I think is sad because they are quite a subculture, but I do find some amazing albums through surfing the shelves in charity shops. I have found all sorts of wonders, ranging from The Toilet Boys, The Inspiral Carpets, Spiritualised, The Pixies and The Sex Gang Children.

One album which I found recently in this way, and think is wonderful is, Word Gets Around, by Stereophonics.I believe it is the first one theyy made, but I prefer it to later ones, especially the track, Check My Eyelids For Holes.

Having been one of the people who began a thread about the subject of truth on this site recently I think your question depends on psychological perspectives and context. Some people are looking for a clear answer and some are happy to live with uncertainty.

In terms of context, I think one's underlying framework of thinking and basic ideasis are the main criteria from which the question of truth is explored. If one starts from a certain religious, or some other philosophical perspectives in which one believes that there is a central underlying truth to be found it is likely to be of great significance to reach out and discover it. But, if you believe that truth is relative, then finding ultimates is not a necessary objective.

Personally, I am neither of the view that there is one absolute truth or the view that searching for truth is meaningless. In my own life, and from discussion in this thread, I would say that we cannot find an absolute truth but the need to find frameworks and personal, authentic truths is an important aspect of life and essential to philosophy.