Existence is objective.
An objection is a fact.
A fact is proven to be true.
Trust is a belief.
Trust does not equal proof and, therefore, does not equal fact.
Intention cannot be proven, only trusted. Acts happen in the physical world (body) while intent happens in the non-physical world (mind).
As the old expression goes, actions speak louder than words. An act, whether positive or negative can be proven, for the act exists in the physical world. However, the intention behind the act only fully exists within the individual committing the act and does not exist in the physical world. We can trust that the intention was objective, but we cannot prove such.
If an individual gives a homeless person an offering, was it to help the homeless person or gratify the individual’s conscience? We can only believe what the individual says was their intent. And since there are multiple intents to consider, the action cannot be viewed as objective and therefore, it cannot fully exist.
Therefore, what the individual says was the basis of the act, true or untrue, can only be trusted.
That creates the questions: Can any non-physical substance, of the mind, be proven? It can exist, but can it fully exist?
In addition, if objective acts are derived from subjective decisions, do the acts even fully exist?
Yes and no. It is a balance.
2 thoughts on “Intention”