Cloudscape

If you stay with your experience in word and thought, you will never tell a lie. For what one experiences, be it in sensations or feelings or thoughts, is the only truth one knows for sure. Say not how things are, but how you perceive them to be.

Everything is perception, and so all perceptions about the present are equally true. Only perceptions of what may happen to one's perception in future can be false.
For instance, someone may believe they will not hurt when they sticks their hand in the fire, but when they do, they will usually find that their hand does hurt; the belief that they would not hurt themselves was therefore false. However, if someone believes they will hurt their hand when they stick their hand in a hallucinated fire, that may indeed very well hurt if they hallucinate the pain; the belief that they would hurt themselves was therefore true.
Whatever perception someone has is true to themselves, for as long as their perception lasts; the only reason that it may not be true to others is quite simply that they do not have the same perception.
As another example, the perception that the sun turns around the earth is true to anyone who holds it, as in their perception it is true. However, the belief that, when they observe the universe, their observations will conform to the predictions of their belief, is false.
Thus, the causality of our perceptions is the only truth that matters; whatever lies unchangeably beyond our perception is irrelevant since it might as well not exist at all. All our perceptions about the current are true; only our perceptions about the future may be false since our perceptions about the current might change in future.

Perhaps, for all its irony, it is by resigning ourselves to the mystery of the universe that we may better understand it. We may find safety in delusions of being all-knowing, but it will bring us no answers. Only by in all humility bowing down to the enigmas of existence can we fully see them, and see that they are far greater than ourselves, far greater than we could ever see, even for one moment, with our limited minds.
Thus the mind dissolves in the infinity of possibilities, and it comes to see that no matter what we will ever know, there are still infinitely many possibilities of how that which we know could be explained. That can be a frightening awareness, and so most people have fled from it into the safety of their certainty. But though it may cause many doubts, those doubts will in turn raise questions which will lead to insights; perhaps not always truthful insights, but insights nonetheless.
Still, when one has reached such state, one can be faced with doubts which at times can be tormenting; but through those torments, one becomes detached from opinions.
Still, uncertainty remains, as one then sees that one cannot know what will happen to oneself or the universe; one can deal with those doubts by not seeking truth in one's thoughts, but rather beauty; for the beauty of thought lies in its logic, and so the more logical it is, the more beautiful. For beauty lies in connections, and so does logic.
Thus, one can be at peace with thoughts which may not be correct, knowing that even if they are not true, they are beautiful; and cherishing the beauty in thoughts, it will grow, and so become more logical and thus closer to the truth. Hollow earth hypothesis, caloric theory or luminiferous ether: these are all thoughts which turned out to be wrong, yet they remain interesting, for they would otherwise have been forgotten altogether and not have been recorded in history. It is no loss, then, to have views that are not truthful, for thought they are not useful, they are still beautiful. If one seeks for beauty in thoughts rather than truth, then even if we will never know the truth, they will still have value to us. With this in mind, one can be open to all possibilities without being torn apart by doubt.
Since the beauty of thoughts is in their logic, the more beautiful thoughts will be, the closer they will be to the truth, even though they may never quite reach it.

There are no sane people. There are just insane people and people who are insane in an abnormal way. Almost everyone holds beliefs that they are certain to be true, but for some people these beliefs are shared with a large percentage of the population, and for some people these beliefs are shared with a smaller percentage. In other words, for some people the insanity is collective, for some people it is individual. We are almost all insane, but some are more original in their insanity than others. Some people think of their own delusions, others just copy them from others. The only difference is in the source of their inspiration. Most people's insanity is to adapt to others' insanity and blindly believe them to be right; other people's insanity is to blindly believe themselves to be right.
Almost everyone thinks they know the truth and that whoever thinks otherwise is wrong, with exceptions only in the very, very few open minds there are in the world. Generally, the more intellectual someone is, the more they are attached to their own opinions. If we attach any value to our beliefs, I believe it should be because of the beauty of the patterns of our thoughts, not because we think they are true. The truth can never fully be achieved but only approached. It is something which lies outside of ourselves, and in that we are perhaps too small too understand it. I believe that nothing is ever fully true or false, and that the truth is always somewhere in between. Thus, we can approach the truth as closely as possible, but never actually reach it. It is the asymptote of the function of knowledge. The truth is something infinitely subtle and nuanced, and while we may come closer and closer to it, we cannot fully reach it unless we could see its infinitely many nuances.

The truth is a target that lies at an infinite distance. Novice sailors find that when they as they try to attach a target, they have to readjust their course the closer they get to it. But the truth lies infinitely far. We can move towards it in as straight a line as possible, but we can never aim straight towards it because it is too far. Our aim can never be perfect, and the least we deviate from it will eventually lead us away from the truth. The closer we get to it, the greater this deviation becomes, so that again and again, we have to readjust our view.

This is illustrated by the model of the atom: at first, it was thought the atom was a solid sphere (Dalton); then, it was thought that that there were negative electrons floating on the positive nucleus (Thomson); then, it was thought that there was actually a lot of space in between electrons and protons (Rutherford); yet later, there turned out to be neutrons in the nucleus as well; yet later, it turned out the electrons weren't orbiting the nucleus in a circle but rather in a wavelike motion; yet later, the protons and neutrons appeared not to be solid but be composed of quarks, elementary particles; and yet later, these elementary particles all appeared not to be solid either, because they were actually really localized by the interference of energy waves. Right now, many scientists still live in the delusion that yes, they know the truth and that this is the end of it.

Will it ever end? Will we ever see that we are not, as we have deluded ourselves since the beginnings of time, Omniscient?
Someone who is deluded is always convinced of the truth of their delusions, and this conviction is by far a more criterion in defining delusions than their falsehood. If I believe that I might be involved in a mind control conspiracy, this is perfectly reasonable, as history has shown that it is possible; however, if I am certain that I am involved in such conspiracy, then I am insane. The irony is that this would make most people insane, were it not for the fact that a third criterion of a delusion is that it is not held by a culture.
I do not think I am so different. Even I like to feel that I know something, even if whatever it is I think to know is at most an approximation of the truth -- still infinitely far from the complete truth, but so too infinitely far from complete falsehood. Everything has some kernel of truth, and yet is not perfectly true.

Something you should surely have read if you've visited my blog at all - probably my most shocking idea.

In an infinite universe, everything is real. Probabilities depend on time and space, thus is both time and space are infinite, all probabilities in the universe are equal to one. This is the basic idea of ergodicity.
This infinity has highly bizarre consequences. Think of the most absurd things you can think of - monkeys raining from a clear sky, trees sprouting from nuclear waste in seconds, atoms arranging themselves to a microscopic epic, molecules across a solar system falling into place to form a hi-tech civilization, a live alien popping into existence in space -- these are all configurations of energy which are theoretically possible, and as Feynman said, anything which can happen will happen. It's all happening, right now and every moment, an infinite number of times. How surreal!
The punchline: the very fact that you can think of something happening means that it IS happening. This principle is known as modal realism: all imaginary worlds are as real as our own, "real" world. Remember that when you're reading a book, or slip into a reverie -- you're having a vision of something which is actually happening.
But it's not over yet -- there's something even more amazing about modal realism…
If everything is real, that means everything is true. After all, it would mean that there is a causal association between all things, and in fact all things are connected. This would actually make all delusions true, as anything that would happen would not only have several causes, but all causes one could think of. For instance, if a paper one looks at suddenly floats away, this would be both because the wind blew it away and because one has telekinetic abilities. There obviously appears to be something wrong here.
In principle, according to chaos theory it may actually be possible to cause a paper to float away by looking at it. But this is not necessarily so, and moreover, it can not be caused both by one's thoughts and the wind.
But because of the ergodic nature of an infinite universe, there would simultaneously be a world where it is caused by the wind and a world where it is caused by one's thoughts, quite simply because if the universe is infinite, everything is. These worlds could otherwise be identical, except in the cause of the paper floating away. Because the universes would be perceived in the same way, they would per definition have the same essence, so that there would be no telling in which of these universes one is. In fact, one could well say one is in both universes at once.
As long as you don't know if something is true or false, it is both true and false, because your own perception matches both the universe where it is true and the universe where it is false. Of course, the only condition for something to be true is that you perceive it to be, that is, that your qualia makes it a possibility (for instance, that you discern something is either true or false, not both). Then, there is always a chance that you'll be in the universe where it is true.
Of course, this chance may be very low, as only in a small percentage of the universes which the many identical "yous" would perceive as identical, it would really be true. Still, however, as long as you have no definitive "proof" whether it is or isn't, it is true, because you have all the perceptions of the you who lives in the universe where it is true, and therefore you are essentially that you. To clarify, nothing really exists if it can't be perceived, thus if the difference between the universe where the idea in question is true and the universe where it is false cannot be perceived, it does not really exist as such, either.
And of course, things are even further complicated because the so-called "proof" that it is or isn't true, which would necessarily be part of one's sensorial input, could be hallucinatory, it'd be essentially worthless: you could still be in a universe where the sensorial input of the proof is an illusion and the idea in question is still either true or false. There is no separation between what we know and what we imagine.
This means that everything is in a dual state, from quantum to universe. This explains the principle of Heisenberg, because we can't (yet) know the state of an individual quantum. This version of this principle is known as the many worlds principle, though the latter was perhaps not founded upon modal realism.
Any possibility one can conceive has a 100% probability of happening somewhere in the multiverse. Thus, any story you can think of is true. Somewhere in the infinite numbers of universes in the multiverse, it happens just like you imagined. If the universe is infinite, space and time are all that separate us from that which we imagine. Imagination, therefore, is a discovery.