You're welcome btw.

Thanks for the nice comment and observation. I, however, agree with you that the 'truth is out there' tagline of The X-Files concerned itself mainly with the existence of the paranormal or of ETs. BUT I disagree with you that that's the whole of it. If you look closely at the level of the characters, it is also a struggle against happiness.

For Mulder, he so desperately wanted to know the truth on many things: the government conspiracy, existence of ETs, and whatever happened to his sister and so on. All of those were personal to him. Finding out the truth, did it really make him happy? And even if he did somewhat find it/them, why does he still seem to seek it (as referenced in the latest movie)?

For Scully, the truth mainly concerns her belief in her religion and her being a scientist/rationalist/doctor. How does she tackle the fact that those two sides of her have different truths? She still has to resolve that in order to be really happy, again as seen in the latest movie.

but uv just said that "Regarding the silent ‘movie’ so far our limited technology can’t figure in sound via light. But I think there are possible workarounds in the future. "…

in the future means, not yet here. hence its not 'current'. what am i missing?

also, u said: "The latter part, that of light, muddles up the meaning and metaphorically relates death and immortality to the phenomena that is light. "

so it is metaphor or science fiction. thats fine by me. but what i wanted to point out, if that its not "the truth" as u orginally defined
@"December 16, 2009 at 11:02 am"…

again, thats fine by me. i love metaphors. they are fantastic. religion is full of metaphors. poetry is metaphors. literature is metaphors. science fiction is metaphor. i just wanted to be fair to ur original definition.

It is the truth as I've defined it, since the light discussion is based on current science. Let me elaborate further.

If you look closely at this post it could have easily been 2 posts: one talking about truth as revealed by science and by religion/superstition. The other, is a pondering of death and immortality and the current understanding of physics on light and the universe, coupled with a secularist's view. The latter part, that of light, muddles up the meaning and metaphorically relates death and immortality to the phenomena that is light. So the reader then has to distinguish at some point, the relation of death and immortality with regards to the physics of light, which I was playfully trying to establish.

I think I've made it quite clear in the post that things such as souls do not constitute scientific truth, but the propagation of light with information encoded in it, is.

i suppose i was confused, but i gotta say, your paragraph subtitles sorta lead to a deep connection between the paragraphs.

the first subtitle is "the problem", and i thought the problem, as you see it, was religion is about happiness while secularism/ science is about truth…

the next subtitle is "the question" and write:

"So then, if you will humor my ponderings, what could secularism possibly offer as an answer to one of the most profound questions we humans"

and i thought that the answer, which is the truth, is found in the succeeding paragraphs.

Regarding the silent movie, that is as we've mentioned, a metaphorical extension. That's muddled with the physics of light. Again, the article could have easily been 2 separate posts: truth according to science and religion, and the take of physics + secularism on death and immortality. So what you're actually trying to clarify is pretty clear in my first paragraph, while I wasn't necessarily talking about the truth as I defined it, in the succeeding paragraphs with Mulder and Scully and light.

Again, there is a connection as well as a certain disconnect with my first paragraph (truth, religion, science) and the succeeding ones (secularism, physics of light, Mulder and Scully).

I also fancy metaphors, and hopefully I can try to do more articles like this in the future, whether in prose or poetry form. You can search around this site or my own blog to find a number of similar metaphorical posts.

Btw regarding the 2nd X-Files movie, I Want To Believe, I can't say I hate it, since aside from my being a Phile, I think it's an acceptable aside from the arc/myth established by the 1st movie. Sure it didn't have enough excitement and conspiracy and aliens as the 1st one, but it gave a glimpse and update on M & S, after the series ended, and as well as their relationship and how they've changed. I see it as being similar to those non mytharc episodes in the series, which are small digressions from the real story. So I'm patiently/impatiently waiting for the 3rd movie about the alien invasion.

Truth in the sense that I described and defined it in my earlier reply above? Yes I think it is truth. We know for a fact that the starlight from the distant stars and bodies we're observing have been traveling for a significant time over a significant distance, before arriving here on Earth. It's not me being fanciful in the sense that I imagine and wish it to be so.

May I inquire what are you driving at here?