~ Why I Invented Language ~

[Harbal]

.




I think that is the prime defining attribute of Human Beings is liar.

That help?

.

It doesn't help me and I think you are beyond help.

[Hobbes' Choice]

.




The why things happens motivates the very essence of science.

Science begins with why.

Reason thus ensues.

.

no, no, no.

IF there is any question in science which is not better asked by asking 'HOW" then it is not really a scientific question.
Give it a try!
Test me.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


yes, yes, yes.

IF there is any question in science which is not better asked by asking 'WHY" then it is not really a scientific question.
Give it a try!
Test me.


By science I mean the discipline or philosophy of science.


...which exists only in the human mind.


So, yes we are talking about exactly the same thing.



...using different adjectives.







.

[Walker]

Since a lie is only a lie if the speaker (or writer) knows it’s a lie, then never again speaking a lie is the single most psychologically and spiritually life-changing act that one can accomplish.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





I prefer a more expanded, philosophical definition of the concept of a lie than what is offered by Wikipedia: A lie is an estrangement of reality.

In the definition that I feel more comfortable with ALL intellectual functions are lies. All thoughts are lies. Self-centered.

Self-serving. Self deluding...Lies. It matters not if an individual has the self-consciousness to realize that their thoughts are lies at the time that they are expressed.


Most people, most reflective, non-philosophical types prefer the more rigid viewpoint. A blinders-on position that will allow themselves to fool themselves so-to-speak. In order to be able to feel good about themselves, correct in a particular viewpoint, or just simply to be able to sleep at night.




From Wikipedia, the world's encyclopedia:

The practice of communicating lies is called lying, and a person who communicates a lie may be termed a liar.

Lies may be employed to serve a variety of instrumental, interpersonal, or psychological functions for the individuals who use them.

Generally, the term "lie" carries a negative connotation, and depending on the context a person who communicates a lie may be subject to social, legal, religious, or criminal sanctions.

In certain situations, however, lying is permitted, expected, or even encouraged. Because believing and acting on false information can have serious consequences, scientists and others have attempted to develop reliable methods for distinguishing lies from true statements.






***Basically, when a person is talking - they are lying. Even more so when we are simply thinking. EVEN MORE SO when we are unconscious of our active intellectual function. We accept that those thoughts are who we are, when in fact - We are not our thoughts. Most people believe-in their own lies.


Every thought is an estrangement of reality.








.

[Hobbes' Choice]

.
yes, yes, yes.

IF there is any question in science which is not better asked by asking 'WHY" then it is not really a scientific question.
Give it a try!
Test me.


By science I mean the discipline or philosophy of science.

...which exists only in the human mind.


So, yes we are talking about exactly the same thing.



...using different adjectives.


.

No we are not. "how and "why": calling them adjectives seems to be missing the point.
I meant it, btw. Try it out and I'll transform your puny "why" into a mature scientific "how".

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




The words who what when where why & how can be nouns, pronouns, adverbs, or conjunctions.


I think you are splitting hairs. Whatever your preference in asking an inquisitive question - that's good for you.


Philosophically, your sideline feels like is distracting from a more philosophical debate that I am hoping to fertilize. I'm not disrespecting you but I just don't thing this dog hunts.


I welcome you to join in the more philosophical debate that is also taking place within this thread.



I may have said this earlier within this thread but what you are concerned with seems like semantics to me...






.

[Hobbes' Choice]

.

The words who what when where why & how can be nouns, pronouns, adverbs, or conjunctions.

I think you are splitting hairs. Whatever your preference in asking an inquisitive question - that's good for you.
Philosophically, your sideline feels like is distracting from a more philosophical debate that I am hoping to fertilize. I'm not disrespecting you but I just don't thing this dog hunts.
I welcome you to join in the more philosophical debate that is also taking place within this thread.
I may have said this earlier within this thread but what you are concerned with seems like semantics to me...



.

No Bill.
It's like you've not really understood what I am saying.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



Okay. Could you re-state your position?


Or could you form a thesis that we could follow?





.

[Walker]

.






In certain situations, however, lying is permitted, expected, or even encouraged. Because believing and acting on false information can have serious consequences, scientists and others have attempted to develop reliable methods for distinguishing lies from true statements.

Is the appointment of a blue ribbon investigative panel one of the reliable methods to determine truth?

[Hobbes' Choice]

.

Okay. Could you re-state your position?


Or could you form a thesis that we could follow?

.

Who is "we"? Is that the Royal 'we"?

I'm pretty sure that anyone reading this knew exactly what I meant.
I could not have put my point more simply.

Since the dawn of time, as man thought that the universe was purposeful, the only question was 'why'. That was because we assumed that god had designed the universe and all that was in it for a series of purposes.
By the time we get to Descartes, we started to reject 'why', as to understand the material universe we had more success asking only "how".

However, we still have the legacy of still asking why, when what we actually need to know is "how".

My contention is that all "why" questions in science, that cannot be re-asked using "how" are false scientific questions. If you can't reframe a question to ask how , and get an answer that is valid, then the question is simple not framed within science.

Give it a try. Ask me any 'why" questions and we will put them to the test.

For example "Why is the sky blue?" Might imply that there was a purpose to it being blue. Answering THAT question is not scientific.

If we ask "how is it that the sky appears blue to humans", then we have a great opening to understand nature.

There is not purposive reason the sky is blue.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




What you are saying doesn't hold-up for me. Your statement doesn't ring true.


It's a moot point.


Non-philosophical.


Logically why would you keep this line of thought up?


Why?




.

[Hobbes' Choice]

.




What you are saying doesn't hold-up for me. Your statement doesn't ring true.

Prove it!

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



Here. This might help you: Your argument is spurious.

Spurious can refer to: seeming to be genuine but false, based on false ideas or facts

That's why.




This is the actual focus of this thread -

Human beings are extremely selfish, stupid, and mean creatures.


Yet we are nothing if not liars.


If humans were to be best described in one word that word would be - liar.



It is said that the ONLY reason we invented language is so that we could lie to each other better.


So that we could look each other square in the face and openly lie and deceive one another.


Indeed, when we are made aware of this fact we feel momentary shame and embarrassment - but then, more often than not, we grab a lie, a stream of thoughts, and cover ourselves.



...individual egos.







*Life PRO TIP: You can use ANY words you want to express YOUR ideas. YOUR wording may not work for EVERY ONE ELSE.

YOU are free to use whatever words work for you ESPECIALLY within the framework of MY threads. Express yorself however you wish. I AM FINE WITH THAT.

I appreciate you participating in any and all of my threads.


That's why I don't care how you express yourself.


How you express yourself is your matter.


For me the words WHY and HOW can often be interchangeable. That's it. Period. Over. I don't care.







.

[Hobbes' Choice]

.



Here. This might help you: Your argument is spurious.
.

This is just an insult.

You have nothing to offer.