Philosophy Now Forum

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

creativesoul wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Actually lying does not have to involve spoken langauge. Chimps are masters of deceit.

I wouldn't equate deceitfulness with lying.

Odd because every person I've ever met would associate the two and assert that lying entails deceit. Indicating that deceit predates formal language...

Indeed. A deliberate misrepresentation of one's own thought/belief is a lie. No argument against deceit being prior to formal language. I still wouldn't equate the two.

.







Yes. YES> YES! If you ask me again in another way the answer will STILL BE YES. WTF?


EVERY thought is an estrangement of reality - A LIE.








.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.Yes. YES> YES! If you ask me again in another way the answer will STILL BE YES. WTF?

EVERY thought is an estrangement of reality - A LIE..

So this thought is a lie?

I know you're hard of thought but think about it if you can.

.








Yes. And I know what you are saying...but it's a matter of scale.

A metaphor doesn't quite fit the situation but - here goes:


I'm saying, all colors are colors.

You're saying, black is the opposite of white.

Another may say - white is the opposite of black.



That's all well & good. I don't care of the perspective or who's right or wrong.


I'm saying, all colors are colors.



That make sense to you?






.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.Yes. And I know what you are saying...but it's a matter of scale.

But that's the thing, it's not.

A metaphor doesn't quite fit the situation but - here goes:

I'm saying, all colors are colors.

You're saying, black is the opposite of white.

Another may say - white is the opposite of black.

That's all well & good. I don't care of the perspective or who's right or wrong

I'm saying, all colors are colors.

That make sense to you?[/size].

No, as 'All colours are colours' is a tautology so always true. You are claiming that everything you think and say is a lie, so when you say this you are lying if you are not then what you say is untrue.

.




You are correct in your assessment.

Now I want you to relax & simmer.

This is the part where a philosopher would be able to think outside of the box; outside of their box.


I don't know if you can do that but I want to give you the fullest chance as possible. Don't think right now.

As Hubert Benoit would say - Let Go!



Let Go of this thread for a while. Let yourself have the opportunity to see the big picture. Perhaps in a few days...



EVERY thought we have is an estrangement of reality.

We are attached to our thoughts - to our inner narration but that does not change the fact.


Up/down, left/right, right/wrong, yours/mine - it doesn't matter. ALL of these seeming opposites are on a much lower scale than what I am challenging you to see.

Your assessment, your perspective - really doesn't matter. NOT in the scale that I am asking you to be.


I challenge you to be a philosopher.






.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.You are correct in your assessment.

I know.

Now I want you to relax & simmer.

Rarely simmer, pretty much always relaxed.

This is the part where a philosopher would be able to think outside of the box; outside of their box.

Once more you talk nonsense.

I don't know if you can do that but I want to give you the fullest chance as possible. Don't think right now.

As Hubert Benoit would say - Let Go!

In the main I prefer Philosophy to Psychoanalysis and especially not the French ones.

Let Go of this thread for a while. Let yourself have the opportunity to see the big picture. Perhaps in a few days...

No need. Your 'big' picture is a gnu epistemology allied with a gnu metaphysics and as such is a cobbled mish-mash of ill-thought out western interpretations of second-hand eastern religious thought and western existential angst.

EVERY thought we have is an estrangement of reality.

Such as this. So if what you say is true then you have no idea what this 'reality' is or even if 'it' exists and yet you blithely assert 'it'.

We are attached to our thoughts - to our inner narration but that does not change the fact.

You make the mistake of thinking your inner voice, i.e. the ability provided by Language, is a thought.

Up/down, left/right, right/wrong, yours/mine - it doesn't matter. ALL of these seeming opposites are on a much lower scale than what I am challenging you to see.

What seeming opposites? These are mainly relations.

What 'lower scale' are you talking about?

Your assessment, your perspective - really doesn't matter. NOT in the scale that I am asking you to be.

From which perspective are you asking this, yours? If so then does it not matter?

I challenge you to be a philosopher.[/size].

No problem.

I'm a linguist and I always reflect on how languages function. For me a language has always been a powerful force: our thoughts are shaped into words and I believe that every phoneme, word, connotation and even grammatical structure has a certain influence on us. Every language has a unique character. But it does answer our needs, nothing in this world appears or changes without desire, there has to be a void. There's no light without a Kli as kabbalists (Michael Laitman, Baal HaSulam) say. And throughout history a word, like a gene, will travel and prevail according to its usefulness.
Kabbalists say that there's a law may you call it nature, law, upper force or Creator if you like. And it is also said that the world was built through letters. It certainly is not describied in a literal sense: a letter or a word in Hebrew conveys a certain perception of this force. And what else is out there but our perception?

David Handeye wrote: So, according to this "invention" of yours, you also should be a liar. My compliments.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.

Yes. I am no different than any one else. That was kind-of the point of this thread.
We almost need to see into ourselves first before we are able to have the reflective psychology.
.

So then why should we believe anything you say? Is seems to me that lying prevents communication because once it is known that you are a liar, then why should anyone listen to anything you have to say? What would be the point?

Most people want others to believe them when they speak, or else it eventually becomes pointless to do so. The primary function of language is communication. Lying just destroys that primary function.

.





Every word either spoken or written is estranged from the multi-dimensional continuum that we find ourselves in.

Consciousness; self-consciousness is extremely fluid. The intellectual function exists within that window that we call our selves. The words that we use are streaks or smears upon that window. Focus on seeing. Encase the smears, within your vision, for what they are.






.

Within the process to understand oneself better came awareness that it's within our primal instincts to long for relationships.

.



Yes. This is true.

And to the poster that I asked to simmer with some concepts I laid-out above; has your perspective widened?


Can you now see what I had laid-out earlier within this thread?


]...[




.

Apes are tricksters. That's how they live - by being smarter than other animals. Their ability to outsmart other animals made up for their lack of natural weapons (aside from gorillas). Since trickery is a hominid's stock and trade, it's no surprise that they also try to fool their competitors in the group.

Humans have since brought the art of trickery to the nth degree. We will only stop when tricks have all been used so much that they don't work any more. It's been interesting watching the rise of Trump and how the unreasonable always ultimately defeat the reasonable, like street fighters kicking a classical boxer in the nuts while the latter is locked in to Marquess of Queensbury rules.

Many years ago a family friend used to term the power of unreason "the power of no". That is, the one who says "no" holds the power.

Greta wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:11 am Many years ago a family friend used to term the power of unreason "the power of no". That is, the one who says "no" holds the power.

Every salesman knows that those who say no are merely the gatekeepers.

Only power says yes, because power is the motive force and motion is life, and as you should know by now, life is the measure of all things.

Btw: nice exercise in power by cobbling the coalition to sanction N. Korea, President Trump.

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:32 pmEvery salesman knows that those who say no are merely the gatekeepers.

Only power says yes, because power is the motive force and motion is life, and as you should know by now, life is the measure of all things.

Btw: nice exercise in power by cobbling the coalition to sanction N. Korea, President Trump.

Please don't suck Don's dong in my presence, Walker. Best to leave it for private

Seriously, I agree that "yes" is ultimately more powerful, but also more rare. "Yes" is about seizing opportunities, whereas "no" is about protectiveness. There are innumerable ways for any partnership, creation, project or enterprise to fail but not many configurations where they work. So each rare "yes" tends to be built from numerous "noes" in the past, aka life experience.