Is it possible to convince anyone with the right words?

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

So, have you just answered your own question?

I don't think I actually have, no.

If a machine can be built that does what you are proposing it could do here, then obviously that by itself answers your own question.

I thought about that as well when I first made this thread, but I tried to phrase it in a way that didn't presuppose an answer. It knows everything about you, but I don't know if that includes "the correct string of words to for every conversation imaginable" because I don't know if there is such a thing, for every conversation.

Have you ever been in, seen, or even heard of debating classes or debates in schools?

Can't say that I have.

What has this got to do with anything I was saying?

You only brought up that person's name in this last reply of yours here and then ask Me some question that is not really in relation to anything I have been talking about that I can see.

I was just trying to give you an example to help understand what I'm talking about. It seems to me now that you do.

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

...Also, what do you mean by "what you are proposing here already takes place."?

[ken]

So, have you just answered your own question?

I don't think I actually have, no.

That is okay. Would you like to rephrase your question and we start again, or would you like to just continue this way? The answer should become obvious to you soon enough.

If a machine can be built that does what you are proposing it could do here, then obviously that by itself answers your own question.

I thought about that as well when I first made this thread, but I tried to phrase it in a way that didn't presuppose an answer. It knows everything about you, but I don't know if that includes "the correct string of words to for every conversation imaginable" because I don't know if there is such a thing, for every conversation.

The reason you are having a hard time finding the answer to your own questions is because of the use of the word 'convince'. The word implies the other does not, or maybe, will not, agree with whatever is being said. As I was also saying in My first reply, if a person believes that they know what is right already, then even proof and evidence, let alone just words, of what is the actual truth can NOT "convince" some one of any thing.

If a person believes, then they can NOT be convinced, of even the truth. However, if a person is fully open, then they do NOT need convincing of any thing as they can see the truth already.

Have you ever been in, seen, or even heard of debating classes or debates in schools?

Can't say that I have.

Fair enough.

Well in a number of "educational" facilities picking one side of a story or discussion and told to then formulate the best arguments for THAT side is taught.

This kind of teaching I consider a detriment to society.

What has this got to do with anything I was saying?

You only brought up that person's name in this last reply of yours here and then ask Me some question that is not really in relation to anything I have been talking about that I can see.

I was just trying to give you an example to help understand what I'm talking about. It seems to me now that you do.

What were you trying to give me an example of exactly?

And,I do not consider understanding what you are talking about any more now than when I did when I first replied in this thread.

[ken]

...Also, what do you mean by "what you are proposing here already takes place."?

There is a 'thing', not necessarily a machine, that, when 'you' are truly honest, knows every thing about you.

And, if you are open enough to listen to what this 'thing' says to, asks, and tells you, then you will you see and understand how 'It' does not have to "convince" you of any thing because 'It' is saying ALL the right things any way. If you remain fully open, you can distinguish between what is true, right, and correct, in a string of words, from what is not true, not right, and not correct.

[surreptitious57]

If a person believes then they can NOT be convinced of even the truth

Beliefs are not always absolute and over time can be modified or discarded

[surreptitious57]

There is a thing not necessarily a machine that when you are truly honest knows every thing about you

What exactly is this thing and why does someones honesty improve its knowledge of who that someone is

[ken]

If a person believes then they can NOT be convinced of even the truth

Beliefs are not always absolute and over time can be modified or discarded

Whilst the belief is being held, then it is absolute.

Sure over time the belief may diminish, and eventually be diminished enough that it can be modified or discarded. But that is the actual point of beliefs. While they are being held they can NOT be modified nor discarded.

ONLY WHEN the actual belief is diminished or has been let go of or has been gotten rid of by one's own self when that belief is modified and/or discarded.

[ken]

There is a thing not necessarily a machine that when you are truly honest knows every thing about you

What exactly is this thing and why does someones honesty improve its knowledge of who that someone is

The true Self.

Why honesty is needed to improve the true Self's knowledge is because people can even deceive them Self.

[surreptitious57]

Do you know that the Self actually exists or do you merely think that it does because if you
can not actually demonstrate that it exists then what reason do have I to think that it does

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

So, have you just answered your own question?

I don't think I actually have, no.

That is okay. Would you like to rephrase your question and we start again, or would you like to just continue this way? The answer should become obvious to you soon enough.

Well, I've re-read my OP, and I still don't see how I answer my own question about whether or not every anyone can be convinced of anything. I was hyper-actively aware of the fact that the concept makes it easy to pre-proposed an answer, in both my OP and responses to you, so I made sure not to do just that. Maybe I did somewhere, but then I don't see how I answered my own question.

The reason you are having a hard time finding the answer to your own questions is because of the use of the word 'convince'. The word implies the other does not, or maybe, will not, agree with whatever is being said. As I was also saying in My first reply, if a person believes that they know what is right already, then even proof and evidence, let alone just words, of what is the actual truth can NOT "convince" some one of any thing.

If a person believes, then they can NOT be convinced, of even the truth. However, if a person is fully open, then they do NOT need convincing of any thing as they can see the truth already.

I think that you have a very, very different definition and understanding of belief than most people. I don't think belief is something that means 100% knowledge and something that can never be pursued out of. That's more like knowing something for sure, but even then I would say we don't actually know anything with 100% certainty.

What were you trying to give me an example of exactly?

That some people are better at convincing other people of things?

I really don't get what you're not getting about this; Some people are better at debate than others and can convey the exact same idea in a way that brings more people to that idea. Agree or do you not? Because it seems to me that you think that a 2-year old toddler who can barely speak, would do just as good of a job at selling or teaching something as a very intelligent and well-spoken professor.

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

...Also, what do you mean by "what you are proposing here already takes place."?

There is a 'thing', not necessarily a machine, that, when 'you' are truly honest, knows every thing about you.

And, if you are open enough to listen to what this 'thing' says to, asks, and tells you, then you will you see and understand how 'It' does not have to "convince" you of any thing because 'It' is saying ALL the right things any way. If you remain fully open, you can distinguish between what is true, right, and correct, in a string of words, from what is not true, not right, and not correct.

I don't think that's similar to the hypothetical machine that I speak of at all.

[ken]

Do you know that the Self actually exists or do you merely think that it does

I KNOW.

because if you
can not actually demonstrate that it exists then what reason do have I to think that it does

Do you need a reason to think that, your, Self exists?

[surreptitious57]

Do you need a reason to think that your Self exists

I would first need to know what a Self is or how it is being defined
And until I do know that then I cannot really answer your question

[ken]

I don't think I actually have, no.

That is okay. Would you like to rephrase your question and we start again, or would you like to just continue this way? The answer should become obvious to you soon enough.

Well, I've re-read my OP, and I still don't see how I answer my own question about whether or not every anyone can be convinced of anything.

If we take the word 'every' out of this sentence, then as you have already stated, SOME people walk away from the same speech "convinced" while others are not "convinced". So, you answered your own question about; "Is it possible to convince anyone of anything by just saying the right thing?" by saying, "There are people who gain a better understanding from a speech from one person that they would not necessarily have gained from another person. Therefore, it is possible to convince any one of any thing by just saying the right thing.

I was hyper-actively aware of the fact that the concept makes it easy to pre-proposed an answer, in both my OP and responses to you, so I made sure not to do just that. Maybe I did somewhere, but then I don't see how I answered my own question.

Do you now?

Obviously it is possible to "convince" any (some) one of any (some) thing by just saying the right thing. The 'right' thing implies it does or achieves what it is set out to do and achieve anyway.

Also, and just as obvious though is but even saying some thing that is absolutely true and right will NOT "convince" any (some) one of any (some) thing, when that person is believing in some thing already that is contrary to what is being said.

The reason you are having a hard time finding the answer to your own questions is because of the use of the word 'convince'. The word implies the other does not, or maybe, will not, agree with whatever is being said. As I was also saying in My first reply, if a person believes that they know what is right already, then even proof and evidence, let alone just words, of what is the actual truth can NOT "convince" some one of any thing.

If a person believes, then they can NOT be convinced, of even the truth. However, if a person is fully open, then they do NOT need convincing of any thing as they can see the truth already.

I think that you have a very, very different definition and understanding of belief than most people.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. However, My definition and understanding of 'belief' fills in the gaps and paints a much better and fuller picture of what IS Life, Itself.

I don't think belief is something that means 100% knowledge and something that can never be pursued out of.

I do NOT think this also.

That's more like knowing something for sure, but even then I would say we don't actually know anything with 100% certainty.

The ONLY thing that I can KNOW with 100% certainty are the thoughts, themselves. But just to make it absolutely clear, those thoughts may be 100% wrong, false, and/or incorrect, or partly wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

What were you trying to give me an example of exactly?

That some people are better at convincing other people of things?

So, again you know the answer to your question, if some people are better at convincing other people of things, then it is possible to convince some people of some things by saying the right thing.

I really don't get what you're not getting about this;

That might be because there is not much or nothing that I am not getting about 'this'. Just maybe you are not getting some thing about 'this'.

Some people are better at debate than others and can convey the exact same idea in a way that brings more people to that idea.[/quote]

Therefore, again you are answering your own question, if some people can convey the exact same idea in a way that brings (convinces) more people to that idea, then it is possible for to convince some people of some thing by just saying the right thing.

By the way, where did some of those people who are better debaters learn to debate? Could it from some "education system"?

Agree or do you not?

Agree.

Because it seems to me that you think that a 2-year old toddler who can barely speak, would do just as good of a job at selling or teaching something as a very intelligent and well-spoken professor.

WHY would it seem like that to you?

WHAT gave you the slightest bit of inclination to assume that?

WHERE did I give any perception that I would think that?

WHEN did I say anything that would lead you to that conclusion?

HOW could you possible see some thing, which I was NOT even thinking about, let alone writing about?

Some times people assume and/or believe some things, and then they find and see things that do not actually exist or are not actually there.

[ken]

...Also, what do you mean by "what you are proposing here already takes place."?

There is a 'thing', not necessarily a machine, that, when 'you' are truly honest, knows every thing about you.

And, if you are open enough to listen to what this 'thing' says to, asks, and tells you, then you will you see and understand how 'It' does not have to "convince" you of any thing because 'It' is saying ALL the right things any way. If you remain fully open, you can distinguish between what is true, right, and correct, in a string of words, from what is not true, not right, and not correct.

I don't think that's similar to the hypothetical machine that I speak of at all.

That might be because It is NOT a machine at all.

Correct Me if I am wrong, you are asking if a machine that knew all your thoughts, then could it say the "right thing" to 'convince' you of any thing?

If by 'any thing' do you mean absolutely any thing, including that which is absolutely and obviously false, wrong, and incorrect? Or, do you just mean that which is true, right, and correct? Either way the answer to your question should already be obvious to you.