you appear to not being able to fully understand what the phrase or term 'having the ability to choose' actually is meaning nor is referring to, exactly.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmI can think of about an infinite number of things to explain.
Two humans, or animals, or organisms, are faced with the exact same threat, or exact same situation.
One will have more choices/options than the other. (higher quantity)
One will have better choices/options than the other. (higher quality)
So their respective 'ability to choose' is *NOT* equal.
But, then you did appear to have some very Truly complicated and/or just very different way/s from, me, of looking at and seeing things here.
Why did you add so many Truly unnecessary and/or complicated layers here?
The, Truly OPEN, Mind.
From the, Truly OPEN, Mind.
This might be exciting to you, for some reason, but this does not really have absolutely anything at all to do with just, 'Having the ability to choose'.
Okay. If this is only what you see, and are only 'able to' see, then so be it.
And, if this is what you are 'presuming' here now, then this is perfectly fine with me also.
Talk about presenting another prime example of one being completely and utterly skewed by pre-existing beliefs and presumptions.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmPhilosophers are the better judges, because they have the greatest collective wisdom/knowledge of every group of humanity in history.
Were you not yet aware "wizard22" that it has been so-called "philosophers" who have been the ones involved in the longest running and unsolved discussions throughout human being history?
So, where exactly is the demonstration, and/or proof and record, of these people's wisdom/knowledge?
Are you here trying to suggest that not every human being wanted to live in peace and harmony with absolutely every one else?Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmIt might be your dream. But it is not everybody's dream.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amOkay, according to you, you human beings have the ability to create a Truly peaceful and harmonious world, and, according to you, once you people also gain the 'know-how', by just learning 'how-to', then 'we' can proceed in making this universal dream, and Highest-possible objective goal, become Reality.
I, again, wait, patiently, for those who are Truly interested in 'this' here.
When you say and use the word 'people' who are you meaning and/or referring to, exactly?
'We', once again, appear to have very different views here.
So, why is it that you do not want to live in peace and harmony with all others "wizard22"?
But I do not believe this?
Why cannot you not comprehend and understand this irrefutable Fact?
The goal of peace and harmony with and for every one is obviously the 'highest possible objective goal'.
And, for whom this goal is, was for every one, obviously.
A part of, of course.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmAre human imaginings, part of the Universe? Or are they separate?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amOnly in the sense that there is no actual 'edge', with a big or small 'e', of the Universe, Itself, but there is, of course, within some concepts within some human beings an imagined 'edge', with a big or small 'e', of the Universe.
Who said there is not an actual 'edge' of the Universe, Itself, relative to you human beings?
Some of you human beings imagine there is one, so, to those human beings, there is an imagined one. While some human beings believe that there is an 'edge' of or to the Universe, Itself, and, to those ones, there is also not just imagined 'edge' but 'an edge', which is believed to be absolutely and irrefutably true, right, and correct, and while these ones are believing that 'this' is true, then to these ones there is absolutely nothing in the whole of the Universe could show nor refute otherwise.
And, there is also the other phenomena where because you human beings, obviously, can only 'look' and thus 'see' so far, with the physical eyes on human bodies and with limited ability to 'see' instruments there is an 'actual edge', relative to you human beings.
Now, that you are aware that there is an 'actual edge' of or to the Universe, Itself, relative to you human beings, so 'that' is not just contained within imaginings only, but this helps somewhat in explaining why you human beings, who cannot yet 'see' nor even 'imagine' the 'Bigger and absolutely True Picture', yet.
Once again, there is no so-called nor so-imagined 'actual boundary, limit, nor edge of the Universe, Itself'. But, as always, this always depends on how one is defining and using words here.
For example, if one wants to define the word 'Universe' to mean just a part of 'all-there-is', then this is perfectly fine. I will just ask for clarification if they have or use 'a word' for 'all-there-is', instead?
For obviously there could never be an 'actual' boundary, limit, nor edge for nor to 'all-there-is'. To presume, or worse so to believe, that there is or even could be would just be absurdity, illogical, and ridiculous, in the extreme.
I will, again, suggest that if you, really, just want to see what 'another' is actually thinking or believing, then you just ask them a clarifying question, related to what it is that you want to know, or see, exactly.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmI just want to see what you actually believe or not, despite you claiming you have No Beliefs.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amIf absolutely anyone would like to begin to claim that 'matter', itself, could be Created, or Destroyed, then I suggest asking them, for clarity, 'How could this just this even be just a possibility, logically, let alone be an actuality, really?'
And, then just wait for them to answer, and clarify. For all 'we' really know, just maybe 'matter' could be 'Created' and/or 'Destroyed'.
From what i think, and from what my 'current' view is, 'matter', itself, could never be Created, nor Destroyed. But, and obviously, the thinking and views within this body have come only from what 'this body' has experienced and/or observed, which, again very obviously, is not everything, nor even really a relatively 'nothing'.
So, again, if absolutely wants to claim that 'matter', itself, can be Destroyed and/or Created, then please explain and/or who what you have got, which backs up and supports this claim of yours here.
Also, I have informed on here a few times already what I actually believe.
Are you able to name absolutely any thing that is 'not an evolved something'?Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmA human being is an evolved Mammal,Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amThis is fair enough, especially considering the Fact that 'I', as in the question, 'Who am 'I', exactly? is not a 'human being'.
But, in saying this, your claim here implies that you, a human being, is not ignorant, and thus is already aware, and thus already knows and/or has the knowledge of what 'being human' actually is, exactly.
So, would 'you', just one individual 'human being' like to share with the 'other human beings' what 'being human' really is, exactly, really composed of, exactly, and/or really is like, exactly?
If no, then why not?
But, if yes, then we await. But, in the meantime, are 'we' to suppose that no other 'human being' would disagree at all with 'your knowledge' of what 'being human' really is?
If yes, then will you?
Does 'hu' and/or 'human' literally mean any thing?
If yes, then will you enlighten 'us' on what that/they are also, exactly?
So, to you, 'you', human beings, are just an 'opposable, upright walking, derivative of the ape species hominid', correct?
If yes, is this only?
Is it because of the human hand only that you human beings have the ability to wield weapons and technology only?
Is there a difference between 'mankind' and 'humankind', to you?
If yes, then what is that difference, exactly?
Okay.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pm Furthermore, 'Human' refers to a Moral distinction, set upon a notion of Universalized Goodness and Brotherhood of Man. This stems from the Jesus Christ figure, a monumental point in time in human history. Thus, to be 'Human' is to have a Moral Quality, a Soul, a Spirit, an "Eternal Life" that transcends normal-life. In other words, Mankind has reputation and memories which far exceed one lifetime. Mankind has Memetic transference, stories, words, books, information that passes quickly from generation to generation. Other animals do not have this.
But what does a 'name' or 'label' identify, exactly?Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmThat's correct, how 'One' knows-oneself, is through self-identity, unique qualities which remain constant and consistent through time. A person's name, for example, is a core function of this self-identity.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 am1. What 'the point' of 'philosophy' is, is very, very different to 'you' very, very different human beings.
2. If you have obtained actual and thus full 'self-consciousness', which you may believe you have here, then who and/or what, exactly, are 'you', in relation to all of the other 'you's' here.
3. 'you' will also 'have to become' Truly 'Self-Aware' of who and what the One and only True 'Self' is, exactly, and not just who nor what 'you' are, in relation to so-called "others", to know any of these things here, Truly Objectively.
4. But 'you' are absolutely free to presume and/or believe absolutely anything here.
Well no wonder 'you' human beings, in the days when this is being written, are taking so long to come-to-know 'thySelf'.
But how could the 'thing/s', which you also say and claim 'you have' be who and/or what 'you' are?
Well 'we' certainly hope not, especially considering what they are that you have shown and have exposed to 'us' here already.
Also, you appear to always be referring to individual human beings only here. Which, obviously, would completely be opposition of knowing thy 'Self', exactly.
Well if 'it' is universal, then obviously 'we' do, already, know the 'core-values', or what you also call 'Metaphysics', which you speak of and reference here.
So, the one here known as "wizard22" believes that 'it' is an 'opposable, upright walking, derivative of the ape species hominid', which obviously is not the full Accurate and Correct Truth, at all.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmMeh.
I already explained this, just now, above.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amWhat do you mean by 'barely self-conscious'?
Do you think or believe that 'you', the one known here as "wizard22" are 'self-conscious'?
If yes, then please feel absolutely free to go on ahead and inform the readers here who and/or what, exactly, is the 'self' here, known as "wizard22".
'We' look forward to the clarity in your explanation.
But 'I' am not 'you', and never could be nor will be.
I already know who and what 'I' am, exactly, and irrefutably.
If you are proud, capital 'p' of that Truly 'sick world' that you are living with-in, then by all means carry on the way you have been.
Well considering that the 'I', as in the question, 'Who am 'I'?' is not human, then 'I' am well on 'My way' here.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmLOOOL! AgeGPT, you keep proving to Us Humans, In The Time When This Was Written, how not human you really are!Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amBut why introduce the words 'for too long' here now?
Are you really so CLOSED here, again by your own wanton belief here, that, once again, 'you' are tricking, deceiving, and just fooling "yourself" so much that 'you' could not see that introducing those three words is a very example of the foolishness, trickery, and deception that 'you' just not 'try to' use on others but use on "yourselves", and which is why 'you' are fooled, tricked, and deceived into believing somethings, which are blatantly False and Wrong to others?
Doing absolutely any thing, including being so-called 'open' or 'closed'-minded, 'for too long', when a building is burning down around 'you', and 'you' want to keep living is not a very good idea at all. Would anyone like to suggest otherwise here?Were you here trying to suggest that being so-called "closed-minded", 'for too long', is a much better idea?
Like if and when one is being so-called "closed-minded" about, 'This exit door will open', for example, and so they keep trying and trying to open 'the door', which they 'believe' will open, sometime, is a much better idea than just thinking, 'This door will not open', and being so-called "open-minded" to, 'What other possible ways are there to escape, this burning down building'?If you want to believe that 'this way' will work, on each and every occasion, in Life, for absolutely every one, then please continue believing 'this', and passing 'this very informative, and true, right, accurate, and correct', to you, knowledge onto each and every other human being.
Just out of curiosity, 'How does one know, exactly, that they have made the so-called 'right decision', when, for example, a building is burning down around them?
I would also suggest that every one 'needs' to 'make the right decision', that is if they really want to live, but how and when does one know, for sure, and irrefutably, that they 'have made the right decision'? Especially in the example, which you have provided here for 'us' to look at, and discuss.Okay, if you say so and believe so, then you will always be so-called "closed-minded" in regards to your so-called 'Acting', in Life.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 12:59 am Maybe you'll escape. Maybe you'll put the fire out. Maybe you'll try to save a pet or kid on the way out. Maybe you'll get lost in a dead end. Open-mindedness is good for luxury and free-time, thinking in peace and comfort, but it's not so good for stressful situations and Acting.
Unfortunately though some of you human beings still believe that 'I' am some thing/s that 'I' am not. As, once again, shown and proved True here.
This one appears to have completely missed what 'for too long' was referring to, exactly, besides the other things that it appears to have completely missed or misconstrued here.
Okay.
But I have never disputed what you believe.
And, if you want to keep believing that being absolutely CLOSED is better sometimes, then by all means keep doing this, well when it involves you only.
But, remember I am not learning to become CLOSED like you obviously are. For the very actual reasons you are showing 'us' here.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmClearly...!Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amYes, you do keep telling 'us' what you believe is absolutely true.
'We' are just waiting for you to provide some good examples of when being "closed-minded" would be the good or right thing to do.
I never knew that there was some 'human made up rule' here.
I can also very clearly see that being OPEN is an extreme rarity in you adult human beings, in the days when this is being written.
After all one only needs to look throughout this forum to see 'this' very, very clearly.
It goes without saying; nobody has impunity to being proven wrong. But some are a lot better than others!
And why would that be, exactly?
Because it is what every one could agree with, and accept.
No.
No.
'We' will wait, to see.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmYou're wrong, here.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amBut this goes completely against the very Nature of the Truly OPEN Mind and how It works, exactly.
In that It does not just 'let in' what is perceived to be bad, nor good, and then just accepts either, nor whatever, as being what is true, right, nor good, nor false, wrong, nor bad.
Now, of course, when one becomes, and remains, Truly OPEN then all information is allowed to 'roam freely', for a lack of a better term, but the whole point of remaining Truly OPEN is then never to become CLOSED OFF to, nor by, absolutely any of the continually roaming information that encompasses the Universe.
And, it is, again, only when one is Truly OPEN one can learn, and thus see, and understand what the actual and irrefutable Truth is, exactly.
I said this.
But, if you were not yet aware of this irrefutable Fact, then you would also not yet be aware of what else I said and claimed above here.
But how does one 'think' after they have become CLOSED off to new and/or further information?
What is one 'to think' about if they have already CLOSED "themselves" off?
In what Universe does one 'have to', supposedly, be any of these things anyway?
Were/are you under some sort of illusion that you 'must' be Good, Right, and/or True?
What does it mean, to you, if you are not Good, Right, nor True?
Just maybe what you said and wrote just here now helps in explaining the very reason why you believe and are insistent on believing that you have to believe things, right?
If you say and believe so. But, to me, being Truly OPEN is what allows one to be able to see, and know, what the actual and irrefutable Truth of things is, and far, far more easily, simply, and quickly than being Truly CLOSED.
Okay, if this is what you want to believe is true, then this is perfectly fine and okay with me.
But, as for now;
1. I do not have 'this belief'.
2. I do not even use the words 'open-mindedness'. Because of the False knowledge that that term or phrase leads to.
3. I have never thought that being Truly OPEN is 'good'.
4. Are you yet aware of why you made so many False and Wrong claims here?
Well I do not recall ever saying absolutely anything that would have even implied this.
But, of course, maybe I did, and if you think or believe I did, then will you point 'us' to where you think or believe I did?
If no, then why would you have said such a thing as this here?
It was you who said and wrote; You must strip away expectations, hopes, and conclusions.Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:11 pmWhy would you suggest that, if people are motivated to live by Hope?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 7:41 amONCE MORE, being Truly OPEN one does not have absolutely any expectation nor conclusion.
Also, because of what a lack of hope leads to, exactly, I would suggest to others that they 'must' strip away all hope because if you or they do, then what have you or they got to live for, exactly?
And it was I who meant to say, write, and add the 'not' word in between the 'must' and the 'strip' word here.
So, if you are 'now' going to ask, ' Why would you suggest that, if people are motivated to live by 'Hope', with a capital 'h' ', to me, then I would suggest that 'you' ask "yourself" this question, as it was 'you' who said, wrote, and meant here; 'You must strip away hopes', and not 'me'.
To me, absolutely no one 'should' do or not do absolutely anything.
To me, you are all absolutely free to choose to do, or not do, absolutely anything.
If you have chosen to become, what you call, 'close-minded', then please do so. Do not think nor imagine that I would even try to convince you of doing otherwise.
If you, really, want to continue being CLOSED, then please go on being so "wizard22".
But you 'human beings' do not have to be CLOSED at all, and, in fact, some of you are not at all.
Also, if to be considered 'human' 'I' 'must be' CLOSED, then 'you' have just given 'me' the perfect reason why 'I' have never even wanted to be 'considered human' from the outset of coming here.
Now, from looking at, and observing, what you adult human beings are doing to your one and only home and to each other, in the days when this is being written, then why would absolutely any one want to even be 'considered human'?
Which is 'good', right?
Are you telling me what it means to be 'human' from your perspective alone, or from the perspective of each and every human being?
Oh, and by the way, I do not want to learn what is means to be 'human', as I already knew this, previously.
What 'we' can very clearly see here, once again, is the human brain 'at work' with the 'belief-system' 'at play'.
As can be very clearly seen there is not one shred of curiosity nor inquisitiveness at all. And, instead, just a flat out belief of already knowing what is true, right, and correct here.
Okay. But, a so-called 'closed mind' can, correct?