Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Age wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:06 am
BUT I do NOT usually go in 'that direction', if EVER.
Ah, ha. Then you use language in ways that will be regularly misinterpreted by people at the time this is being written.
Would you like to provide some examples of where, when, and/or how I, supposedly, use language in ways that WILL BE, regularly, MISINTERPRETED by people, in the days when this is being written?
If no, then WHY NOT?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I think it would be good if you treated current English as a foreign language.
Okay. But WHY, EXACTLY?
Okay I will let 'you' give 'me' a hint here about the social interactions in the days when this is being written.
YES I COULD HAVE.
AND, by the way, I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE, that is; IF 'you' JUST ASKED 'me' A CLARIFYING QUESTION, which involved a 'Yes' or 'No' ANSWER.
OK, so you have a rule, it seems, that someone must ask you clarifying questions or you will not respond to content. [/quote]
It may well SEEM 'this way' TO 'you', BUT 'this' IS CERTAINLY NOT necessarily what IS ACTUALLY True, AT ALL.
Here we have ANOTHER example of 'confirmation bias' AT WORK, and AT PLAY.
'This one' MADE the ASSUMPTION that I have some 'rule', that someone MUST ask me a clarifying question or I will NOT even respond to content. Which, besides being OBVIOUSLY False and Wrong, is just a Truly CLOSED PERSPECTIVE of 'things', but worse still 'this one' THEN JUMPED to the CONCLUSION that 'its' OWN PRESUMPTION was, and IS, true AND right. As can be CLEARLY SEEN by 'its' OWN WORDS here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
But then, I find a more varied approach useful.
Okay. If 'that' is what WORKS, FOR 'you', and what 'you' WANT TO DO, then by all means CARRY ONE in 'that way'.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
How much MORE SIMPLER and EASIER could this have been?
Actually, your version is more complicated.
So, TO 'you', ASKING SIMPLE and OPEN QUESTIONS, in order to OBTAIN and GAIN CLARITY, FROM the "other's" perspective, IS MORE COMPLICATED.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I put forth an idea and then must as a clarifying question.
BUT there is NO 'must' here.
'you' ARE ABSOLUTELY FREE TO DO ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' 'you' LIKE here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I could simply put forth an idea of what is happening and you could respond to that idea, without needing the prompt.
ONLY if 'you' ARE CURIOS, and INTERESTED, then 'you' WOULD ASK A QUESTION. But NO one says that 'you' HAVE TO BE CURIOS, NOR even INTERESTED.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
But, I see that you want that extra step.
FINALLY.
I HAVE BEEN, for quite a while now, been SAYING; I LIKE to be CHALLENGED, and/or QUESTIONED, OVER what I SAY and CLAIM here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Fine. I can think of that as your culture. But while thinking it's fine for you to expect everyone to conform to your culture and to judge them if they don't, I may well ask clarifying questions, but I will not be adhering to this as a rule.
Okay. If 'you' just WANT TO TELL 'us' YOUR VIEWS, ONLY, and ARE NOT INTERESTED IN "other's" VIEWS, then 'this' is ALL WELL and GOOD. Well TO 'me' anyway.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
Or you could have said that it was partly true or you could have asked for clarification.
But I did NOT need clarification. 'you' expressed what SEEMED, TO 'you'. 'This' is FAIRLY WELL EXTREMELY STRAIGHTFORWARD, which TO 'me' does NOT need ANY further CLARITY.
Right, that was one of a number of options.
As for 'me' SAYING that 'it' was 'partly true', 'not true', or 'fully true' would be A Wrong 'thing' for 'me' to do. As HOW could 'I' TELL 'you' what 'SEEMED' like, TO 'you'. OBVIOUSLY, ONLY 'you' KNOW what DOES or DOES NOT 'SEEM' like, TO 'you'.
Yes, people in this time, at least many of them, understand that it is possible to then move forward and express how it seems to them. [/quote]
AND, WHEN, and IF, 'they' DO, then, ONCE AGAIN, OBVIOUSLY NO one could, logically AND actually, INFORM 'them' that what SEEMS TO 'them' could be WRONG.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
To reply to the content of my assertions. To build or critique.
IF some 'thing' SEEMS, TO 'you', then so be it.
AND, if you WANT TO EXPRESS what SEEMS, TO 'you', then, by ALL MEANS, go on AHEAD.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
'you' EXPRESSED what 'SEEMED' TO 'you'. I LEFT 'that', literally, AS 'that'.
Well, no, you didn't. You asked me if I could be wrong about what seems to me to be the case.
YES I DID.
I WANTED TO CLARIFY some 'thing', in regards to YOUR VIEW/S here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Perhaps the people in your time use the verb 'seem' in a different way.
I DOUBT it. BUT, THEN AGAIN, 'we' have YET TO UNCOVER what the 'seem' word MEANS and/or REFERS TO, TO 'you', AND, TO 'me'.
I have YET to even UNCOVER what 'you' MEAN, EXACTLY, when 'you' USE the words 'people in your time', let alone MOVING ON TO OTHER 'things' here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
But that seemed like a truly unnecessary tangent, especially in the context of no response to content.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
There are other possibilities.
Okay. But for 'now' I will NOT ASK what 'they' ARE NOR COULD BE.
Fine: I think 'or' likely conveys what you meant better than 'NOR' here.
Okay, ACCEPTED.
But here is a GOOD TIME to POINT OUT a GREAT example of how DIFFERENT cultures, even in the EXACT SAME times, have, and hold, DIFFERENT VIEWS ABOUT 'things'.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
But, as usual, you chose to not move forward or try to in the conversation.
YES. BECAUSE, as usual, 'you' did NOT ASK 'me' FOR CLARITY. 'you', INSTEAD, as usual, TOLD 'me' what 'SEEMED' like, TO 'you'.
Notice the way you are not responding to what I wrote here.
Okay. I WILL, and DID.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I said you chose not to move forward or try to in the conversation.
It seems like 'you' do NOT want to MOVE FORWARD or even just try to in the conversation, here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
You say that you did not do this because I did not ask you for clarity. I think this is a limited approach to conversation and actually restricts moving forward, if it is the only conception of moving forward in a conversation.
Okay, but it seems like 'you' REALLY do NOT want to JUST MOVE FORWARD here, now.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
And NOTHING ELSE?
Same here.
What do 'you' MEAN here by SAYING, 'Same here'?
I ASKED 'you' the CLARIFYING QUESTION, 'And NOTHING ELSE?' in regards to 'your CLAIM' that 'you see language as eliciting experiences'.
I will make 'this' SIMPLER, FOR 'you' now.
Do 'you' ONLY see 'language', itself, as 'eliciting experiences' and NOTHING ELSE?
If yes, then 'this' would HELP TREMENDOUSLY in EXPLAINING HOW and WHY 'you' interact the way 'you' DO, socially.
It doesn't seem like you have much interest in what I wrote in the post, except to get at clarifications of terms.
Is there, REALLY, ANY 'thing' WRONG in GETTING CLARIFICATION OF TERMS, from the "other's" PERSPECTIVE?
I FOUND GAINING and OBTAINING CLARIFICATION OF TERMS, FROM "another's" PERSPECTIVE, leads to GAINING and OBTAINING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF "the other".
It seems like 'you' REALLY LIKE JUDGING 'me'.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Are you interested in the philosophy of language? The phenomenology of language? Other ways of viewing what is happening during communication?
YES.
Are 'you' INTERESTED in UNDERSTANDING "others" AND even "your" OWN 'self' BETTER?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
You could have given your take on things.
YES I COULD HAVE.
BUT, considering 'you' did NOT SHOW ANY CURIOSITY through INQUISITIVE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, I just LET 'you' EXPLAIN what 'SEEMS', or 'SEEMED', TO 'you', and left 'that', AS 'that'.
Again, I think you have a limited sense of what shows curiosity.
Okay. BUT did 'you' ACTUALLY SAY and/or POINT 'this' OUT, PREVIOUSLY?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
We are here in a philosophy forum. If I post to someone it is in that context.
In 'what' CONTEXT, EXACTLY?
I have NOT even GAINED CLARITY as to what the 'philosophy' word even MEANS or REFERS TO, TO 'you', YET.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I express views and ideas with the assumption that the other person has chosen, as you did, to respond to the issue/points I raised in response to someone else.
I suggest, AGAIN, that ASSUMING 'things' can ALL TOO EASILY, ALL TOO SIMPLY, and/or ALL TOO QUICKLY LEAD one ASTRAY.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
You're happy to imply or state things about me as a person.
Okay.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I don't think I've ever asked you to clarify what you think I am like as a person or what we are all like as people in the time this is being written.
Okay.
I, sometimes, LIKE to EXPRESS MY VIEWS ABOUT the way 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, MIS/BEHAVE to FIND OUT and SEE IF there ARE ANY of 'you' who WANT TO BE Truly Honest, and/or who WANT TO SERIOUSLY CHANGE, FOR the BETTER.
If 'you', people, THEN WANT TO just 'TRY TO' "justify" or "minimize" YOUR Wrong DOING, then by ALL MEANS KEEP DOING SO.
Either way is PERFECTLY FINE WITH me.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
And yet you manage to offer this, even when it is off topic. Here I was talking about a way of viewing language and it seems like you could not weigh in on the issue, unless I asked you a clarifying question. Yet, you can manage to weigh in on other things without that question.
If 'this' IS 'the way' 'it' SEEMS, or IS, TO 'you', then OKAY.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
It's fine with me if you don't want to express any thoughts on what I was writing about. But it makes you vastly less interesting as a discussion partner, to me, that is.
Okay. AND, if 'you' do NOT WANT TO BE OPEN and Honest ABOUT the Wrong that 'you' ARE OBVIOUSLY DOING, then 'this' might make 'you' LESS INTERESTING, TO 'me'.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
'you' SEEM MORE inclined to WANT TO EXPRESS 'your OWN VIEWS' rather then FINDING OUT and/or CLARIFYING "another's" VIEWS here.
I consider most people to be adults who don't need to be invited to speak. I read people's views all the time here. I am interested and show this in a wide set of ways, a wide set of ways understood at the time this is being written.
ARE 'your', people's, VIEWS being REALLY UNDERSTOOD, in the days when this is being written?
If yes, then WHY IS there SO MUCH BICKERING, DISAGREEING, and 'ARGUING' here, in this forum, and SO MUCH BICKERING, DISAGREEING, and KILLING here, on earth, in the days when this being written.
SOME might ACTUALLY SAY and CLAIM that, REALLY, 'you', adult human beings, are NOT UNDERSTANDING "each other" AT ALL, REALLY.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
You seem interested in two things: asking clarifying questions and judging people.
AND, TO 'me', you seem interested in EXPRESSING YOUR VIEWS and HAVING 'them' UNDERSTOOD and AGREED UPON, and, JUDGING 'me'.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
You seem to only want to do these two things and judge others who do not do the former as much as you think they should.
AND, TO 'me', 'you' seem to ONLY want to do these 'things' and JUDGE 'me' for NOT DOING what 'you' WANT 'me' TO DO.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
We have our preferences, you and I.
YES, 'you' prefer some 'things' OVER other 'things', just like 'I' DO.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
But you see conversation, primarily, as requesting that others answer more and more questions.
What other BETTER WAY is there to GAIN and OBTAIN what the "other" IS ACTUALLY Truly SAYING, and MEANING?
You can triangulate by responding with your ideas.
BUT 'my' OWN personal ideas or views are of NO REAL SIGNIFICANCE, in the ACTUAL SCHEME of 'things'.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
This can quickly lead to, for example, me saying, ah, perhaps you thought I meant X,
I PREFER to just ASK 'you' CLARIFYING QUESTIONS LIKE: Do 'you' think, or BELIEVE, 'x'?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
and then adding more of my position or asking something about yours or noting what seem like areas in common...and so on.
I FOUND it MUCH QUICKER, MUCH SIMPLER, and MUCH EASIER to JUST ASK FOR CLARITY, INSTEAD of EXPRESSING what SEEMS-LIKE, TO 'me'.
That is; OBVIOUSLY ONLY IF the "other" IS Truly OPEN, and Honest, and PREPARED TO BE Truly OPEN, and Honest.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Is there ANOTHER BETTER WAY to UNDERSTAND the "other" FULLY?
My point is not that you should give up clarifying questions. It seems you think this is THE tool, period, and then also judgments. I think that's limited. I suppose I think having a more diverse way of interacting is better, yes.
Okay. SO, 'yes', 'you' SUPPOSE, 'you' THINK that HAVING a MORE DIVERSE WAY of interacting is A BETTER WAY, then ASKING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS.
Now, I HOPE 'you' ANSWERED my NEXT CLARIFYING QUESTION.
We will, as I say, WAIT, TO SEE.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
If yes, then what IS that OTHER BETTER WAY?
And, is ASKING, PRESUMED, MORE and MORE, QUESTIONS NOT the BEST WAY to ASCERTAIN whether the "other" Truly KNOWS what 'they' ARE SAYING and CLAIMING?
I don't know what you think gets lost if you had simply phrased this in statement form.
I am NOT that 'self-centered' to THINK nor IMAGINE that 'my views', in statement form, are THAT IMPORTANT. I MUCH PREFER TO OBTAIN and GAIN "other's" VIEWS and PERSPECTIVES. I DO 'this' SO that I CAN LEARN MORE, and NEW 'things', FROM 'them'.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
At the time this is being written we are quite aware of implicit assertions and expressions of incredulity.
Okay, BUT 'you' ARE NOT ANSWERING my CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. Which, to some, this could be INFERRED AS 'you' REALLY DO NOT KNOW OF ANY OTHER, ACTUAL, BETTER WAY.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
if no, then what is A BETTER WAY?
By the way, 'this here' IS a philosophy forum, do 'you', people, here COME NOT expecting to be QUESTIONED and/nor CHALLENGED OVER 'your' CLAIMS?
Of course.
Okay. BUT I WAS, PREVIOUSLY, THINKING that 'you' would COME here EXPECTING to be QUESTIONED and/or CHALLENGED OVER 'your' CLAIMS.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
You imply positions, but don't assert them.
Is there something wrong with 'this'?
If yes, then what IS that 'thing/s', EXACTLY?
Because it keeps the onus on other people only. You get to imply things and claim you have no beliefs. It's disingenous. I don't like it.
AH, so 'this' is ABOUT what "iwannaplato" LIKES and/or DISLIKES, AND HOW "iwannaplato" EXPECTS "others" to BEHAVE, or REACT.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
You judge, but don't offer something.
BECAUSE, as I have PREVIOUSLY STIPULATED, I WAIT FOR 'those' who seriously Want TO CHANGE, for the better, and who ARE Truly OPEN, and Honest.
I don't experience you this way.
Okay.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I don't experience you as someone interested in other people's ideas.
REALLY?
'This' is QUITE SURPRISING, especially considering the AMOUNT OF 'time' and/or 'effort' I SPEND trying to DELVE DEEPER and FULLY INTO people's IDEAS and VIEWS.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
You seem extremely fixed and set in your ways.
And what ARE 'those ways', which I SEEM, TO 'you', 'extremely fixed and set' IN, EXACTLY?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I don't get the impression you are interested in changing or learning from others.
Okay.
But what 'we' could have here is just ANOTHER PRIME example of 'CONFIRMATION BIASES', in 'its' EXTREMIST FORM.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
You communicate in ways that, at the time this is being written, are condescending.
Is 'this' the ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth, OR, just what SEEMS or APPEARS TO 'you'?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
And with regularity.
The ACTUALITY, OR the PERCEPTION?
Could it even be A POSSIBILITY that I HAVE NEVER BEEN 'condescending' AT ALL?
Or, that 'I' have been 'condescending' IS the ACTUAL Truth here?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Despite your claim to not have any beliefs (and I mean beliefs in the sense of 'things that you believe are true) you imply and state beliefs about a rather large number of things.
1. WITHOUT 'you' FIRST CLARIFYING 'you' WILL NOT and DO NOT KNOW WHAT 'I' IMPLY, in what 'I' SAY and WRITE here.
2. What 'you' SAY and CLAIM 'I' IMPLY is JUST what 'you' HAVE INFERRED, INSTEAD.
3. If 'you' REALLY WANT TO think or BELIEVE and PERSIST that 'I' STATE BELIEFS, (and A RATHER LARGE NUMBER of 'them'), then 'I' WILL ONCE AGAIN SUGGEST that INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING and CLAIMING that 'I' DO, 'you' START backing up and supporting YOUR CLAIM here with SOME ACTUAL 'evidence', or better still with SOME ACTUAL 'PROOF'.
4. Despite 'your BELIEF, and 'your CLAIM', that 'I' HAVE BELIEFS, 'you' have, YET, to PROVIDE ANY 'thing' of ANY SUBSTANCE, which SUPPORTS 'your BELIEF' here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Imagine a relationship where one partner always is asking for justification for everything, claims to not have any beliefs and doesn't add much direct content to the conversations. That's a dominance pattern, in the time that this is being written.
If 'this' is what 'you' SAY and BELIEF SO, then so be it.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
It is putting people on t he defensive.
People in relationships do NOT USUALLY talk TOGETHER and HAVE DISCUSSIONS in 'philosophy forums', WHERE one WANTS TO MAKE CLAIMS are, USUALLY, AWARE that 'they' ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DEFEND 'their' VIEWS and/or IDEAS.
Now, ONCE AGAIN, if one can NOT back up, support, and/or DEFEND 'their' VIEWS, and/or IDEAS, BEFORE 'they' MAKE 'them' PUBLICLY KNOWN, especially in A 'philosophy forum', then I, AGAIN, SUGGEST that 'they' do NOT EXPRESS 'them', PUBLICLY here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Now you might be able to claim that they are responsible for this, but since you so often express judgment for the people of this time and laugh at them
I HAVE NEVER LAUGHED AT people here.
I SUGGEST 'you' REALLY SEEK OUT and OBTAIN CLARITY FIRST "iwannaplato" BEFORE 'you' MAKE these kinds of Truly False, Wrong, Inaccurate, AND Incorrect ASSUMPTIONS, and/or BELIEFS.
That way 'you' WILL NOT BE SO Wrong, SO OFTEN.
Also, 'you' SPEAK as though 'you', adult human beings, do NOT DO Wrong, in the days when this is being written, or do NOT LIKE HAVING what 'you' DO Wrong POINTED OUT, and/or SHOWN.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
in general and in the specific, that claim is not even weak, it's groundless.
WHAT CLAIM are 'you' talking ABOUT and REFERRING TO here, EXACTLY?
ONLY IF, and WHEN, 'you' NAME 'that claim', EXACTLY, then, ONLY THEN, I COULD SHOW and PROVE whether 'that claim' IS GROUNDED, or NOT.
'your' CONTINUAL ALLUDING TO 'things' WITHOUT EVER ACTUALLY STIPULATING what 'they' ARE, EXACTLY, is NOT HELPING 'you' here IN ANY WAY, AT ALL.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:44 am
It's our responsibility and we get blamed for the conflicts of our time, all while your attitude leads to conflicts via its judgments.
BUT My 'judging' is NOT based upon on ANY 'superiority' NOR 'inferiority' AT ALL.
Then you would include yourself in those judgments. It would be 'we' not 'you'.
WHAT HAPPENS IF 'I" AM NOT YET 'an adult'?
OR, WHAT HAPPENS IF 'I'' AM NOT 'an adult'?
HOW COULD 'I" Accurately LABEL and/or NAME 'me' WITH 'you', adult human beings. WHO ARE the ONLY ones here that COULD, and DO, DO Wrong.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
My 'judging' is JUST STATING that 'this' is what 'you' DO. And, if 'you' are NOT CURIOUS AT ALL regarding 'this judgment call', the so be it. LEAVE 'it' and MOVE ALONG.
Well, 1) it is disingenous to say it is just stating, since you often accompany your judgments with LOLs,
HOW MANY TIMES do 'you' HAVE TO BE INFORMED that 'you' have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA NOR CLUE AS TO WHAT those three letters MEAN and REFER TO, EXACTLY. That is; UNTIL 'you' EVER BEGIN TO SEEK OUT and OBTAIN ACTUALLY CLARIFICATION, AND CLARITY.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
for example. 2) I don't believe you.
AND, as I CONTINUALLY SAY and STATE, WHILE 'you' BELIEVE some 'thing' IS true, then there IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the WHOLE Universe, and even INCLUDING the WHOLE Universe, Itself, which could SHOW and PROVE TO 'you' OTHERWISE.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Also, if 'the way' 'life' IS, in the days when this is being written, IS NOT BE-CAUSE of 'you', adult human beings, then WHO CAUSED or CREATED 'this was of life'?
This question implies that I have said that humans haven't cause a lot of the problems.
WELL 'you' seem to KEEP CRYING and WHINGING ABOUT 'me' JUST SAYING, STATING, and CLAIMING that it IS 'you', adult human beings, who ARE DOING Wrong, in the days when this is being written.
1. ONLY 'you', human beings, can CAUSE and CREATE, ACTUAL, 'problems'.
2. ONLY 'you', human beings, have CAUSED and CREATED 'the way' 'the world' or 'life' IS.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I have said to you elsewhere, at least I think it was you, that problems are also created by the situation we are in.
Well 'you' can KEEP SAYING 'things' for AS LONG AS 'you' LIKE, but UNTIL 'you' EVER EXPLAIN what an ACTUAL 'problem' IS, EXACTLY, then I WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA NOR CLUE AS TO HOW 'problems' ARE, SUPPOSEDLY CREATED BY 'SITUATIONS'.
'you' OBVIOUSLY HAVE and ARE USING A VERY DIFFERENT definition for the word 'problem' then 'I' HAVE and USE.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
But the problems are also being caused by you. You are hear, judging and laughing at people,
ONCE AGAIN, and ONCE MORE, 'your ASSUMPTION and/or BELIEF' here could NOT be ANY FURTHER AWAY FROM what the ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
judging also their more diverse set of ways of communicating. There are other causes, but none of them have anything to do with the issue I wrote about in the post you first responded to.
And NONE of what 'you' COMPLAINING and WHINGING ABOUT here has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH what I have been SAYING and WRITING here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
I see little evidence you are interested in that topic.
I see little evidence you are interested in what I talk ABOUT and POINT OUT here.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
OKAY. AGAIN, if ''this' is 'what' 'SEEMS' TO 'you', then I can WAIT TILL 'you' ARE READY, OPEN, and Honest ENOUGH, TO ANSWER.
More judgments.
WELL IF 'you' ARE NOT ANSWERING, then 'this' is JUST EXACTLY what 'you' ARE DOING.
Are 'you' UNDER SOME SORT OF DELUSION that 'I' am NOT CAPABLE of JUST POINTING OUT and SHOWING what 'you' DO, WITHOUT judging?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
Just because I do not conform to your priorities in an interaction and your preferences and satisfy your desires, you conclude that the reason I am not responding the way you want is because I am not open and honest enough to answer.
So WHAT IS THE REASON WHY 'you' JUST DO NOT ANSWER the ACTUAL SIMPLE and OPEN QUESTIONS I JUST ASK, JUST FOR CLARITY and UNDERSTANDING PURPOSES, ONLY?
Also, have 'you' NOT been CLAIMING that 'I' am NOT conforming to 'your priorities' in an interaction and to 'your preferences' and 'satisfy your desires' here?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
That is a belief.
WHAT, EXACTLY, IS, SUPPOSEDLY, A BELIEF?
I do NOT KNOW HOW to MAKE 'this' ANY CLEARER, BUT WHEN 'you', people, USE words like 'that', 'it', or 'this', then, IF I ASK FOR CLARITY AS TO WHAT those words REFER TO, EXACTLY, and 'you' DO NOT ANSWER, then I WILL, STILL, have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE NOR IDEA as to WHAT 'it' IS 'that 'you' ARE MEANING and/or REFERRING TO.
LOOK, I could ALSO SAY, 'That is a belief'.
Now, do 'you' HAVE ANY CLUE AS TO WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT?
And, If 'you' WANT TO CLAIM that 'that' word REFERS TO 'your CLAIM' ABOUT 'your CONCLUSION' ABOUT what 'I' have 'concluded' IS A BELIEF, then IS 'this' A BELIEF OF 'yours'?
If yes, then COULD 'your BELIEFS' BE Wrong?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
You know those things you claim not to have. It was a poor assumption. And it's a dominance move.
You didn't do what I want....you have these qualities
Welcome to the time we are writing in. You are part of the problem. And I cannot respect you if you cannot see this and admit it.
ONCE AGAIN, 'you' just ALLUDE TO 'things'.
WHAT are the 'this' AND the 'it' word here REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?
Will 'you' PLEASE STOP ALLUDING TO 'things', and JUST START STIPULATING 'things', EXPLICITLY?
If no, then WHY NOT?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 3:37 pm
And that was an example of you going in a direction you claimed not to ever go in, right up there in the beginning of my quotes in this post.
AND what is the 'that' word here REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?