A:
1. It is not possible to know the unknowable
2. A world outside the knowing is unknowable
3. It is not possible to know a world outside the knowing
4. Mind is knowing
5. It is not possible to know a world outside the mind
6. It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
7. The world is my mind
--------------------------------------------------------------
B:
1. We know a world
2. The world we know must be in the mind[A]
3. The world is in the mind
4. The mind is greater than the world
5. The mind is All-Knowing of the world
6. All that is in the mind are its conceptions
7. The world is the mind's creation
8. The mind is All-Powerful
9. The mind is God
10. God exists
Dear Atheists. It's over.
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
Magnolia5275 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 2:14 am A:
1. It is not possible to know the unknowable
2. A world outside the knowing is unknowable
3. It is not possible to know a world outside the knowing
4. Mind is knowing
5. It is not possible to know a world outside the mind
6. It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
7. The world is my mind
--------------------------------------------------------------
B:
1. We know a world
2. The world we know must be in the mind[A]
3. The world is in the mind
4. The mind is greater than the world
5. The mind is All-Knowing of the world
6. All that is in the mind are its conceptions
7. The world is the mind's creation
8. The mind is All-Powerful
9. The mind is God
10. God exists
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
It is not possible to know that.Magnolia5275 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 2:14 am 1. It is not possible to know the unknowable
9. The mind is God
10. God exists
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
… the’re probably a’lot’o’people …
… who just ( seem’to ) know „now“ …
… and ( this way ) define past as some’thin’ „material“ …
… and ( this way ) as „fear“ …
… and ( this way )t is called „fearer“ :
… „pray“in ( … ) „material“ …
… and „be“in’ „fetishist“ :
… „hav“in’ ( … ) „power“ :
… „posessin“ !
… and this way some human’s produce „symbol“s :
… „feel’material“ !
… and this way … some thousand’s year’s ago …
… ( so’called ) „christianity“ was found’ :
… beein’ … „despite“ – material !
… and this way … „we’looser“ … just can pray …
… who just ( seem’to ) know „now“ …
… and ( this way ) define past as some’thin’ „material“ …
… and ( this way ) as „fear“ …
… and ( this way )t is called „fearer“ :
… „pray“in ( … ) „material“ …
… and „be“in’ „fetishist“ :
… „hav“in’ ( … ) „power“ :
… „posessin“ !
… and this way some human’s produce „symbol“s :
… „feel’material“ !
… and this way … some thousand’s year’s ago …
… ( so’called ) „christianity“ was found’ :
… beein’ … „despite“ – material !
… and this way … „we’looser“ … just can pray …
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
''THIS'' is another word for ''UNKNOWING'' which is apparently known as this unknowing known.
THIS is, without doubt or error. But, WHAT this is, is imagined, as this unknowing becomes artificially conceived as a known concept in this unknowing conception.
It's not known what is writing this, what is knowing this, what is reading this, what is speaking these WORDS...except as conceptual understanding, in this unknowing conception, rendering all knowing as an illusion, albeit appearing as if the illusion is real.
Every known thing is a concept known, that cannot in and of itself know.
Reality is without doubt or error, but as soon as WORDS are overlaid upon it, reality becomes a description of unknowing, which is an artificial conception of this ever present unborn eternal now. This artificially placed conceptual overlay upon the unborn now, is likened to a dream, in which nothing ever happens.
Reality doesn't require or need to make sense to be, reality just is...The mind seeks for reality to make sense, only because the mind can do absolutely nothing with the idea of this unborn unknowing now. So the mind will conjure up some sort of sense of what never makes or requires to make sense, so that it thinks and believes it understands. But this understanding is only imagined, because the mind is a myth.
.
THIS is, without doubt or error. But, WHAT this is, is imagined, as this unknowing becomes artificially conceived as a known concept in this unknowing conception.
It's not known what is writing this, what is knowing this, what is reading this, what is speaking these WORDS...except as conceptual understanding, in this unknowing conception, rendering all knowing as an illusion, albeit appearing as if the illusion is real.
Every known thing is a concept known, that cannot in and of itself know.
Reality is without doubt or error, but as soon as WORDS are overlaid upon it, reality becomes a description of unknowing, which is an artificial conception of this ever present unborn eternal now. This artificially placed conceptual overlay upon the unborn now, is likened to a dream, in which nothing ever happens.
Reality doesn't require or need to make sense to be, reality just is...The mind seeks for reality to make sense, only because the mind can do absolutely nothing with the idea of this unborn unknowing now. So the mind will conjure up some sort of sense of what never makes or requires to make sense, so that it thinks and believes it understands. But this understanding is only imagined, because the mind is a myth.
.
Last edited by Dontaskme on Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
I was just wondering, noerd, how did you come to develop this intensely irritating style of writing, and why?noerd wrote: ↑Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:19 am … the’re probably a’lot’o’people …
… who just ( seem’to ) know „now“ …
… and ( this way ) define past as some’thin’ „material“ …
… and ( this way ) as „fear“ …
… and ( this way )t is called „fearer“ :
… „pray“in ( … ) „material“ …
… and „be“in’ „fetishist“ :
… „hav“in’ ( … ) „power“ :
… „posessin“ !
… and this way some human’s produce „symbol“s :
… „feel’material“ !
… and this way … some thousand’s year’s ago …
… ( so’called ) „christianity“ was found’ :
… beein’ … „despite“ – material !
… and this way … „we’looser“ … just can pray …
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
… inspired by tv dialogue's …
… as urban person … some’time’s look’out’side’a window … and … wonder …
… ( bout „synchronity“ ) …
… „why“ … do’al’is’people … behave like „robot“s ?
… pantomizin’ tv …
… machtin’eire stick …
… followin’ „shadow“s ?
… „what“ ( may ) do they „think“ ?
… ( havin’ ) „order“ ?
… followin’ … „fear“ … and reproducin’ „hierarchy“ ?
… „are“ they ( emotional - ) „match – stick – men“ ?
… „traditionalized“ … by fear … to reproduce … match – stick – men ?
… „knowin“ … what’s „good“ ?
… „havin“ good’s … or otherwise „loose“ ?
… „beein“ symbolized … by „stereotype“s ?
… „reflex“ !
… „be“ match – stick – men ?
… costructin’ … „ancester“s … „anima“l ?
… feel’ike’dog … and „keep“ one’self for’it ?
… „barkin“ – reflexive … gain’s’t car’s … and „unknown“ ?
… as urban person … some’time’s look’out’side’a window … and … wonder …
… ( bout „synchronity“ ) …
… „why“ … do’al’is’people … behave like „robot“s ?
… pantomizin’ tv …
… machtin’eire stick …
… followin’ „shadow“s ?
… „what“ ( may ) do they „think“ ?
… ( havin’ ) „order“ ?
… followin’ … „fear“ … and reproducin’ „hierarchy“ ?
… „are“ they ( emotional - ) „match – stick – men“ ?
… „traditionalized“ … by fear … to reproduce … match – stick – men ?
… „knowin“ … what’s „good“ ?
… „havin“ good’s … or otherwise „loose“ ?
… „beein“ symbolized … by „stereotype“s ?
… „reflex“ !
… „be“ match – stick – men ?
… costructin’ … „ancester“s … „anima“l ?
… feel’ike’dog … and „keep“ one’self for’it ?
… „barkin“ – reflexive … gain’s’t car’s … and „unknown“ ?
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
I'm still wondering.noerd wrote: ↑Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:58 pm … inspired by tv dialogue's …
… as urban person … some’time’s look’out’side’a window … and … wonder …
… ( bout „synchronity“ ) …
… „why“ … do’al’is’people … behave like „robot“s ?
… pantomizin’ tv …
… machtin’eire stick …
… followin’ „shadow“s ?
… „what“ ( may ) do they „think“ ?
… ( havin’ ) „order“ ?
… followin’ … „fear“ … and reproducin’ „hierarchy“ ?
… „are“ they ( emotional - ) „match – stick – men“ ?
… „traditionalized“ … by fear … to reproduce … match – stick – men ?
… „knowin“ … what’s „good“ ?
… „havin“ good’s … or otherwise „loose“ ?
… „beein“ symbolized … by „stereotype“s ?
… „reflex“ !
… „be“ match – stick – men ?
… costructin’ … „ancester“s … „anima“l ?
… feel’ike’dog … and „keep“ one’self for’it ?
… „barkin“ – reflexive … gain’s’t car’s … and „unknown“ ?
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
… historicism … „grow“s :
… is this way defined upon „power“ :
… „is“ man ?
… „is“ this way still „unknown“ …
… or internet ?
… do – I – know …
… what’s „new“ ?
… do – I – need …
… synthetic’time ?
… „is“ ( this way still ) „earth“ …
… or are we beein(s ) „enlightened“ ?
… „be“ atom …
… or – be – mass ?
… or – beein’ – devided …
… into …
… „opinion“ ?
… „do“ – I – think …
…
… or otherwise …
… „be“ stomach ?
… or may’t be possible …
… „movin“ ?
… „is“ ( this way still ) „aim“ …
… or „has“to’be „yesterday“ ?
… or do I presume …
… „be“ movin’ ?
… is this way defined upon „power“ :
… „is“ man ?
… „is“ this way still „unknown“ …
… or internet ?
… do – I – know …
… what’s „new“ ?
… do – I – need …
… synthetic’time ?
… „is“ ( this way still ) „earth“ …
… or are we beein(s ) „enlightened“ ?
… „be“ atom …
… or – be – mass ?
… or – beein’ – devided …
… into …
… „opinion“ ?
… „do“ – I – think …
…
… or otherwise …
… „be“ stomach ?
… or may’t be possible …
… „movin“ ?
… „is“ ( this way still ) „aim“ …
… or „has“to’be „yesterday“ ?
… or do I presume …
… „be“ movin’ ?
Re: Dear Atheists. It's over.
??noerd wrote: ↑Mon Jan 09, 2023 11:02 am … historicism … „grow“s :
… is this way defined upon „power“ :
… „is“ man ?
… „is“ this way still „unknown“ …
… or internet ?
… do – I – know …
… what’s „new“ ?
… do – I – need …
… synthetic’time ?
… „is“ ( this way still ) „earth“ …
… or are we beein(s ) „enlightened“ ?
… „be“ atom …
… or – be – mass ?
… or – beein’ – devided …
… into …
… „opinion“ ?
… „do“ – I – think …
…
… or otherwise …
… „be“ stomach ?
… or may’t be possible …
… „movin“ ?
… „is“ ( this way still ) „aim“ …
… or „has“to’be „yesterday“ ?
… or do I presume …
… „be“ movin’ ?
??