The Sun Also Sets

[Age]

No there is no contradiction

Because knowledge is both justified true belief and justified true information

Please define the difference between information and knowledge.

EXCELLENT request.

[commonsense]

'you', 'gary childress", here could NOT be PROVIDING a MORE PERFECT example of one who IS SO CLOSED, and ONE "sided".

Should I not be "closed" to cannibalism?

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' have managed to COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISS the WHOLE POINT being made.

If 'you' were NOT SO CLOSED a 'person' as 'you' ARE, then I would start to wonder if 'you' are purposely 'trying to' to DEFLECT here.

What is the whole point?

[commonsense]

No there is no contradiction

Because knowledge is both justified true belief and justified true information

Please define the difference between information and knowledge.

Information is data. Knowledge is information once analyzed.

[Age]

Should I not be "closed" to cannibalism?

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' have managed to COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISS the WHOLE POINT being made.

If 'you' were NOT SO CLOSED a 'person' as 'you' ARE, then I would start to wonder if 'you' are purposely 'trying to' to DEFLECT here.

What is the whole point?

WHEN one IS Truly Honest, Open, and seriously Wanting TO CHANGE, FOR the BETTER, then 'that one' CAN and WILL ALSO SEE the ACTUAL ABSOLUTE Truth OF 'things', AS WELL.

[commonsense]

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' have managed to COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISS the WHOLE POINT being made.

If 'you' were NOT SO CLOSED a 'person' as 'you' ARE, then I would start to wonder if 'you' are purposely 'trying to' to DEFLECT here.

What is the whole point?

WHEN one IS Truly Honest, Open, and seriously Wanting TO CHANGE, FOR the BETTER, then 'that one' CAN and WILL ALSO SEE the ACTUAL ABSOLUTE Truth OF 'things', AS WELL.

Then clearly my post about the consensus that the Earth was flat is relevant, as it countered your comment about absolute truth.

[Age]

What is the whole point?

WHEN one IS Truly Honest, Open, and seriously Wanting TO CHANGE, FOR the BETTER, then 'that one' CAN and WILL ALSO SEE the ACTUAL ABSOLUTE Truth OF 'things', AS WELL.

Then clearly my post about the consensus that the Earth was flat is relevant, as it countered your comment about absolute truth.

LOL
LOL
LOL "commonsense".

CLEARLY 'your' post did NOT even come CLOSE.

And, IF 'you' ARE NOT TO SCARED NOR AFRAID to back up and support YOUR CLAIM here now, then let 'us' SEE 'you' 'TRY'.

'your' post did NOT counter my comment AT ALL, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, as my following post CLEARLY SHOWED, and PROVED.

[commonsense]

WHEN one IS Truly Honest, Open, and seriously Wanting TO CHANGE, FOR the BETTER, then 'that one' CAN and WILL ALSO SEE the ACTUAL ABSOLUTE Truth OF 'things', AS WELL.

Then clearly my post about the consensus that the Earth was flat is relevant, as it countered your comment about absolute truth.

LOL
LOL
LOL "commonsense".

CLEARLY 'your' post did NOT even come CLOSE.

And, IF 'you' ARE NOT TO SCARED NOR AFRAID to back up and support YOUR CLAIM here now, then let 'us' SEE 'you' 'TRY'.

'your' post did NOT counter my comment AT ALL, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, as my following post CLEARLY SHOWED, and PROVED.

It’s totally absurd of you to think this.

[Sculptor]

Because knowledge is both justified true belief and justified true information

Please define the difference between information and knowledge.

Information is data. Knowledge is information once analyzed.

Why call data data if it is the same as information?
What makes you think that information is not already analysed?
And how do you think this amount so a contradiction is what I said above?

[commonsense]

Please define the difference between information and knowledge.

Information is data. Knowledge is information once analyzed.

Why call data data if it is the same as information?
What makes you think that information is not already analysed?
And how do you think this amount so a contradiction is what I said above?

I’m exasperated. I’m out for now.

[commonsense]

Information is data. Knowledge is information once analyzed.

Why call data data if it is the same as information?
What makes you think that information is not already analysed?
And how do you think this amount so a contradiction is what I said above?

I’m exasperated. I’m out for now.

Data is information. Knowledge is information.
qv MW if source material is required
You might as well ask why there are sometimes more than one word for the same referent.

[Walker]

What does the 'it' word here REFER TO, EXACTLY, which you CLAIM is ONLY 'everything'?

Re: the first quote*

But any and all mirrors are NOT eternal, NOR could ever even be close to being so.

in this quote particular quote chain, e.g, thee quoting me. Or is it, thou? Anyway, it's the quote most indented and more importantly, it's the truth of the quote forming the words in the font style to which you've grown accustomed, and yet will not replicate except in, particular circumstances of combined elements as yet to be analytically defined. Do you agree?

I do not even have a clue what you are getting at here, let alone agreeing with 'it'. Do you NOT agree?

* The mirror is as eternal as eteral can ever be, however, all reflections in the mirror are ... transitoree.

I would agree under the appropriate conditions of understanding, however lacking that, under conditions of lax formality such as renegade fonting, the appropriate view is not nein, but rather, the appropriate view is to take what you've got and run as far and fast as you are willing and/or able. In other words, find eternity in now rather than seeking safety in what you admitedly don't have, i.e., a clue, because now is the only place eternity can exist other than in fantasy. The clue is to run far and fast with what you have, which is more, before attention wanders elsewhere. Surely you must agree with that.

I'm wondering if The First Black Dwarf will be entropy's final evolution.

[Gary Childress]

Re: the first quote*

But any and all mirrors are NOT eternal, NOR could ever even be close to being so.

in this quote particular quote chain, e.g, thee quoting me. Or is it, thou? Anyway, it's the quote most indented and more importantly, it's the truth of the quote forming the words in the font style to which you've grown accustomed, and yet will not replicate except in, particular circumstances of combined elements as yet to be analytically defined. Do you agree?

I do not even have a clue what you are getting at here, let alone agreeing with 'it'. Do you NOT agree?

* The mirror is as eternal as eteral can ever be, however, all reflections in the mirror are ... transitoree.

I would agree under the appropriate conditions of understanding, however lacking that, under conditions of lax formality such as renegade fonting, the appropriate view is not nein, but rather, the appropriate view is to take what you've got and run as far and fast as you are willing and/or able. In other words, find eternity in now rather than seeking safety in what you admitedly don't have, i.e., a clue, because now is the only place eternity can exist other than in fantasy. The clue is to run far and fast with what you have, which is more, before attention wanders elsewhere. Surely you must agree with that.

I'm wondering if The First Black Dwarf will be entropy's final evolution.

Woah. Easy. Best not to chase others away. Let's not go that far.

[Sculptor]

Why call data data if it is the same as information?
What makes you think that information is not already analysed?
And how do you think this amount so a contradiction is what I said above?

I’m exasperated. I’m out for now.

Data is information. Knowledge is information.
qv MW if source material is required
You might as well ask why there are sometimes more than one word for the same referent.

But you accused me of a contradiction, and now you are repeating yourelsf without clarity.

Why call data data if it is the same as information?
What makes you think that information is not already analysed?
And how do you think this amounts to a contradiction in what I said above?

You might as well ask why there are sometimes more than one word for the same referent.

You mean like information and knowledge for example?

[commonsense]

I’m exasperated. I’m out for now.

Data is information. Knowledge is information.
qv MW if source material is required
You might as well ask why there are sometimes more than one word for the same referent.

But you accused me of a contradiction, and now you are repeating yourelsf without clarity.

Why call data data if it is the same as information?
What makes you think that information is not already analysed?
And how do you think this amounts to a contradiction in what I said above?

You might as well ask why there are sometimes more than one word for the same referent.

You mean like information and knowledge for example?

My apologies. You said that knoweldge is often calle "justified true belief", but I cannot find where I mistakenly thought you said tha knowledge is justified true information or anything other than belief. Mea culpa.

Yes. Yeah. Yup. Affirmative.

[Age]

Then clearly my post about the consensus that the Earth was flat is relevant, as it countered your comment about absolute truth.

LOL
LOL
LOL "commonsense".

CLEARLY 'your' post did NOT even come CLOSE.

And, IF 'you' ARE NOT TO SCARED NOR AFRAID to back up and support YOUR CLAIM here now, then let 'us' SEE 'you' 'TRY'.

'your' post did NOT counter my comment AT ALL, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, as my following post CLEARLY SHOWED, and PROVED.

It’s totally absurd of you to think this.

And I could replay JUST AS STUPIDLY WITH; 'It is totally absurd of you to think this', AS WELL.

But do 'these words' REALLY get us ANYWHERE?

LOOK, your post about some people thinking that the earth was flat 'countering' what I said does NOT work AT ALL.

And, if you would like to delve into and discuss this further I can and will EXPLAIN WHY.

But, if you do NOT, then just continue on as you are here now.