Philosophy Now Forum

But 'to assume' infers to be CLOSED, and to NOT be OPEN. To be Truly OPEN is to NOT 'assume', NOR 'believe, ANY thing. To be open is to accept what is in front of them, to accept is to assume. Are you saying that whatever you assume is true then this means that you are open? Accepting what is prese...

Very true, but LOL obviously one would NOT KNOW, until they ask. Also, if one was Truly OPEN, and Truly curious enough, then ONLY THEN that one could and would KNOW. And what does it mean to be open other than to assume what is in front of them? But 'to assume' infers to be CLOSED, and to NOT be OP...

Well, if they are open and curious enough, then they would ask questions. Questions do not always result in clarity. Very true, but LOL obviously one would NOT KNOW, until they ask. Also, if one was Truly OPEN, and Truly curious enough, then ONLY THEN that one could and would KNOW. And what does it...

Age wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 11:37 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:35 am

Age wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 11:22 am

Very true.

But not to others.

Well, if they are open and curious enough, then they would ask questions.

Questions do not always result in clarity.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 4:03 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:34 am
Referencing is pointing, pointing is observation, thus referencing is observation.

"NOT the act of referencing."

No.

And again:

The act of referencing is pointing, to point is to observe, thus the act of referencing is the act of observation.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 11:22 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 11:42 pm

Age wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 4:22 am

What is happening here is VERY CLEAR, NOW.

It is clear to you.

Very true.

But not to others.

And that has what to do with what you're responding to? Identity is observed through the pointer. 1 exists as it's own identity, not 1=1. It exists as it's own identity because it is a pointer. That which points has it's own identity. That has nothing at all to do with "Reference, not observation. ...

You keep creating strawmen. I mentioned ' substance theory ' above. Can you confirm that you understand what 'substance theory' is about? If yes, demonstrate substance theory [thing-in-itself] is realistic and tenable, then you would have proven the thing-in-itself is true and real. Substance theor...

Who said so? You are merely insisting via words and your own logic, your above is true, but provide no solid verifications and justification at all. The looping of FSK's necessitates a looping form beyond the FSK's considering the FSK's follow a loop. There is nothing to loop to beyond the ultimate...

Not the act of referencing, but what's being referenced. To reference something is to have one phenomenon point to another. And that has what to do with what you're responding to? Identity is observed through the pointer. 1 exists as it's own identity, not 1=1. It exists as it's own identity becaus...

Note the thing-in-itself is an ontological claim which is not verifiable and justifiable empirically and philosophically. You have to prove this ontological entity is realistic before you can observe it empirically and discussed in epistemologically. Note Substance theory , or substance–attribute t...

Whatever the original FSK - i.e. framework and system, it is constructed by humans. Thus if there is a loop it is looped within humanity. Because it is looped within humanity, humans are the co-creators of reality. I believe you are trying to suggest there is something external to humans, e.g. a Go...

How, EXACTLY, do 'I' continually change 'time'/'space'? And, what, EXACTLY, is 'time/space', to you? The I manipulates time/space through action. Time is individuating spaces. Space is axiomatic and accepted as is considering formless is accepted through the formlessness of the mind, with this form...

Advocate wrote: ↑Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:48 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:46 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 2:28 am So is identity an illusion?

If it strayed from the original source, yes.

Identity is the story we tell ourselves about who we are in relation to our circumstances.

Yet the story is identified as itself. We are what we relate too.

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 9:01 pm The void has a different meaning than nothing.
Nothing is the unmanifest.
The void is infinite potentiality.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/sunyata

Potentiality is unmanifested actuality.