Philosophy Now Forum

If one stopped believing in gravity then a new interpretation would come to take its place. This is not necessarily true, as need not be. Not all knowledge is testifiable as the testing requires a further test beyond it to justify it. Testifiable (sic)? Do you mean testable? All discretionary binar...

Or knowledge, one may believe and be correct. That doesn't make it knowledge : only if acknowledged as correct such that "belief" becomes redundant/irrelevant. If you started/stopped "believing" in gravity, it will act the same either way. Belief is necessary as part of the progress towards knowled...

Belief implies an absence of knowledge yet this implication necessitates it may or may not occur. Hence: not knowledge. Knowledge as knowing necessitates the awareness of a series of variables... Knowledge entails knowing (of) one's own being. Variables have limited utility, they are not reality. T...

... Recommended for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPJg5kR79Nc 1:07 "Now obviously, you believe - when you believe that something is the case, it implies that you don't know..." Eckhart Tolle is 100% correct. Belief implies absence of knowledge, thus knowledge implies absence of belief. Also:...

False, a unicorn exists is a definite assertion. Thus either definitely true or false. Its existence as an abstraction is true. No - its non-existence as an imagination is true. False, both knowledge and belief or rather knowledge as justified belief The words "I believe" mean "I do not know..." he...

False, definitions can be both true and false... Is/Not are definite(s). Definite assertions can only be definitely true or definitely false, else the concerned assertion itself is not actually a definite assertion. Knowledge as acceptance of phenomenon is knowledge as belief of phenomenon. Knowled...

False, I am following my own premises where everything is an assertion. Your premises do not allow that thus contradict themselves on their own terms. Space and time are measurably discrete units. Discrete units implies discretion. Definite assertions can (only) be definitely true or definitely fal...

How can I be projecting my own personal viewpoint by stating "image", "form" and "likeness" are synonyms? The argument presented is a statement of definition as to how "image", "form" and "likeness" relate. The point being made was that you can't see your own hypocrisy: you accused me of making ass...

Again assertions with no argument. Image, likeness and form are synonyms. You follow with the assertions: Image, likeness and form are synonyms. The accuser is the accused. Again, another abstraction. Incessantly playing an 'abstraction' card does naught but demonstrate your lacking the ability to ...

This is an assertion, not an argument. The letters used to type your response are forms. I'm not here to argue about such things, as there is no point - it is embedded in your psyche along with many other things I care not to address. You cannot sever from reality without creating a new reality tha...

False, reality as composed of forms, and symbols acting as forms... Reality is not composed of forms/symbols acting as forms. Reality as beginning and ending is a statement of relation...It becomes it's new whole thus contains it's own beginning and end much in the same manner the "all" contains it...

Both therefore proposition one is true and as true necessitates symbols as real phenomenon in themselves. Not both: reality precedes symbols, not the other way around. All converging and diverging from a point, which the point as the most universal symbol necessitates reality beginning and ending w...

Yes it is, your equation relative to Pi and Phi, is a series of symbols which represent a series of relations. It defines reality. Symbols define reality? Or reality defines symbols? One must beg/end in the reality, not with symbols. But the underlying relation is defined through symbols. The under...

Reality is defined through symbols... Reality is not defined through symbols. ...as the equations you offer are composed of symbols... The equations/symbols are not of any importance after being used to acknowledge the underlying relation... ...the equations are not real in themselves (according to...

But if reality is defined through a symbol... ...and it is not . 4/√Φ is a series of symbols thus an abstraction. Definite(s) again - how obnoxiously crass (recurring). The relationship they describe is both: what is of imperative importance and (for being not merely an abstraction ) how a radial l...