Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 6:09 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 6:02 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 5:57 pm
Reality doesn’t have a model.
Nobody said it did. There's no word "model" above.

But you could answer the question...
Opinions are synonymous with models.
Not at all, actually.

But answer the question: does an opinion turn into a "lie" because the opinion changed, or because it "turned out" not to conform the reality, to the truth?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 8:20 pm
does an opinion turn into a "lie" because the opinion changed, or because it "turned out" not to conform the reality, to the truth?
Answered: :arrow: Because it "turned out" not to conform the reality, to the truth.

Even though in reality, Reality itself doesn't have a truth. Truths are perceptions in no perceiver. Truth claims are the artificial relative appearance of the absolute.
( SCIENCE AND THE SAGES HAVE CONFIRMED - that which is perceived as the perceiver cannot itself be perceived )

All truth claims are false and true within the artificial dream of separation, the mind of knowledge. Knowledge is a fictional story believed to be real. But you do not believe this.

No human being identified with thought knows WHY reality is, WHAT it is, or WHERE it comes from. ALL that is known is that it IS

The seeker is never satisfied with no answer. Even though there is only one question to all our answers..the one question is WHAT?

The one question 'WHAT'? is simultaneously 'ALL ANSWERS'. ( No word can define 'what is', or every word defines 'it'. )

I understand the drive to move forward in our discussion mannie. But in reality, there is only circular reasoning within all conceptual dialog, this has been proved over 1,000's of years. No philosopher likes to think s/hes reached an Impasse.. the (End of Knowledge)

Knowledge can only point to the illusory nature of reality which is unknowable. Everything is KNOWN and that which is KNOWN knows nothing.

We can only argue for and against's...forever and ever, going and getting nowhere, the place we never leave, or entered. :D
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

The only relationship there is in 'Reality'
Is :arrow: An APPARENT relationship between Ignorance and Knowledge. . which ARE :arrow: Noumena Phenomenalizing.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

Truth is a human perception perceived. And while this is apparently true, the perceiver is inconceivable and cannot be perceived.

Absolute truth cannot be conceived of.

The truth, therefore, depends on a reference standard and is not absolute. Mind can only refer to itself as a reference frame.

All ''truth claims'' are determined by human perception. They are a re-presentation of reality, not actual reality which is always a presentation.

Life doesn't need a truth to be. Life is functioning automatically in every moment, complete and without error.

Life does not question. Questions only arise to the sense of a separate I - which is an illusion. .therefore, any answer would be an illusion also...in other words, an imagined story, that most philosophers cannot agree to anyway.

Human Perceptions are never to be seen as all being on the same page at the same time. But, everyone believes they are the Golden Child.

As illustrated here :arrow: Image
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 7:07 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 8:20 pm
does an opinion turn into a "lie" because the opinion changed, or because it "turned out" not to conform the reality, to the truth?
Answered: :arrow: Because it "turned out" not to conform the reality, to the truth.
Thank you.

I guess the next question would be, "How do you know when something has "turned out" not to conform to the reality, to the truth?" In other words, what are the indicators you notice that show you that that has happened?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 1:43 pm

I guess the next question would be, "How do you know when something has "turned out" not to conform to the reality, to the truth?" In other words, what are the indicators you notice that show you that that has happened?
The indicators are difference, one thing is true, the other thing is not true.

It's true I am a female. It's not true I am a male.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:53 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 1:43 pm

I guess the next question would be, "How do you know when something has "turned out" not to conform to the reality, to the truth?" In other words, what are the indicators you notice that show you that that has happened?
The indicators are difference, one thing is true, the other thing is not true.
Great. But "difference" between WHAT and WHAT? A "difference" implies the existence of two things: in this case, an "opinion" and "reality." Unless you have both, there is no such thing as a "difference."
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:00 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:53 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 1:43 pm

I guess the next question would be, "How do you know when something has "turned out" not to conform to the reality, to the truth?" In other words, what are the indicators you notice that show you that that has happened?
The indicators are difference, one thing is true, the other thing is not true.
Great. But "difference" between WHAT and WHAT? A "difference" implies the existence of two things: in this case, an "opinion" and "reality." Unless you have both, there is no such thing as a "difference."
Reality doesn't have an opinion. Opinions are appearances within reality, opinions have no actual reality. They only appear to have.

In a dream, how do you know what's one thing and what's another?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:21 pm Opinions are appearances within reality,
Two things again: "appearances" and "reality." You're a dualist.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:32 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:21 pm Opinions are appearances within reality,
Two things again: "appearances" and "reality." You're a dualist.
Dualism is the dream, only the dream is known.

And that which is known, knows nothing.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:35 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:32 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:21 pm Opinions are appearances within reality,
Two things again: "appearances" and "reality." You're a dualist.
Dualism is the dream, only the dream is known.
Two things again: "dream" and "reality."

If there's no "reality," there's no meaning in the word "dream." You may as well write, "dualism is a mxtplx."
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:39 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:35 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:32 pm
Two things again: "appearances" and "reality." You're a dualist.
Dualism is the dream, only the dream is known.
Two things again: "dream" and "reality."

If there's no "reality," there's no meaning in the word "dream." You may as well write, "dualism is a mxtplx."
There is no objective reality. Except in the dream of separation, duality. The you can only happen in duality, where the knower is inseparable from known, and the known is inseparable from the knower.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Dontaskme »

It is not a dream insofar as the way you have been conditioned to believe, or are familar with.
But it can be compared to a dream.
It is a conceptual mind map that has nothing to which it can be compared since it is the sense of self's only reference.
The self and it's map are the same phenomenon.
The self, or the I amness, cannot see that, cannot change that, cannot escape or transcend that.

There is an understanding that comprehends the nature of self and it's mind map that is comparable to lucid dreaming in which the dreaming entity knows that it is dreaming, or being dreamt.

Conceptual thought and it's persona can go no further than that understanding simply because they have no reality outside of that arena.

Nightly dreams happen within you. And you happen within the dreamer of both nightly and wakeful dreaming.

You happen in the dreamer - the dreamer doesn't happen in you..that's the difference, just the ONE love action dreaming difference where there is none..
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 4:03 pm It is not a dream insofar as the way you have been conditioned to believe, or are familar with.
But it can be compared to a dream.
Sorry, DAM: just not interested.

What you're doing is very much like offering to debate, "How can Hobbits escape Azkaban?" There are no rules for such a discussion, no means of arbitrating it, no possibility of actual progress, and no conclusions possible, since the entire thing is merely a fantasy. And I gave those kinds of games up when I was a mere child.

I would hope philosophy offers us way more interesting and relevant exercises than you're presently offering. And frankly, my life's too short already.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 6604
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 3

Post by Lacewing »

Walker wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 8:26 am...
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:18 pm...
Either of you... tell us some more about the characters of Christians that non-Christians don’t have.

Or tell us what non-theists do that theists don't.

Let’s bring all of the self-serving glorification out into the open and see it for what it is.
Post Reply