An Analogy, From Physical To Mind

[Age]

The aim should not be to win a philosophical argument but to make sure ones own argument is as rigorous as it can possibly be

There's a mantra in my world - if you can't measure it, you can't improve it. From it the important question follows:

How do you measure the rigour of an argument?

It is partly that. A great deal of philosophy's failure is because it attempts answer invalid questions.

Or.... how do you measure the validity of a question?

But if philosophy is not going to answer any questions, what's the point of asking them?

And the most important question of all... Why? applied recursively to itself.

Why ask questions?

For the same reason we all do.

Why do some assume that there is recursiveness without end?

[PeteJ]

Three comments:
I do not regard solving problems the primary purpose of knowledge. The primary purpose of knowledge is to live successfully.
Minds are distributed one to an individual. There is no such thing as collective knowledge.
Logic and reason alone are useless without evidence.

I don't mean these as arguments, just a difference in point of view.

It's too different for me. I have no idea what your purpose is in these discussions but each to his own and I'll leave you to it.

[Skepdick]

For the same reason we all do.

I doubt that.

Why do some assume that there is recursiveness without end?

Because the halting problem is unsolved.

If you are searching for something, you need a stop condition. When do you stop looking? When you find what you are looking for.

If you don't know what you are looking for - how can you know that you've found it?

[Skepdick]

Why ask questions?

The proper question is half the answer.

Defining the problem is half the answer.

Which begs the question: What's a problem?

[Skepdick]

I do not regard solving problems the primary purpose of knowledge. The primary purpose of knowledge is to live successfully.

Sounds to me like the problem you are solving is distinguishing "living successfully" from "living unsuccessfully".

Juxtaposition.

[Age]

For the same reason we all do.

I doubt that.

This is a result of having already held beliefs and assumptions.

You are free to doubt any thing at all, for as long as you like also.

But is doubting really helping you?

Why do some assume that there is recursiveness without end?

Because the halting problem is unsolved.

That is only a "problem" in computing.

Computing is only a tiny, minuscule, and unnecessary part of Life and living.

If you are searching for something, you need a stop condition. When do you stop looking? When you find what you are looking for.

When you find thee Answer.

Obviously if you knew what you were looking for, then you would not have to look for it. Unless of course you did not know where it was.

If you don't know what you are looking for - how can you know that you've found it?

Because 'it' fits in perfectly, with all the other pieces of the puzzle.

Once the puzzle is full, and the picture is complete and crystal clear, then you will know that you have found 'It'.

This is all very easily done, once you know HOW to do it.

How to do this is very easily learned, once you are Truly OPEN
Being Truly OPEN is very easily achieved, once you are Truly Honest.

By the way, you are basing recursiveness on some so called "halting problem", and on "looking for" some thing.

So, what is it that you adult human beings are actually "looking for", which you say you can not find because of some "recursive issue" and some "halting problem"?

You, people, really do like to make complex 'this', which really is truly simple.

If you just openly and honestly expressed what it is that you are actually "looking for", then maybe I could help you find "it" (whatever "it" is).

[Age]

The proper question is half the answer.

Defining the problem is half the answer.

Which begs the question: What's a problem?

Are you aware that you use the phrase "begs the question" in a more general sense, which is quite different than how some use it in philosophy forums?

By the way, to me, a 'problem' is very simply just a question posed for a solution.

To me, for each and every problem/question there is a solution/answer, which, by the way, can be very easily found, that is; once you know how to find them.

[Skepdick]

But is doubting really helping you?

Very much so.

That is only a "problem" in computing.
Computing is only a tiny, minuscule, and unnecessary part of Life and living.

Your brain is a computer. It is a problem for people with brains. Do you have a brain?

When you find thee Answer.

Obviously if you knew what you were looking for, then you would not have to look for it. Unless of course you did not know where it was.

If you knew what the Answer was, you wouldn't have to look for it. Wherever it was.

Because 'it' fits in perfectly, with all the other pieces of the puzzle.

Once the puzzle is full, and the picture is complete and crystal clear, then you will know that you have found 'It'.

Terrible analogy. Jigsaw puzzles have boundaries. You know its shape, and the number of pieces before you even begin.

How many pieces are there in the puzzle of reality?
What shape is it?

So, what is it that you adult human beings are actually "looking for", which you say you can not find because of some "recursive issue" and some "halting problem"?

I can't speak for all human beings, but it seems to me you are looking for True Openness. Let us know when you find it.

[Skepdick]

The proper question is half the answer.

Defining the problem is half the answer.

Which begs the question: What's a problem?

Are you aware that you use the phrase "begs the question" in a more general sense, which is quite different than how some use it in philosophy forums?

By the way, to me, a 'problem' is very simply just a question posed for a solution.

To me, for each and every problem/question there is a solution/answer, which, by the way, can be very easily found, that is; once you know how to find them.

OK. If every question is a problem then solve/answer this problem: What is a problem?

[Age]

Defining the problem is half the answer.

Which begs the question: What's a problem?

Are you aware that you use the phrase "begs the question" in a more general sense, which is quite different than how some use it in philosophy forums?

By the way, to me, a 'problem' is very simply just a question posed for a solution.

To me, for each and every problem/question there is a solution/answer, which, by the way, can be very easily found, that is; once you know how to find them.

OK. If every question is a problem then solve/answer this problem: What is a problem?

I just did.

Did you not see it?

You do have a tendency to miss a lot of what I actually say.

By the way I did not say "every question is a problem". You really do have a very bad tendency of not reading the actual words that I write, AND, twist things around to your own beliefs and assumptions.

But the reason you do this is because of your already held beliefs and assumptions, so obviously you can not help doing it when you are unaware of what you are actually doing.

Having and maintaining already held beliefs and assumptions stops you from being OPEN to see what is actually real and true around 'you'.

[Age]

But is doubting really helping you?

Very much so.

That is great.

I hope you are Truly Happy.

That is only a "problem" in computing.
Computing is only a tiny, minuscule, and unnecessary part of Life and living.

Your brain is a computer.

If you believe so, then it must be.

But who is the one who "has" a brain?

It is a problem for people with brains.

But not all brains get stuck on so called "problems" like other brains do.

How do people 'have' brains?

What are these things you call "people", with brains?

Do you have a brain?

No.

When you find thee Answer.

Obviously if you knew what you were looking for, then you would not have to look for it. Unless of course you did not know where it was.

If you knew what the Answer was, you wouldn't have to look for it. Wherever it was.

But I did not say any thing this, so why are you replying this way?

You do have tendency to twist or rearrange words around from what I actually say, and then respond from that twisted and distorted version of things that you have and hold.

When you try to convince "others" of your own beliefs, you do this rearranging of words and letters, which suit your own specific goals and specific beliefs of things, but usually have no relation to the actual and real Truth of things.

Because 'it' fits in perfectly, with all the other pieces of the puzzle.

Once the puzzle is full, and the picture is complete and crystal clear, then you will know that you have found 'It'.

Terrible analogy.

Is it really?

Jigsaw puzzles have boundaries.

Do ALL of them?

You know its shape, and the number of pieces before you even begin.

Is this what you believe is absolutely true and correct?

Do you know the shape, and the number of pieces of the puzzle of reality?

If yes, then what is the shape, and, how many pieces are there?
If no, then maybe what you say here is not absolutely true and correct, correct?

How many pieces are there in the puzzle of reality?

That is up to 'you'. 'you' make up your own reality, correct?

What shape is it?

Again, whatever shape 'you' want reality to be.

Remember, it was you who said; "You know the its [puzzle] shape, and the number of pieces before you even begin". I never said nor even thought any such thing.

So, what is it that you adult human beings are actually "looking for", which you say you can not find because of some "recursive issue" and some "halting problem"?

I can't speak for all human beings, but it seems to me you are looking for True Openness. Let us know when you find it.

Okay. I found It. What seemed to you was totally incorrect.

True Openness was not hard to stumble upon at all really, and once you have found it also, then you will have the KNOW-HOW of how to remain Truly OPEN always after as well.

By the way, do you have any thing that you are actually "looking for"? You did not answer this question before. If no, then that is great.

If yes, then again, what is it that you are actually "looking for"?

[Skepdick]

True Openness was not hard to stumble upon at all really, and once you have found it also, then you will have the KNOW-HOW of how to remain Truly OPEN always after as well.

When you found Openness, was it all that you expected it to be?

By the way, do you have any thing that you are actually "looking for"? You did not answer this question before. If no, then that is great.

If yes, then again, what is it that you are actually "looking for"?

Right now, I am looking for a beer.

[Age]

True Openness was not hard to stumble upon at all really, and once you have found it also, then you will have the KNOW-HOW of how to remain Truly OPEN always after as well.

When you found Openness, was it all that you expected it to be?

But I have already told you that I was not looking for Openness. So, I was not expecting any thing at all regarding Openness.

By the way, do you have any thing that you are actually "looking for"? You did not answer this question before. If no, then that is great.

If yes, then again, what is it that you are actually "looking for"?

Right now, I am looking for a beer.

In you very own words: If you knew what the Answer was, you wouldn't have to look for it. Wherever it was.

[Skepdick]

But I have already told you that I was not looking for Openness.

You didn't tell me that. You told me that you found True Openness. It's only reasonable to assume that before you found True Openness you were looking for it.

Unless you are telling us that you found True Openness, but you weren't looking for it.

In you very own words: If you knew what the Answer was, you wouldn't have to look for it. Wherever it was.

But I wasn't looking for an Answer. I was looking for beer. And I found beer.

I would've been rather upset if I went looking for beer and found an Answer instead.

[Age]

But I have already told you that I was not looking for Openness.

You didn't tell me that. You told me that you found True Openness. It's only reasonable to assume that before you found True Openness you were looking for it.

No matter how many times I say, if you assume some thing, then you are not OPEN, eople still then go ahead and assume some thing, which on just about most occasions end up being totally WRONG. Only when you Truly OPEN can you then see what is actually True and Right. And, if you assume any thing, then you are NOT Truly OPEN.

Now, if you go back and read what I wrote, from the Truly OPEN perspective, it can be seen that I did actually tell you that I was not looking for Openness. It is there and can very easily be pointed out, word for word, if that is what you would like me to do for you. I wrote it specifically the way I did because I "knew" this was going to happen.

Now, did I know this was going to happen because I wrote in a way, which I knew would make you assume some thing, and which I knew you would make such an obviously wrong assumption, or did I not know this was going to happen?

I am, after all, needing examples of how the brain is unable to function at its most efficient capacity when it is making assumptions and/or believing things. Getting brains to unknowingly provide examples of how inefficient they are working when they are assuming provides excellent examples of what it is that I will relay one day.

Your assumption that it is reasonable to assume some thing is another example of a brain working tremendously inefficiently, and incorrectly.

Unless you are telling us that you found True Openness, but you weren't looking for it.

That is exactly what happened, which, by the way, you could have come to realize much earlier if you had not been making assumption after assumption about what you thought was right.

Also and by the way I was not telling you any thing regarding this point. You were the one who was just making assumptions about this. I was just leading you astray to make more and more assumptions, even though I also did actually say what was actually right. By continually assuming you were getting further away from the truth. Your tendency to rearrange my words and twist things around only distorted your views even further.

In you very own words: If you knew what the Answer was, you wouldn't have to look for it. Wherever it was.

But I wasn't looking for an Answer. I was looking for beer. And I found beer.

This was the actual point I was making before when I showed how you tried to twist what I said around.

It was you, after all, who used the 'Answer' word when I NEVER did.

So, what you have now done is actually confirm that what I said previously was actually RIGHT when you, by the rearrangement of words, was trying to make out I was WRONG. So, now we can move on from that.

I would've been rather upset if I went looking for beer and found an Answer instead.