metaphysics is...

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Skepdick »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:08 pm So, what is 'synthesis' to 'you'?
It's spontaneous. It does not require prior experience.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:53 pm You have ALREADY made it KNOWN that you do NOT YET KNOW what the answers are when you ask questions.
Have you not already understood that there is no clarity to be found in any answers?

Answers lead to more questions.
Age
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Age »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:13 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:08 pm So, what is 'synthesis' to 'you'?
It's spontaneous. It does not require prior experience.
Are you 100% ABSOLUTELY SURE of this?

Where did you synthesize the idea of 'spontaneous' from?

If it was NOT from prior experience, then WHERE did you spontaneously obtain 'that' idea from?

Are you some sort of genius who comes up with BRAND NEW completely "spontaneous" ideas?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:13 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:08 pm You have ALREADY made it KNOWN that you do NOT YET KNOW what the answers are when you ask questions.
Have you not already understood that there is no clarity to be found in any answers?
LOL I have ALREADY found that LOTS OF CLARITY is obtained in, and from, Truthful answers.

Also does what you say and claim here imply that you have NO clarity at all?

Or, do you obtain clarity from something else besides answers?

If yes, then WHERE do you obtain clarity from, EXACTLY?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:13 pm Answers lead to more questions.
And questions lead to more answers. But so what?
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Skepdick »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Are you 100% ABSOLUTELY SURE of this?
How would I know if I wasn't?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Where did you synthesize the idea of 'spontaneous' from?
I learned it.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm If it was NOT from prior experience, then WHERE did you spontaneously obtain 'that' idea from?
From society.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Are you some sort of genius who comes up with BRAND NEW completely "spontaneous" ideas?
No, I am not, but people who believe in "syhtnesis" believe they are.

Frankly, I am not in pursuit of ingenuity. I am just avoiding stupidity.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Also does what you say and claim here imply that you have NO clarity at all?
I have total clarity on my lack of clarity.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm If yes, then WHERE do you obtain clarity from, EXACTLY?
I don't obtain any clarity. I don't even pursue it.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm And questions lead to more answers. But so what?
Why do you ask?
Age
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Age »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:35 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Are you 100% ABSOLUTELY SURE of this?
How would I know if I wasn't?
I do NOT care.

I asked you a clarifying question. So, will you answer that question?

If no, then WHY NOT?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:35 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Where did you synthesize the idea of 'spontaneous' from?
I learned it.
And did you learn 'it' from prior experience or just spontaneously from NOTHING?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:35 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm If it was NOT from prior experience, then WHERE did you spontaneously obtain 'that' idea from?
From society.
And was that from prior experience of society?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:35 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Are you some sort of genius who comes up with BRAND NEW completely "spontaneous" ideas?
No, I am not, but people who believe in "syhtnesis" believe they are.

Frankly, I am not in pursuit of ingenuity. I am just avoiding stupidity.
Okay.

Some are suggesting otherwise here. But anyway.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:35 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm Also does what you say and claim here imply that you have NO clarity at all?
I have total clarity on my lack of clarity.
The self-contradiction does NOT need to highlighted anymore here.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:35 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm If yes, then WHERE do you obtain clarity from, EXACTLY?
I don't obtain any clarity. I don't even pursue it.
This was EXTREMELY OBVIOUS.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:35 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:30 pm And questions lead to more answers. But so what?
Why do you ask?
Because you seemed to be making a Truly useless point before.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Skepdick »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm I do NOT care.
I don't care either, but you asked. Not me.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm I asked you a clarifying question. So, will you answer that question?

If no, then WHY NOT?
No, I won't answer. Because I don't know what you want to know.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm And did you learn 'it' from prior experience or just spontaneously from NOTHING?
Have you ever learned anything from nothing?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm And was that from prior experience of society?
Is there any other kind?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm The self-contradiction does NOT need to highlighted anymore here.
It's not a self-contradiction. It's a self-affirmation.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm This was EXTREMELY OBVIOUS.
Then why did you ask the question?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm Because you seemed to be making a Truly useless point before.
So what?
Age
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Age »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:49 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm I do NOT care.
I don't care either, but you asked. Not me.
But that was not what I do NOT care about. I did NOT ask in relation to what I do NOT care about.

What I care about is if you answer my clarifying questions Honestly or not. You OBVIOUSLY did NOT answer my question, let alone answer Honestly.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:49 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm I asked you a clarifying question. So, will you answer that question?

If no, then WHY NOT?
No, I won't answer. Because I don't know what you want to know.
I will tell you what it is that I want to KNOW. I want to KNOW your Honest answers to my clarifying questions posed to you.

So, NOW you KNOW.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:49 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm And did you learn 'it' from prior experience or just spontaneously from NOTHING?
Have you ever learned anything from nothing?
So, just like 'I', 'you', and EVERY other human being, we gain our ideas, synthesize, from prior experience, which even 'you', "skepdick" now appear to AGREE with.

And, when this is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, then 'you', human beings, will STOP being prejudiced, and thus STOP ridiculing and humiliating each "other", and then 'you' will be heading closer to START living in a Truly 'peaceful world'. (But this is off topic, in a sense).
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm And was that from prior experience of society?
Is there any other kind?[/quote]

None that I can think of, at the moment. Can you think of ANY? Your answer here appears to indicate that you can NOT, ALSO.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:49 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm The self-contradiction does NOT need to highlighted anymore here.
It's not a self-contradiction. It's a self-affirmation.
And, a VERY SELF-CONTRADICTORY self-affirmation one as well.

But, considering you do NOT YET KNOW the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?', 'you' providing a VERY contradictory self-affirmation is of NO surprise at all.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:49 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm This was EXTREMELY OBVIOUS.
Then why did you ask the question?
To make SURE that you PROVIDED the ACTUAL PROOF all by "yourself".
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:49 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:44 pm Because you seemed to be making a Truly useless point before.
So what?
So, that it became HIGHLIGHTED and MORE OBVIOUS that you made a useless point. Which it is NOW.

So, thank you.

And thank you for YOUR previous CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. They SHOWED how when asked ENOUGH lead to PURE CLARITY and UNDERSTANDING.

What YOUR CLARIFYING QUESTIONS led to is that ALL concepts/ideas come from past experiences.

Now, although there is still some MORE to be learned and understood here regarding this, the FACT still remains that the concepts and ideas within that and each and every other human head is ONLY because of past experiences. Therefore, what 'you' ALL think about each "other" would be COMPLETELY and UTTERLY DIFFERENT if you each had DIFFERENT past experiences.

Which, by the way, is ALL related to 'meta-physics', that is; what is above or beyond the physical.

Oh, and by the way, what does 'metaphysics' actually mean, to you?
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Skepdick »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm But that was not what I do NOT care about. I did NOT ask in relation to what I do NOT care about.

What I care about is if you answer my clarifying questions Honestly or not. You OBVIOUSLY did NOT answer my question, let alone answer Honestly.
The honest answer to your clarifying question was "I don't know what you want to know".

Your question was incoherent.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm I will tell you what it is that I want to KNOW. I want to KNOW your Honest answers to my clarifying questions posed to you.
I can't give you any answers to questions you don't understand.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm So, just like 'I', 'you', and EVERY other human being, we gain our ideas, synthesize, from prior experience, which even 'you', "skepdick" now appear to AGREE with.
So you haven't learned ANYTHING from NOTHING?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm And, when this is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, then 'you', human beings, will STOP being prejudiced, and thus STOP ridiculing and humiliating each "other", and then 'you' will be heading closer to START living in a Truly 'peaceful world'. (But this is off topic, in a sense).
When it's fully understood you, Age, will stop asking clarifying questions.

But it isn't fully understood. So you ask questions.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm None that I can think of, at the moment. Can you think of ANY? Your answer here appears to indicate that you can NOT, ALSO.
I asked because I couldn't.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm And, a VERY SELF-CONTRADICTORY self-affirmation one as well.
Self-contradiction is impossible. In principle or in practice.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm But, considering you do NOT YET KNOW the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?', 'you' providing a VERY contradictory self-affirmation is of NO surprise at all.
Considering you are still asking the question, no wonder you don't understand.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm To make SURE that you PROVIDED the ACTUAL PROOF all by "yourself".
Why do you need me to provide proof for the obvious?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm So, that it became HIGHLIGHTED and MORE OBVIOUS that you made a useless point. Which it is NOW.
Why do you feel the need to highlight the obvious?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm Oh, and by the way, what does 'metaphysics' actually mean, to you?
Nothing and everything.
Age
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Age »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm But that was not what I do NOT care about. I did NOT ask in relation to what I do NOT care about.

What I care about is if you answer my clarifying questions Honestly or not. You OBVIOUSLY did NOT answer my question, let alone answer Honestly.
The honest answer to your clarifying question was "I don't know what you want to know".
I provided you with this KNOWLEDGE in my next response in that post.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm Your question was incoherent.
WHY did you just not say this last time?

Also, if you had ANY interest, then you would have informed me of this earlier and asked me some clarifying question/s. But, considering you still have NOT, then you OBVIOUSLY have NO interest and do NOT care what my clarifying question was, right.

But for EVERY one else.
I asked you:
So, what is 'synthesis' to 'you'?

You said:
It's spontaneous. It does not require prior experience.

I then asked you:
Are you 100% ABSOLUTELY SURE of this?

Now, because that question was incoherent to you, for reasons not yet known, this question to you just means, are you 100% absolutely sure that 'synthesis' is spontaneous, and, 'synthesis' does not require prior experience?

Some are now wondering WHY you have spend so much effort 'trying to' just DEFLECT. But anyway.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm I will tell you what it is that I want to KNOW. I want to KNOW your Honest answers to my clarifying questions posed to you.
I can't give you any answers to questions you don't understand.
You can give ANY thing you like my questions.

By the way, I do understand MY questions, although, and even if, they are completely incoherent, to you.

What would make you ASSUME and say that I do NOT understand my OWN questions?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm So, just like 'I', 'you', and EVERY other human being, we gain our ideas, synthesize, from prior experience, which even 'you', "skepdick" now appear to AGREE with.
So you haven't learned ANYTHING from NOTHING?
Is it even POSSIBLE to learn some 'thing' from NO 'thing'?

If yes, then HOW?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm And, when this is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, then 'you', human beings, will STOP being prejudiced, and thus STOP ridiculing and humiliating each "other", and then 'you' will be heading closer to START living in a Truly 'peaceful world'. (But this is off topic, in a sense).
When it's fully understood you, Age, will stop asking clarifying questions.
Yes when 'it' is fully understood by 'you', human beings, more than likely will I will stop asking 'you' (as many) clarifying questions regarding 'it'.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm But it isn't fully understood. So you ask questions.
Well telling people ANY thing other than what they BELIEVE is true, right, and/or correct, I have found, is a completely useless and worthless task, so I am trying something else.

If you KNOW of a better way, or ANY way, to get 'you', human beings, to SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is, then would you let me KNOW as well?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm None that I can think of, at the moment. Can you think of ANY? Your answer here appears to indicate that you can NOT, ALSO.
I asked because I couldn't.
So, do you AGREE that you synthesize ALL of your ideas from your past experiences of society?

If yes, then this was a quick shift from what you were originally 'trying to' infer. Which is EXACTLY WHY I was hoping you would continue on with that line of questioning.

However, if you do NOT agree that you synthesize ALL of your ideas from past experiences of society, then WHERE else do you get YOUR ideas from, EXACTLY?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm And, a VERY SELF-CONTRADICTORY self-affirmation one as well.
Self-contradiction is impossible. In principle or in practice.
If 'you' BELIEVE that this is ABSOLUTELY True, then 'you' could NEVER contradict "your" OWN 'self', correct?

Also, when 'you' become AWARE of what the saying or term, "yourself", itself, ACTUALLY IS, then, hopefully, 'you' will find this as humorous as 'I' do.

Could the term, "yourself", be a contradiction in terms, and thus be 'self-contradictory'? Or, is this just NOT possible in and from YOUR view of 'things'?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm But, considering you do NOT YET KNOW the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?', 'you' providing a VERY contradictory self-affirmation is of NO surprise at all.
Considering you are still asking the question, no wonder you don't understand.
But I am OBVIOUSLY NOT "still asking 'the' question" here in what YOU quoted here, as can be CLEARLY SEEN and PROVEN.

By the way, what is 'the' question you are referring to here?

And, what is 'it' you are proposing and claiming here that I do NOT understand?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm To make SURE that you PROVIDED the ACTUAL PROOF all by "yourself".
Why do you need me to provide proof for the obvious?
So, that I do NOT accused of leading/directing ANY thing, including subjects, here.

Showing how the Mind and the brain work, without directly influencing the brains to much, is a very delicate task.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm So, that it became HIGHLIGHTED and MORE OBVIOUS that you made a useless point. Which it is NOW.
Why do you feel the need to highlight the obvious?
Probably the same reason you felt the need to highlight the obvious?

Why did 'you' feel the need to highlight the obvious?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:19 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:11 pm Oh, and by the way, what does 'metaphysics' actually mean, to you?
Nothing and everything.
Now this is a PRIME EXAMPLE of a human brain SHOWING its True ABILITY.

It can ONLY put out what has been put into it.

And, from what brains put out, this SHOWS and REVEALS what kind of societies they have had to live in and endure through.

Thus, the reason WHY societal CHANGE was needed, in and from the days of when this was being written.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Skepdick »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm I provided you with this KNOWLEDGE in my next response in that post.
You didn't You provided the information you thought I need, not the information I actually need.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm WHY did you just not say this last time?
I did. I used different words to say the same things.

I changed my words to help you.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Also, if you had ANY interest, then you would have informed me of this earlier and asked me some clarifying question/s. But, considering you still have NOT, then you OBVIOUSLY have NO interest and do NOT care what my clarifying question was, right.
It's tedious correcting all your misconceptions.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Are you 100% ABSOLUTELY SURE of this?
And I asked "How would I know if I wasn't?"
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Now, because that question was incoherent to you, for reasons not yet known, this question to you just means, are you 100% absolutely sure that 'synthesis' is spontaneous, and, 'synthesis' does not require prior experience?
The reason is obvious in the very question.

How would I know if I wasn't 100% absolutely sure?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Some are now wondering WHY you have spend so much effort 'trying to' just DEFLECT. But anyway.
They are probably also wondering why you don't know the difference between me and you.

I am not deflecting, so it's probably you.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm You can give ANY thing you like my questions.
Sure. Anything, but answers.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm What would make you ASSUME and say that I do NOT understand my OWN questions?
Are you 100% absolutely sure that you are asking me this question?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Is it even POSSIBLE to learn some 'thing' from NO 'thing'?

If yes, then HOW?
I don't know.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Yes when 'it' is fully understood by 'you', human beings, more than likely will I will stop asking 'you' (as many) clarifying questions regarding 'it'.
Then stop asking me questions.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Well telling people ANY thing other than what they BELIEVE is true, right, and/or correct, I have found, is a completely useless and worthless task, so I am trying something else.
Spare me your beliefs, tell me what you want.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm If you KNOW of a better way, or ANY way, to get 'you', human beings, to SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is, then would you let me KNOW as well?
How do I get you to see that we see it?

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm So, do you AGREE that you synthesize ALL of your ideas from your past experiences of society?
I didn't synthesise ANY ideas. If it requires past experience it's not synthesis.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm If yes, then this was a quick shift from what you were originally 'trying to' infer. Which is EXACTLY WHY I was hoping you would continue on with that line of questioning.
Despite all your "clarifying" questions you keep arriving at the wrong conclusions.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm However, if you do NOT agree that you synthesize ALL of your ideas from past experiences of society, then WHERE else do you get YOUR ideas from, EXACTLY?
Why are you asking me this question when I already told you the answer?

You sure seem to jump to conclusions exactly like "them adult humans"
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm If 'you' BELIEVE that this is ABSOLUTELY True, then 'you' could NEVER contradict "your" OWN 'self', correct?
Obviously.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Also, when 'you' become AWARE of what the saying or term, "yourself", itself, ACTUALLY IS, then, hopefully, 'you' will find this as humorous as 'I' do.
It's just a word. I am more than any words.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Could the term, "yourself", be a contradiction in terms, and thus be 'self-contradictory'? Or, is this just NOT possible in and from YOUR view of 'things'?
Contradictions do not exist.

I exist.

Therefore I cannot be a contradiction.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm So, that I do NOT accused of leading/directing ANY thing, including subjects, here.
Nobody is accusing you of anything.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Showing how the Mind and the brain work, without directly influencing the brains to much, is a very delicate task.
We know how it works.

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Probably the same reason you felt the need to highlight the obvious?

Why did 'you' feel the need to highlight the obvious?
How would you even assert the probability of our reasons being the same, and then continue to ask me for my reasons?

Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Thus, the reason WHY societal CHANGE was needed, in and from the days of when this was being written.
Change is happening whether it's needed or not.
Age
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Age »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm I provided you with this KNOWLEDGE in my next response in that post.
You didn't You provided the information you thought I need, not the information I actually need.
But I DID inform you of what I WANT TO KNOW.

Also, I NEVER thought that you 'need' that information. I just provided it anyway.

By the way, 'you' NEVER actually 'need', on its own, ANY information. You just seek out and 'want' information. This is because of what 'you' NATURALLY ARE.

But, if you Truly 'want' some 'thing', like the knowledge and know-how of how to create and live in a much better "world", only then you do ACTUALLY 'need' information. Which, by the way, I ALREADY HAVE this information. That is; If you are Truly interested in obtaining and KNOWING 'it' as well.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm WHY did you just not say this last time?
I did. I used different words to say the same things.

I changed my words to help you.
How EXACTLY is asking me; "How would I know if I wasn't?" the same thing as informing me, "Your question was incoherent"?
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Also, if you had ANY interest, then you would have informed me of this earlier and asked me some clarifying question/s. But, considering you still have NOT, then you OBVIOUSLY have NO interest and do NOT care what my clarifying question was, right.
It's tedious correcting all your misconceptions.[/quote]

It can also be CLEARLY SEEN to be tedious to just get you to clarify and to write coherently the first time. For example, if you just wrote, "Your question is incoherent to you" the first time, then it would NOT have taken us as long as it has to just get to this far.

Also, do NOT forget that I just asked you a CLARIFYING question and it was TO YOU incoherent. You had the misconception and I would NEVER had arrived at a misconception if you just explained this the first time. Asking me a completely OFF TOPIC question only DELAYED you responding to the ACTUAL question I posed to you first. Which, by the way, you have still NOT gotten around to answering and thus clarifying.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Are you 100% ABSOLUTELY SURE of this?
And I asked "How would I know if I wasn't?"[/quote]

SEE, this is just YOUR DELAYING TACTICS, which I alluded to in my last response to your DETRACTING writing and form.

Have you FORGOTTEN ALREADY that you explained that that is, supposedly, just the SAME THING as saying, "Your question is incoherent", to you.

You OBVIOUSLY do NOT want to answer this question Truly Honestly because of where that would leave 'you', especially considering the views, which you 'try to' express here.

But if you are Truly Honest about that question being, supposedly, "incoherent" to you. Then it will HAVE TO remain "incoherent" to 'you'.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Now, because that question was incoherent to you, for reasons not yet known, this question to you just means, are you 100% absolutely sure that 'synthesis' is spontaneous, and, 'synthesis' does not require prior experience?
The reason is obvious in the very question.

How would I know if I wasn't 100% absolutely sure?[/quote]

I do NOT KNOW. You were the ONE who MADE THE CLAIM. NOT ME.

YOU made the CLAIM that 'synthesis' is spontaneous and that 'synthesis' does NOT require prior experience.

I have suggested before and I will suggest AGAIN. If you want to make a CLAIM, then I suggest that you have what is NEEDED to back up and support YOUR CLAIMS BEFORE you make the CLAIM.

Making up excuses like; "your question is incoherent", to me, can be seen as DELAYING TACTICS.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Some are now wondering WHY you have spend so much effort 'trying to' just DEFLECT. But anyway.
They are probably also wondering why you don't know the difference between me and you.
If this is what 'you' think, then will you inform "them" of WHY 'you' ASSUME that they are wondering WHY 'I', supposedly, do NOT know the difference between 'me' and 'you'?

By the way, what is THEE ACTUAL DIFFERENCE between 'me' and 'you', from YOUR perspective?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm I am not deflecting, so it's probably you.
But;

'I' am the one asking the question.

You are the one refusing, by deflection, to answer my question.

Shat could it possibly be that I would be or could be even 'deflecting' from EXACTLY?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm You can give ANY thing you like my questions.
Sure. Anything, but answers.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm What would make you ASSUME and say that I do NOT understand my OWN questions?
Are you 100% absolutely sure that you are asking me this question?
Yes, if there is a 'me' responding. The question to 'you' is also HERE for ALL to SEE.

But other than that there is ONLY one 'thing' that I can be 100% absolutely sure of, and it is NOT if I am asking you that question.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Is it even POSSIBLE to learn some 'thing' from NO 'thing'?

If yes, then HOW?
I don't know.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Yes when 'it' is fully understood by 'you', human beings, more than likely will I will stop asking 'you' (as many) clarifying questions regarding 'it'.
Then stop asking me questions.
Your response OBVIOUSLY does NOT 'logically' follow from what I ACTUALLY said.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Well telling people ANY thing other than what they BELIEVE is true, right, and/or correct, I have found, is a completely useless and worthless task, so I am trying something else.
Spare me your beliefs, tell me what you want.
What do you propose here are my "beliefs"?

Also, I have ALREADY TOLD YOU what I WANT.

I WANT YOU to answer my questions Honestly.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm If you KNOW of a better way, or ANY way, to get 'you', human beings, to SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is, then would you let me KNOW as well?
How do I get you to see that we see it?
By PROVING 'it'.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm So, do you AGREE that you synthesize ALL of your ideas from your past experiences of society?
I didn't synthesise ANY ideas. If it requires past experience it's not synthesis.
So, 'you' do NOT synthesize ANY ideas, correct?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm If yes, then this was a quick shift from what you were originally 'trying to' infer. Which is EXACTLY WHY I was hoping you would continue on with that line of questioning.
Despite all your "clarifying" questions you keep arriving at the wrong conclusions.
Will you give examples?

If no, then WHY NOT?

Also, what can be CLEARLY SEEN here is that I have arrived at NO conclusion, and therefore could NOT "keep arriving at the wrong conclusions".

By the way, it was YOUR line of clarifying questions that was referring to and was hoping would continue.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm However, if you do NOT agree that you synthesize ALL of your ideas from past experiences of society, then WHERE else do you get YOUR ideas from, EXACTLY?
Why are you asking me this question when I already told you the answer?

You sure seem to jump to conclusions exactly like "them adult humans"
LOL Your REFUSAL to answers says MORE about 'you' than 'me'.

Also, what can be CLEARLY SEEN and PROVEN is that I have NOT arrived at ANY conclusion here, let alone "jumped to conclusions" here.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm If 'you' BELIEVE that this is ABSOLUTELY True, then 'you' could NEVER contradict "your" OWN 'self', correct?
Obviously.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Also, when 'you' become AWARE of what the saying or term, "yourself", itself, ACTUALLY IS, then, hopefully, 'you' will find this as humorous as 'I' do.
It's just a word. I am more than any words.
We will just have to WAIT and SEE.

Thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is sometimes stranger than fiction, as some say.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Could the term, "yourself", be a contradiction in terms, and thus be 'self-contradictory'? Or, is this just NOT possible in and from YOUR view of 'things'?
Contradictions do not exist.

I exist.

Therefore I cannot be a contradiction.
So, to 'you', the one known as "skepdick" here, the term, " "your" 'self' ", could NEVER be self-contradictory nor a contradiction of terms, correct?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm So, that I do NOT accused of leading/directing ANY thing, including subjects, here.
Nobody is accusing you of anything.
You completely MISSED the point, AGAIN.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Showing how the Mind and the brain work, without directly influencing the brains to much, is a very delicate task.
We know how it works.
'Who' knows how 'it' works? And what is 'it'?
Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Probably the same reason you felt the need to highlight the obvious?

Why did 'you' feel the need to highlight the obvious?
How would you even assert the probability of our reasons being the same, and then continue to ask me for my reasons?
To see if it was the same, or NOT.

Skepdick wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:30 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 3:11 pm Thus, the reason WHY societal CHANGE was needed, in and from the days of when this was being written.
Change is happening whether it's needed or not.
VERY, VERY True. Thank you for HIGHLIGHTING the MISTAKE I MADE.

Thus, the reason WHY societal CHANGE, for the better, was needed, in and from the days of when this was being written.
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Advocate »

Y'all haven't been talking about the OP here for a long time. It's time for you to move on.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Skepdick »

Advocate wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 5:28 pm Y'all haven't been talking about the OP here for a long time. It's time for you to move on.
You can't even recognise that what we are engaging is Metaphysics?

Language is Metaphysics!
Communication is Metaphysics!
Interaction is Metaphysics!
Philosophy is metaphysics.
Physics is metaphysics.

Everything is metaphysics.
Nothing is metaphysics.

Science is the best metaphysic available to humans in 2021.
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Skepdick post_id=493404 time=1612024784 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493401 time=1612024137 user_id=15238]
Y'all haven't been talking about the OP here for a long time. It's time for you to move on.
[/quote]
You can't even recognise that what we are engaging is Metaphysics?

Language is Metaphysics!
Communication is Metaphysics!
Interaction is Metaphysics!
Philosophy is metaphysics.
Physics is metaphysics.

Everything is metaphysics.
Nothing is metaphysics.

Science is the best metaphysic available to humans in 2021.
[/quote]

The OP is meta-metaphysics, not metaphysics, clue in!
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Skepdick »

Advocate wrote: Sat Jan 30, 2021 7:05 pm The OP is meta-metaphysics, not metaphysics, clue in!
I am talking about meta^∞ metaphysics, yo! Recursion.

Clue in!
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: metaphysics is...

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Skepdick post_id=493412 time=1612030361 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493411 time=1612029954 user_id=15238]
The OP is meta-metaphysics, not metaphysics, clue in!
[/quote]
I am talking about meta^∞ metaphysics, yo! Recursion.

Clue in!
[/quote]

I'm talking about the infinitely recursive meta-möbius version, duh!
Post Reply