peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:10 pm
You will never know what this knowledge offers unless you understand his reasoning?
This is the crux why I won't waste my time reading it.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
The kind of knowledge you can achieve through pure reason is "know that".
The kind of knowledge that matters in this universe is "know how".
The author does not appear to have any practical experience in dealing with complexity and scale.
Yet another armchair genius who thinks the world's problems can be solved by thinking about them a lot!
That not how it works. That's not how ANY of this works...
JUST STOP IT LOGIK. You’re making assumptions the very thing I hoped you would not do. You should not read what I gave. Only those people who would even consider that this is worth reading would be worth talking to. Obviously you’re not and I am not blaming you at all. After all, if this author is right, how can I blame you if man’s will is not free?
peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:10 pm
It’s so very sad that no one has asked me a relevant question regarding the chapters I’ve graciously given this forum. The assumptions that have been made about me are fabricated. If there is the slightest possibility that this is not a joke, that I understand what I’m sharing, then isn’t reading the first 3 chapters worth the risk of it not being what you hoped it would be? Think about this: if this author is correct you would be bypassing a discovery only because you pooh poohed the possibility that he could be right without examining the proof. I thought philosophy groups were objective think tanks: true investigators. I have found this across the board not to be the case. You will never know what this knowledge offers unless you understand his reasoning? I challenge you to find a flaw after you read what he has written, not before. What is 100 + pages to read if there is the possibility that this discovery is the real deal and not a waste of your time? I am not pulling the wool over your eyes but if no one shows any interest I will move on. I do understand the skepticism but just because other claims turned out to be false doesn’t mean this claim is false. All I have ever asked is for this author to be given a fair tribunal.
peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:10 pm
It’s so very sad that no one has asked me a relevant question regarding the chapters I’ve graciously given this forum. The assumptions that have been made about me are fabricated. If there is the slightest possibility that this is not a joke, that I understand what I’m sharing, then isn’t reading the first 3 chapters worth the risk of it not being what you hoped it would be? Think about this: if this author is correct you would be bypassing a discovery only because you pooh poohed the possibility that he could be right without examining the proof. I thought philosophy groups were objective think tanks: true investigators. I have found this across the board not to be the case. You will never know what this knowledge offers unless you understand his reasoning? I challenge you to find a flaw after you read what he has written, not before. What is 100 + pages to read if there is the possibility that this discovery is the real deal and not a waste of your time? I am not pulling the wool over your eyes but if no one shows any interest I will move on. I do understand the skepticism but just because other claims turned out to be false doesn’t mean this claim is false. All I have ever asked is for this author to be given a fair tribunal.
peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:10 pmIt's so very sad...
Your interaction here is all about what you want...yes? What you think other people should do, and what you think other people should care about and see value in...yes? You think your expectations are reasonable to ask of people who have other things that are much more compelling to them than that which is compelling to you. You dismiss the feedback you get from people who are kind enough to take a look to any degree or to even listen and engage with what you're saying. Why in the world would people give a crap about delving into your agenda to the extent that you do, or that you want them to? Seriously... just because you tell them it's important? Are you that easily influenced and directed by people who tell you to explore a path?
How realistic is it that the problem is with everybody else and the other forums? You ask people to read, but you do not listen. You take no responsibility for YOUR unreasonable expectations and behavior -- you lament how sad it is that people don't do what you want. Then you claim you are bullied.
peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:10 pmIt's so very sad...
Your interaction here is all about what you want...yes? What you think other people should do, and what you think other people should care about and see value in...yes? You think your expectations are reasonable to ask of people who have other things that are much more compelling to them than that which is compelling to you. You dismiss the feedback you get from people who are kind enough to take a look to any degree or to even listen and engage with what you're saying. Why in the world would people give a crap about delving into your agenda to the extent that you do, or that you want them to? Seriously... just because you tell them it's important? Are you that easily influenced and directed by people who tell you to explore a path?
How realistic is it that the problem is with everybody else and the other forums? You ask people to read, but you do not listen. You take no responsibility for YOUR unreasonable expectations and behavior -- you lament how sad it is that people don't do what you want. Then you claim you are bullied.
Seriously peacegirl...wtf?
No no no, you can't use the same BS over and over again, without you lifting a finger to actually read the text. What are you afraid of? No true scientific investigator would judge my history online (what a joke) as proof that I have nothing to offer. If you look back in history, it's the same old story which is why you should think twice before you speak bullshit.
peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:10 pm
It’s so very sad that no one has asked me a relevant question regarding the chapters I’ve graciously given this forum. The assumptions that have been made about me are fabricated. If there is the slightest possibility that this is not a joke, that I understand what I’m sharing, then isn’t reading the first 3 chapters worth the risk of it not being what you hoped it would be? Think about this: if this author is correct you would be bypassing a discovery only because you pooh poohed the possibility that he could be right without examining the proof. I thought philosophy groups were objective think tanks: true investigators. I have found this across the board not to be the case. You will never know what this knowledge offers unless you understand his reasoning? I challenge you to find a flaw after you read what he has written, not before. What is 100 + pages to read if there is the possibility that this discovery is the real deal and not a waste of your time? I am not pulling the wool over your eyes but if no one shows any interest I will move on. I do understand the skepticism but just because other claims turned out to be false doesn’t mean this claim is false. All I have ever asked is for this author to be given a fair tribunal.
It's about fucking time.
This highfalutin group is as arrogant as they come.
peacegirl wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 4:49 pm
No no no, you can't use the same BS over and over again, without you lifting a finger to actually read the text. What are you afraid of? No true scientific investigator would judge my history online (what a joke) as proof that I have nothing to offer. If you look back in history, it's the same old story which is why you should think twice before you speak bullshit.
It's very simple: You are being ridiculous, and you are not reputable, so there is no compelling reason to go where you point. This feedback could help your future approach, yet you show no appreciation.
Logik wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:28 pm
Yes! Don't talk or listen to practitioners who identify gaping problems with your methods, talk/listen to your followers!
Religion-building 101.
fix-society.png
This is humorous. What practitioners? Do you mean YOU and your cronies? What gaping problems are you talking about? Be specific Logik!!
You lack empirical evidence that your styategy will have the desired/predicted/expected effect!!!
How much particular do you want me to get.
Yes me and “my cronies”. The Illuminati! The old guard standing in your way!
Yes, in a way you (and your associates) are acting like the illuminati. Just to be clear, I don't need this forum. I just thought you'd like to know where I find lots of arrogance to go around, where there should be curiosity at the very least. You go round and round discussing issues that will not have any lasting impact and when something truly valid comes along, you reject it. Go figure. I don't need to hear your retort, as I'm not willing to respond to your mistaken reasoning.
This is humorous. What practitioners? Do you mean YOU and your cronies? What gaping problems are you talking about? Be specific Logik!!
You lack empirical evidence that your styategy will have the desired/predicted/expected effect!!!
How much particular do you want me to get.
Yes me and “my cronies”. The Illuminati! The old guard standing in your way!
Yes, in a way you are acting like the illuminati. I'm just following your lead. I don't need this forum. I just thought you'd like to know where I find major arrogance and a block to anything that you deem impossible or wrong or unworthy of your time while you go round and round discussing issues that will not have any lasting impact. I don't need to hear your retort, as I'm not willing to be taken in by your mistaken reasoning.
Where would you like me to e-mail you your “I could fix the world if you stop oprressing me” membership card?
-1- wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:47 pm
It's about fucking time.
This highfalutin group is as arrogant as they come.
You've now filled pages with your comments, that's enough room for several summaries.
Come on, you know we all know that the insights of the book are most likely rubbish. How do you want to enforce world peace? Create a global dictatorship and force every human to behave a certain way?
-1- wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:47 pm
It's about fucking time.
This highfalutin group is as arrogant as they come.
You've now filled pages with your comments, that's enough room for several summaries.
Come on, you know we all know that the insights of the book are most likely rubbish. How do you want to enforce world peace? Create a global dictatorship and force every human to behave a certain way?
If I were the benevolent dictator this place would be so much better!
