Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 3233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:05 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:47 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:32 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 9:34 pm


You assumed I missed it.
Besides your assumption is completely and utterly wrong. It is wrong for two reasons:

1. I added the word 'OR' so I never even assumed what you thought/assumed I did.

Actually you assumed probabilistic behavior, it was defined by a specific number of categories.

2.Even if I had assumed what you thought/assumed I did your insistence OR inability to not even provide the example, and try and refute it, helps in provinh my example is 100% True, Right, and Correct, for two reasons:

Dude, learn to read. I explained in multiple examples how your ideas are both assumptions and composed of assumptions

1. You are proving my view of hoe the brain works.

Not really, external environmental factors determine various functions of the brain. It may not be the brain but the environment causing the brain to act a certain way. You want to originate it with the brain....but this is an assumption.


2. From what I have observed so far there is no possible way you could refute my example of what is not assumed.

Yes, from what you assume there is no possible way to refute your assumptions that your arguments are not assumptions...I agree.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 9:34 pm
I can see you are afraid of being wrong, so let me break it down so that a child can understand it:
Another wrong assumption you make here.

False, you said everyone's brain is locked in a certain way of defending there beleifs thus yours is as well.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 9:34 pm
The statements you made are composed of assumptions.
Another wrong assumption you make here

Good, then tell me why...other wise it is just and assumption.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 9:34 pm
Those assumptions are letters, words, symbols and contexts (such as personal sensory experience, point of view etc.)

Words such as "I" and "you", because they are not defined, are assumed. They are defined within a specific context, however the context is also assumed as other contexts can be presented.
Another wrong assumption you make here

Duh...duh...duh... seriously? Throw in a stutter, like petey, and you will be more convincing.

I enjoy how you are assuming everyone understands why saying "your wrong" constitutes a good explanation.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 9:34 pm
Stop projecting your assumptions, your "people are wired a certain way to not let go of there beliefs" is an undefined argument in the face of beliefs always in a process of change.
Another wrong assumption you make here

why?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 9:34 pm
Face it, all is assumption, and proof is expansive definition and self referentiality.
Another wrong assumption you make here. You can not prove this assumption is even close to be correct, so what is the point of continually expressing your assumption/s?

Actually I can prove it considering proof is merely definition. The nature of math being grounded in the assumption of 1 proves this. Basic 1 is an assumption, yet this assumption defines itself through recurssion into a proof. The relation of 1 and 1, as many numbers Inverts isomorphically to 2 as 1 number. Equations are isomorphic in nature. It argues how many parts invert to one...in this case number.

Your attempt at a theory can not even be proven false, so again what is the point of continually reiterating some thing that is completely worthless and useless?

Anything can be proven false given a context change.

If you want me to provide my example of 'what is not assumed', then I will. I have nothing to hide so I can keep presenting my example and proving it correct if you like. But if you are to afraid that I can do this, and do you will keep ignoring it, then so be it. Your continual ignorance of my example shows anyway, and thus proves, that what I am saying is true and correct also. So, either way I am happy.

Yes please, provide it.

Both all of your responses as well as your non responses continually proves that what I KNOW and am saying is True, Right, and Correct. You, unfortunately for you, NEVER know if you are correct or not, and you are NEVER able to prove any thing you assume and say.

False, assumption is truth. Disconnected truths are false. All contradiction is grounded in the fragmentation of truths, hence the fragmentation of assumptions.

The connection of assumptions mandates truth, as this connection allows for an inherent form which exists as is. Form is inseperable from assumption as assumption takes on a projective and receptive nature. Truth is grounded in form.
You replace the words I use with your own words, and then say I am saying some thing, which I am OBVIUOSLY not. Your own assumptions and beliefs have blinded you so much so that you are now writing your own words and trying to argue against them. You are, at times, now literally disputing and arguing against your own self.

You, at times, use the 'false' word in reply to what "others" say, yet you also assume and believe that there is not any thing that can be known.

So, how can you KNOW some thing is 'false'?

If every thing is an assumption, as you assume and believe it is, then how could you know, or prove, any thing?

By the way you still have not directly addressed my example of 'what is not assumed'. Do you even know what my example is?

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4963
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:08 am

Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:05 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:47 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:32 am


Besides your assumption is completely and utterly wrong. It is wrong for two reasons:

1. I added the word 'OR' so I never even assumed what you thought/assumed I did.

Actually you assumed probabilistic behavior, it was defined by a specific number of categories.

2.Even if I had assumed what you thought/assumed I did your insistence OR inability to not even provide the example, and try and refute it, helps in provinh my example is 100% True, Right, and Correct, for two reasons:

Dude, learn to read. I explained in multiple examples how your ideas are both assumptions and composed of assumptions

1. You are proving my view of hoe the brain works.

Not really, external environmental factors determine various functions of the brain. It may not be the brain but the environment causing the brain to act a certain way. You want to originate it with the brain....but this is an assumption.


2. From what I have observed so far there is no possible way you could refute my example of what is not assumed.

Yes, from what you assume there is no possible way to refute your assumptions that your arguments are not assumptions...I agree.



Another wrong assumption you make here.

False, you said everyone's brain is locked in a certain way of defending there beleifs thus yours is as well.



Another wrong assumption you make here

Good, then tell me why...other wise it is just and assumption.



Another wrong assumption you make here

Duh...duh...duh... seriously? Throw in a stutter, like petey, and you will be more convincing.

I enjoy how you are assuming everyone understands why saying "your wrong" constitutes a good explanation.




Another wrong assumption you make here

why?



Another wrong assumption you make here. You can not prove this assumption is even close to be correct, so what is the point of continually expressing your assumption/s?

Actually I can prove it considering proof is merely definition. The nature of math being grounded in the assumption of 1 proves this. Basic 1 is an assumption, yet this assumption defines itself through recurssion into a proof. The relation of 1 and 1, as many numbers Inverts isomorphically to 2 as 1 number. Equations are isomorphic in nature. It argues how many parts invert to one...in this case number.

Your attempt at a theory can not even be proven false, so again what is the point of continually reiterating some thing that is completely worthless and useless?

Anything can be proven false given a context change.

If you want me to provide my example of 'what is not assumed', then I will. I have nothing to hide so I can keep presenting my example and proving it correct if you like. But if you are to afraid that I can do this, and do you will keep ignoring it, then so be it. Your continual ignorance of my example shows anyway, and thus proves, that what I am saying is true and correct also. So, either way I am happy.

Yes please, provide it.

Both all of your responses as well as your non responses continually proves that what I KNOW and am saying is True, Right, and Correct. You, unfortunately for you, NEVER know if you are correct or not, and you are NEVER able to prove any thing you assume and say.

False, assumption is truth. Disconnected truths are false. All contradiction is grounded in the fragmentation of truths, hence the fragmentation of assumptions.

The connection of assumptions mandates truth, as this connection allows for an inherent form which exists as is. Form is inseperable from assumption as assumption takes on a projective and receptive nature. Truth is grounded in form.
You replace the words I use with your own words, and then say I am saying some thing, which I am OBVIUOSLY not. Your own assumptions and beliefs have blinded you so much so that you are now writing your own words and trying to argue against them. You are, at times, now literally disputing and arguing against your own self.

You, at times, use the 'false' word in reply to what "others" say, yet you also assume and believe that there is not any thing that can be known.

So, how can you KNOW some thing is 'false'?

If every thing is an assumption, as you assume and believe it is, then how could you know, or prove, any thing?

By the way you still have not directly addressed my example of 'what is not assumed'. Do you even know what my example is?
Blah, blah blah...assumptions.

I addressed the list already, why don't you copy and paste it again and I will address it again? Better yet, why dont you copy and paste my responses with it?

I assume something is false and I know that I assume because this is an assumption and this constant cycling takes a form. The form is observed as is.

Proof is form.

Age
Posts: 3233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:16 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:08 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:05 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:47 am
You replace the words I use with your own words, and then say I am saying some thing, which I am OBVIUOSLY not. Your own assumptions and beliefs have blinded you so much so that you are now writing your own words and trying to argue against them. You are, at times, now literally disputing and arguing against your own self.

You, at times, use the 'false' word in reply to what "others" say, yet you also assume and believe that there is not any thing that can be known.

So, how can you KNOW some thing is 'false'?

If every thing is an assumption, as you assume and believe it is, then how could you know, or prove, any thing?

By the way you still have not directly addressed my example of 'what is not assumed'. Do you even know what my example is?
Blah, blah blah...assumptions.

I addressed the list already, why don't you copy and paste it again and I will address it again? Better yet, why dont you copy and paste my responses with it?

I assume something is false and I know that I assume because this is an assumption and this constant cycling takes a form. The form is observed as is.

Proof is form.
So, if 'proof is form' is true, and thus 'not what is assumed', then you have just refuted what you have been asserting is true. You, therefore, are in a constant cycle of stupidity AND absurdity

What you are essentially 'trying to' say and do here; is prove that which you say can not be proven. In other words, you are trying to assert that you KNOW 'that', which can not be known.

Have fun.

There is another fact, which can actually be known and proven, as I have been saying and pointing out, but which you have been missung or just ignoring That is;

You assume every thing.

Now, if this is false, then prove it.

However, if this is not false, then it is an example of 'what is not assumed'.

By the way, now you have absolutely no excuse for missing nor ignoring the actual and real truth, which is clearly bold underlined for you.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4963
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:30 am

Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:16 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:08 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:05 am


You replace the words I use with your own words, and then say I am saying some thing, which I am OBVIUOSLY not. Your own assumptions and beliefs have blinded you so much so that you are now writing your own words and trying to argue against them. You are, at times, now literally disputing and arguing against your own self.

You, at times, use the 'false' word in reply to what "others" say, yet you also assume and believe that there is not any thing that can be known.

So, how can you KNOW some thing is 'false'?

If every thing is an assumption, as you assume and believe it is, then how could you know, or prove, any thing?

By the way you still have not directly addressed my example of 'what is not assumed'. Do you even know what my example is?
Blah, blah blah...assumptions.

I addressed the list already, why don't you copy and paste it again and I will address it again? Better yet, why dont you copy and paste my responses with it?

I assume something is false and I know that I assume because this is an assumption and this constant cycling takes a form. The form is observed as is.

Proof is form.
So, if 'proof is form' is true, and thus 'not what is assumed', then you have just refuted what you have been asserting is true. You, therefore, are in a constant cycle of stupidity AND absurdity

False, linearism and circularity are both unavoidable. All arguments must have a progressive circularity.

The argument thus results in a spiral that allows for maintaining basic truths and enabling them to constantly adapt.


What you are essentially 'trying to' say and do here; is prove that which you say can not be proven. In other words, you are trying to assert that you KNOW 'that', which can not be known.

Have fun.

I know I assume, and I am aware of how these assumptions exist through and as forms. Reality is composed of patterns, assumptions are grounded in patterns. A dot strictly just is. Assumption reciprocates through forms as functions and functions as forms.

What I am saying is proof has a nature and as such is strictly a set of definitions.


There is another fact, which can actually be known and proven, as I have been saying and pointing out, but which you have been missung or just ignoring That is;

You assume every thing.

Now, if this is false, then prove it.


However, if this is not false, then it is an example of 'what is not assumed'.

By the way, now you have absolutely no excuse for missing nor ignoring the actual and real truth, which is clearly bold underlined for you.

And what is the real truth? Because that is a half truth. ALL is assumed. You assumed a specific angle, and disconnected one assumption from another, that is why you are wrong.
What you fail to realize is all assumptions are grounded in spatial forms, and these forms take on the nature of the assumptive process. All is grounded in space.

Age
Posts: 3233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:19 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:30 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:16 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:08 am

Blah, blah blah...assumptions.

I addressed the list already, why don't you copy and paste it again and I will address it again? Better yet, why dont you copy and paste my responses with it?

I assume something is false and I know that I assume because this is an assumption and this constant cycling takes a form. The form is observed as is.

Proof is form.
So, if 'proof is form' is true, and thus 'not what is assumed', then you have just refuted what you have been asserting is true. You, therefore, are in a constant cycle of stupidity AND absurdity

False, linearism and circularity are both unavoidable. All arguments must have a progressive circularity.

The argument thus results in a spiral that allows for maintaining basic truths and enabling them to constantly adapt.


What you are essentially 'trying to' say and do here; is prove that which you say can not be proven. In other words, you are trying to assert that you KNOW 'that', which can not be known.

Have fun.

I know I assume, and I am aware of how these assumptions exist through and as forms. Reality is composed of patterns, assumptions are grounded in patterns. A dot strictly just is. Assumption reciprocates through forms as functions and functions as forms.

What I am saying is proof has a nature and as such is strictly a set of definitions.


There is another fact, which can actually be known and proven, as I have been saying and pointing out, but which you have been missung or just ignoring That is;

You assume every thing.

Now, if this is false, then prove it.


However, if this is not false, then it is an example of 'what is not assumed'.

By the way, now you have absolutely no excuse for missing nor ignoring the actual and real truth, which is clearly bold underlined for you.

And what is the real truth? Because that is a half truth. ALL is assumed. You assumed a specific angle, and disconnected one assumption from another, that is why you are wrong.
What you fail to realize is all assumptions are grounded in spatial forms, and these forms take on the nature of the assumptive process. All is grounded in space.
But there is no need to realize this, as it is just ground on your own beliefs, some of which are obviously false, wrong, and incorrect.

You seem to believe, and assume, that just because you believe some thing is true and right, then the rest of humanity must also accept and believe that 'what you believe is true and right' is true and right.

For your information, just because you BELIEVE some thing, that does NOT make it true NOR right.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4963
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am

Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:30 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:16 am


So, if 'proof is form' is true, and thus 'not what is assumed', then you have just refuted what you have been asserting is true. You, therefore, are in a constant cycle of stupidity AND absurdity

False, linearism and circularity are both unavoidable. All arguments must have a progressive circularity.

The argument thus results in a spiral that allows for maintaining basic truths and enabling them to constantly adapt.


What you are essentially 'trying to' say and do here; is prove that which you say can not be proven. In other words, you are trying to assert that you KNOW 'that', which can not be known.

Have fun.

I know I assume, and I am aware of how these assumptions exist through and as forms. Reality is composed of patterns, assumptions are grounded in patterns. A dot strictly just is. Assumption reciprocates through forms as functions and functions as forms.

What I am saying is proof has a nature and as such is strictly a set of definitions.


There is another fact, which can actually be known and proven, as I have been saying and pointing out, but which you have been missung or just ignoring That is;

You assume every thing.

Now, if this is false, then prove it.


However, if this is not false, then it is an example of 'what is not assumed'.

By the way, now you have absolutely no excuse for missing nor ignoring the actual and real truth, which is clearly bold underlined for you.

And what is the real truth? Because that is a half truth. ALL is assumed. You assumed a specific angle, and disconnected one assumption from another, that is why you are wrong.
What you fail to realize is all assumptions are grounded in spatial forms, and these forms take on the nature of the assumptive process. All is grounded in space.
But there is no need to realize this, as it is just ground on your own beliefs, some of which are obviously false, wrong, and incorrect.

You seem to believe, and assume, that just because you believe some thing is true and right, then the rest of humanity must also accept and believe that 'what you believe is true and right' is true and right.

For your information, just because you BELIEVE some thing, that does NOT make it true NOR right.
You assume it is my beliefs...I am stating assumption is unavoidable and this is evidenced by it repeated nature. It does not negate other people's beliefs or assumptions...it strictly just acknowledges them for what they are.

How is that forcing anything on anyone?

Age
Posts: 3233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:14 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:30 am


What you fail to realize is all assumptions are grounded in spatial forms, and these forms take on the nature of the assumptive process. All is grounded in space.
But there is no need to realize this, as it is just ground on your own beliefs, some of which are obviously false, wrong, and incorrect.

You seem to believe, and assume, that just because you believe some thing is true and right, then the rest of humanity must also accept and believe that 'what you believe is true and right' is true and right.

For your information, just because you BELIEVE some thing, that does NOT make it true NOR right.
You assume it is my beliefs...
Are you now saying that you do not believe that you always make assumptions, and that there is no assumptive process?

You will have to clarify this if you want to be somewhat understood.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
I am stating assumption is unavoidable and this is evidenced by it repeated nature.
If it is 'evidenced', then it is true, right, and/or correct. Therefore, it is then not an assumption, and, If that is the case, then not every thing is an assumption. And, if this is true, then what you are saying here is wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

As I have been alluding to, the reason you are seeing assumptions being continually repeated is because you wholeheartedly BELIEVE that this is true. And, because you BELIEVE it so strongly, then this is ALL you can see, obviously.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
It does not negate other people's beliefs or assumptions...it strictly just acknowledges them for what they are.
If you know 'what they are', then they are NOT assumed.

This would therefore be just another example of 'what is not assumed'.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
How is that forcing anything on anyone?
Do you have any understanding of why you could, and would, come uo with such an obviously ridiculous assumption?

The answer, by the way, to WHY you did make such an absurd and ridiculous assumption is obvious, that is; when you KNOW and understand how the brain works.

What actual words in what I wrote led you to assume such a thing? I certainly can not see any word, in my writings, that is even suggesting that you are "forcing anything on anyone".

You are certainly NOT "forcing" any thing on me, and that is for sure. In fact, what you are saying here is being continually shown to be wrong and incorrect, from my perspective anyway.
Last edited by Age on Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11961
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Arising_uk » Sat Aug 17, 2019 2:16 pm

Skepdick wrote: Clarification then: It depends on how many different ways you are using 'exists' ...
Or upon what "idea" means?
Arising_uk wrote: Hence dualism. You've invented a line between "world' and "ourselves". ...
Well I certainly hold to the metaphysic that we are a body with senses, memory and language in an external world but think the word "world" includes "ourselves".
Obviously we all do that without blinking an eye, but if you were to decide to practice the principle of charity (with the knowledge that Johndoe is defending monism e.g one context, an undivided whole ), you could trivially read "unicorns can exist and not exist" as

"[concepts of unicorns; and actual unicorns] can exist and not exist at the same time".
concept -> exists
unicorn -> does-not-exist ...
Sure but all that is saying is that there are ideas and things so one of them not existing is not the same as it existing and not existing at the same time. However, Johndoe has in the past actually claimed that the existing cat is also not existing at exactly the same time.
Which is true.
No argument there other than that it's just saying that one thing exists and the other doesn't.
Arising_uk wrote: Propositional logic uses axioms. You used the axiom of non-contradiction to draw conclusions about the statement.
But it doesn't use equality so not an issue.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4963
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:36 am

Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:14 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:19 am


But there is no need to realize this, as it is just ground on your own beliefs, some of which are obviously false, wrong, and incorrect.

You seem to believe, and assume, that just because you believe some thing is true and right, then the rest of humanity must also accept and believe that 'what you believe is true and right' is true and right.

For your information, just because you BELIEVE some thing, that does NOT make it true NOR right.
You assume it is my beliefs...
Are you now saying that you do not believe that you always make assumptions, and that there is no assumptive process?

You will have to clarify this if you want to be somewhat understood.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
I am stating assumption is unavoidable and this is evidenced by it repeated nature.
If it is 'evidenced', then it is true, right, and/or correct. Therefore, it is then not an assumption, and, If that is the case, then not every thing is an assumption. And, if this is true, then what you are saying here is wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

As I have been alluding to, the reason you are seeing assumptions being continually repeated is because you wholeheartedly BELIEVE that this is true. And, because you BELIEVE it so strongly, then this is ALL you can see, obviously.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
It does not negate other people's beliefs or assumptions...it strictly just acknowledges them for what they are.
If you know 'what they are', then they are NOT assumed.

This would therefore be just another example of 'what is not assumed'.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
How is that forcing anything on anyone?
Do you have any understanding of why you could, and would, come uo with such an obviously ridiculous assumption?

The answer, by the way, to WHY you did make such an absurd and ridiculous assumption is obvious, that is; when you KNOW and understand how the brain works.

What actual words in what I wrote led you to assume such a thing? I certainly can not see any word, in my writings, that is even suggesting that you are "forcing anything on anyone".

You are certainly NOT "forcing" any thing on me, and that is for sure. In fact, what you are saying here is being continually shown to be wrong and incorrect, from my perspective anyway.
I read one word, you repeat the same thing in constant variation.

Age
Posts: 3233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:26 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:36 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:14 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am


You assume it is my beliefs...
Are you now saying that you do not believe that you always make assumptions, and that there is no assumptive process?

You will have to clarify this if you want to be somewhat understood.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
I am stating assumption is unavoidable and this is evidenced by it repeated nature.
If it is 'evidenced', then it is true, right, and/or correct. Therefore, it is then not an assumption, and, If that is the case, then not every thing is an assumption. And, if this is true, then what you are saying here is wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

As I have been alluding to, the reason you are seeing assumptions being continually repeated is because you wholeheartedly BELIEVE that this is true. And, because you BELIEVE it so strongly, then this is ALL you can see, obviously.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
It does not negate other people's beliefs or assumptions...it strictly just acknowledges them for what they are.
If you know 'what they are', then they are NOT assumed.

This would therefore be just another example of 'what is not assumed'.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:36 am
How is that forcing anything on anyone?
Do you have any understanding of why you could, and would, come uo with such an obviously ridiculous assumption?

The answer, by the way, to WHY you did make such an absurd and ridiculous assumption is obvious, that is; when you KNOW and understand how the brain works.

What actual words in what I wrote led you to assume such a thing? I certainly can not see any word, in my writings, that is even suggesting that you are "forcing anything on anyone".

You are certainly NOT "forcing" any thing on me, and that is for sure. In fact, what you are saying here is being continually shown to be wrong and incorrect, from my perspective anyway.
I read one word, you repeat the same thing in constant variation.
I read ALL your words, you constantly do not answer clarifying questions, which, if you did honestly, would then prove that your theory/argument is not valid nor sound, wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

Your refusal to even look at what is written helps to show and prove just how brain does not want to see 'that' what contradicts what it already believes is true. The inability of that brain to refute what I am saying can also be seen here.

If you believe that you can work things out and understand all of what is written by reading just one word, then I would not be surprised if I was you that some just do not accept this as being at all true.

Skepdick
Posts: 1688
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Skepdick » Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:24 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 2:16 pm
Sure but all that is saying is that there are ideas and things so one of them not existing is not the same as it existing and not existing at the same time. However, Johndoe has in the past actually claimed that the existing cat is also not existing at exactly the same time.
Yeah, it's trivial to construct a logical system in which his claim is true using many-sorted logic.

You simply put all instances of the Unicorn-pattern into a Unicorn sort.

real-unicorns ∈ Unicorn-sort
toy-unicorns ∈ Unicorn-sort
concept-unicorns-in-Skepdick-head ∈ Unicorn-sort
concept-unicorns-in-Arising_uk-head ∈ Unicorn-sort

If you've never heard of the concept of "unicorn" before, then unicorn-pattern don't exist in your head, but it exist in mine.
Real unicorns don't exist, but toy unicorns do. They are all Unicorns.

So from the perspective of a 3rd observer "unicorns both exist and don't" is true.

Information-patterns are the same things as Platonic forms.
Arising_uk wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 2:16 pm
No argument there other than that it's just saying that one thing exists and the other doesn't.
Yes. Some instances of the unicorn pattern exist. Some instances of unicorn pattern don't exist.
Arising_uk wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 2:16 pm
But it doesn't use equality so not an issue.
It does't have to. It uses sets/types/sorts (categorization) - as soon as you place one concept in multiple categories, you've committed equivocation.

That's why all dualism explodes.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4963
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:45 pm

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:26 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:36 am
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:14 pm


Are you now saying that you do not believe that you always make assumptions, and that there is no assumptive process?

You will have to clarify this if you want to be somewhat understood.



If it is 'evidenced', then it is true, right, and/or correct. Therefore, it is then not an assumption, and, If that is the case, then not every thing is an assumption. And, if this is true, then what you are saying here is wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

As I have been alluding to, the reason you are seeing assumptions being continually repeated is because you wholeheartedly BELIEVE that this is true. And, because you BELIEVE it so strongly, then this is ALL you can see, obviously.



If you know 'what they are', then they are NOT assumed.

This would therefore be just another example of 'what is not assumed'.



Do you have any understanding of why you could, and would, come uo with such an obviously ridiculous assumption?

The answer, by the way, to WHY you did make such an absurd and ridiculous assumption is obvious, that is; when you KNOW and understand how the brain works.

What actual words in what I wrote led you to assume such a thing? I certainly can not see any word, in my writings, that is even suggesting that you are "forcing anything on anyone".

You are certainly NOT "forcing" any thing on me, and that is for sure. In fact, what you are saying here is being continually shown to be wrong and incorrect, from my perspective anyway.
I read one word, you repeat the same thing in constant variation.
I read ALL your words, you constantly do not answer clarifying questions, which, if you did honestly, would then prove that your theory/argument is not valid nor sound, wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

Your refusal to even look at what is written helps to show and prove just how brain does not want to see 'that' what contradicts what it already believes is true. The inability of that brain to refute what I am saying can also be seen here.

If you believe that you can work things out and understand all of what is written by reading just one word, then I would not be surprised if I was you that some just do not accept this as being at all true.
"Wrong and incorrect from your perspective anyway" is a subject point of awareness, it is assumed on your part.

Age
Posts: 3233
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:10 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:45 pm
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:26 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:36 am

I read one word, you repeat the same thing in constant variation.
I read ALL your words, you constantly do not answer clarifying questions, which, if you did honestly, would then prove that your theory/argument is not valid nor sound, wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

Your refusal to even look at what is written helps to show and prove just how brain does not want to see 'that' what contradicts what it already believes is true. The inability of that brain to refute what I am saying can also be seen here.

If you believe that you can work things out and understand all of what is written by reading just one word, then I would not be surprised if I was you that some just do not accept this as being at all true.
"Wrong and incorrect from your perspective anyway" is a subject point of awareness, it is assumed on your part.
If some thing can be proven to be true, then it is not assumed.

My example of 'what is not assumed' can be proven to be true, therefore it is some thing not assumed.

Skepdick
Posts: 1688
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Skepdick » Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:17 pm

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:10 pm
My example of 'what is not assumed' can be proven to be true, therefore it is some thing not assumed.
You can't prove a negative, except via assumption.

Prove that I don't believe you are an idiot.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4963
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:39 pm

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:10 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:45 pm
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:26 am


I read ALL your words, you constantly do not answer clarifying questions, which, if you did honestly, would then prove that your theory/argument is not valid nor sound, wrong, false, and/or incorrect.

Your refusal to even look at what is written helps to show and prove just how brain does not want to see 'that' what contradicts what it already believes is true. The inability of that brain to refute what I am saying can also be seen here.

If you believe that you can work things out and understand all of what is written by reading just one word, then I would not be surprised if I was you that some just do not accept this as being at all true.
"Wrong and incorrect from your perspective anyway" is a subject point of awareness, it is assumed on your part.
If some thing can be proven to be true, then it is not assumed.

My example of 'what is not assumed' can be proven to be true, therefore it is some thing not assumed.
False, the proof is assumed as is...as a state of connected axioms that define the properties of a phenomenon.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests