Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
Age wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:56 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am
(Sipping coffee)...I think atla needs coffee too.
Okay. You might, however, find, and contrary to popular belief, that no one "needs" coffee.
Like 'you', they only 'want' coffee.
But, as history has proven many times, 'popular belief' is very often completely and utterly WRONG.
Also, I am not sure why an "atla" was brought up here now, nor what an "atla" has to do with this thread, but I do not really care anyway.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 amAssuming is knowing...
(Sipping coffee)
That is what 'you' assume, 'assuming' is.
Some would say 'assuming' is
assuming, whereas 'knowing' is
knowing.
These are two, obviously, very distinctly different things to some human beings. But they are, obviously, the exact same thing, to 'you'.
This is obviously because if they were not the exact same thing, then your argument/theory would not work.
Changing the definitions of words, is a little trick some human beings (unintentionally?) try to use, to try and make their own beliefs/arguments/theories work logically. But, unfortunately, this trick just does not ever work successfully. When people try to 'trick' "others" they eventually get caught out.
Sipping coffee...
IF 'sipping coffee' MEANS sipping coffee, then WHERE IS the assumption?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 amWe assume reality, it imprints us, these imprints form our perspective and these perspectives give us the identity through which we assume further reality. Assumption and knowing are inseperable.
To you, obviously. But, 'assumption' and 'knowing' are NOT inseparable, to EVERY one, which is also completely obvious.
If you are incapable of defining the word 'assuming' and the word 'knowing' separately, then that is a dysfunction of 'you'. It is not proof that those two obviously different words, with obviously different meanings, are incapable of being separated.
You just CHOOSE to not separate them, and again this is not proof that they are inseparable.
How 'you' CHOOSE to look at and see things is NOT proof of any thing. Understood?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 amPeople fail not because of assuming, but because they fail to assume.
People fail 'what' exactly?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am When we observe reality we assume it.
OF COURSE. This is what human beings do. Did you MISS the part where I said I agree with you wholeheartedly?
But just because 'you', adult human beings, do that, sometimes, does NOT mean that EVERY one does it.
If I knew you read what I wrote, then I would ask are you at all able to understand this? But I do NOT know, so then I will not.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am To not assume is to not observe.
Another assumption, which, to some, is OBVIOUSLY WRONG.
I can CERTAINLY observe, without assuming. In fact I am doing it right HERE and NOW.
Lots of other human beings can do this as well. In fact ALL human beings, once upon a time, observed without assuming.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 amPeople fail for not assuming enough of reality, this leaves a disconnect between assumptions.
This is YOUR assumption, which obviously could be WRONG.
To me, there is only ONE thing that can be KNOWN, FOR SURE, without ANY assumption what so ever. Therefore, absolutely every thing else could just be assuming. But obviously if there is ONE thing that is NOT assumed, then 'NOT all is assumed'. Contrary to YOUR BELIEF.
You can say ALL you like and NOT listen to, or question or challenge any one, nor any thing else, other than what you already assume and believe is true, but by doing that, does that make one's assumptions correct?
If you are NOT open to the 'fact' that you could be WRONG, then that says more about 'you' then it does about your "theory/argument".