Disconnected from what exactly?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 3:24 pmFalse, what I am observing is that your assumptions are disconnected but still exist as assumptions.
If you knew what my example of 'what is not assumed' was, then you would see that this is not false at all.
I never assumed any such thing. I never alluded to any such thing. I have never even thought any such thing. Therefore, this is just another example of how wrong you can be, when you assume things.
Did I? Or, are you just assuming that? which obviously could be wrong. Have I, instead, just been questioning you in regards to, If you are even aware of what my example of 'what is not assumed' is?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 3:24 pmYou said I ignored your examples:Age wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 5:51 amWhy?
Is it impossible for you to do it?
You have not shown any evidence that you are even aware of my example of 'what is not assumed', so maybe that is why you want me to do it for you?
Also, is telling me to "shut up" your last resort?
You want to assert that every thing is assumed, but obviously you can not prove this. Whereas I can and have already proved that not every thing is assumed. It now appears that you do not like this fact, but the only come back you have left now is; "shut up".
You have yet to show any evidence that you are even remotely aware of what my example is. But you could very easily and simply prove that you are aware of what it is by just repeating the same example, that is; if you so wish to.
You are free to assume and believe any thing you want to.
If you choose to believe that I am a liar for just asking you the clarifying question; Do you even know what my example of 'what is not assumed' is? Then that is perfectly fine with me.
Either you can answer the question or you can not. Either way is of no real concern to me. I am not the one here who is asserting some thing and trying to make up an argument for some thing, which I believe is absolutely true and right. I have absolutely nothing to prove here.
I am just asking you if you know what my example of 'what is not assumed' is or not?
If this is what you believe, then so be it. You are free to assume absolutely every thing and any thing, if you so wish to. But if you will not accept that not all of us do what you tell us we do, then you will just have to continue assuming otherwise.
To me, what you wrote here just appears to be a very convoluted, complicated, and confused way to express what IS essentially just very simple and easy.
By the way, are you at all aware that what you are saying is the truth of things, and what you are saying happens, really does occur?
However, by your own standards, if what you are saying really is what occurs, and is thus 'taken as is', then that means that what IS true and right must already be known by you and already be really true. But, if this is the case, then what you are saying can not be assumed, which would then refute every thing you are saying about how every thing is assumed.
To me, every thing you have been saying is true, in a sense. It is a truth of things. But, there is thee absolute Truth of things, which overrides your human being perspective of the truth of things. Of course what you are saying is a truth for what human beings do. Human beings only assume things, by defining things with assumed definitions, and they do this recursively. So, I accept this and agree with you, up to a certain extent. You, human beings, are STUCK in this absurd assumed defined cycle, which you insist is what occurs. HOWEVER, IF you are fighting so strongly for this, then that infers that you already KNOW what the actual and real truth of things IS. How do you KNOW this?
And, by the way, If you already KNOW what the truth IS, then you would NOT have to assume the truth of things.
There is an inner-KNOWING to what is Right and Wrong in Life and to what is True and False in Life.
When you human beings come together peacefully, find out what 'it' IS that you ALL agree on and accept as being True and Right, Wrong and False, then that is WHEN the actual and real Truth of things is found and discovered, or, revealed and uncovered.
Is it logical to insist that you KNOW what is right and true but then also insist that you do NOT know what is right and true and what you are insisting is really just an assumption?
By definition, an 'assumption' is just more or less a guess at what IS, which obviously could very well be WRONG.
If some thing can be proven as true, then it is not assumed. It is the truth.
NOT every thing is assumed.