Can you tell lie to yourself?

[Immanuel Can]

Same question. I'll answer you when you answer me.

But I do NOT care one iota if you answer me or not.

I see.

Well, then, I will have to assemble my impression from the data of your comments. And I will do so as factually as I can, with the data you have provided.

You're manifestly ashamed of your age...that suggests young. Older people don't tend to be coy about their age until they're very old. But I don't think you're that.

The same impression is reinforced by your reference to "you adults," which means you don't see yourself as an adult, and still have the teenager's view that "adults" are of a different kind, and that they can be blamed as a block, without casting any aspersions on yourself. It manifests simplistic dualism: adults = bad, children - good. You furthermore show that you feel that you stand in a position to see what's wrong with "adults," and you feel critical of them, and don't recognize your continuity with them. So you must be in the pre-adult phase. No other theory makes sense.

Your comments show some self-awareness, but limited life experience, and little sense of general human continuity. They manifest a great deal of impulsivity, and a tendency toward unfocused rhetoric and gratuitous confrontation and obstinacy. Your thoughts as you currently articulate them are fairly advanced for a teenager, but are fragmentary, and do not even seem to congeal into a single positive proposition about anything...you seem content to criticize others, rather than to offer a different view.

But, if you were a teenager, that would be to be expected. You could not possibly yet had time to form a complete personal perspective on the world, or a coherent life philosophy of your own -- which would make perfect sense if you were simply too young and inexperienced to have been able to do so. (No insult, just a fact.)

All that leads to a compelling thesis that you are a teenager. Probably mid teens, around 17 or 18. That is going to be my assumption, because the data you have provided so far compels that conclusion.

If that's not the case, feel free to disconfirm it, and to explain what contrary evidence I should be seeing, and to say what the truth is.

Other than that, I think any other reader is going to share my impression.

[Age]

Same question. I'll answer you when you answer me.

But I do NOT care one iota if you answer me or not.

I see.

Well, then, I will have to assemble my impression from the data of your comments.

You obviously do not have to, but if you want to, then go right ahead. Absolutely no one is going to stop you.

And I will do so as factually as I can, with the data you have provided.

What ever you do it will only be just another assumption, which obviously could be partly or completely wrong.

You're manifestly ashamed of your age...that suggests young.

Both are just assumptions.

Older people don't tend to be coy about their age until they're very old. But I don't think you're that.

Assuming things as being facts, and then deceiving one's self as they are doing things factually, is another great example of one telling lies to them "self".

The same impression is reinforced by your reference to "you adults," which means you don't see yourself as an adult, and still have the teenager's view that "adults" are of a different kind, and that they can be blamed as a block, without casting any aspersions on yourself.

You are free to assume absolutely any thing you want to. But be forewarned, doing so will never leave you any wiser. While assuming you will still always only ever be at the point of; I could be wrong.

It manifests simplistic dualism: adults = bad, children - good.

If you assume so.

You furthermore show that you feel that you stand in a position to see what's wrong with "adults," and you feel critical of them, and don't recognize your continuity with them. So you must be in the pre-adult phase.

"must be"? That means there is absolutely NO possibility of any thing else at all, correct?

No other theory makes sense.

Lol

Your comments show some self-awareness, but limited life experience, and little sense of general human continuity.

If that is what you see, then that is it.

They manifest a great deal of impulsivity, and a tendency toward unfocused rhetoric and gratuitous confrontation and obstinacy.

Is that what is really occurring or just what you are seeing and/or experiencing?

Your thoughts as you currently articulate them are fairly advanced for a teenager, but are fragmentary, and do not even seem to congeal into a single positive proposition about anything

That might be the intention for now?

...you seem content to criticize others, rather than to offer a different view.

I am waiting for clarification of my criticism/questioning of what is said, and waiting for criticisms, challenges, and/or questioning of what I have offered so far, before I express further views.

But, if you were a teenager, that would be to be expected. You could not possibly yet had time to form a complete personal perspective on the world, or a coherent life philosophy of your own -- which would make perfect sense if you were simply too young and inexperienced to have been able to do so. (No insult, just a fact.)

No insult is ever seen nor could ever be taken by this one. Also, if this is a fact or not at all, would depend on what do you actually mean by 'to form a complete personal perspective on the world or a coherent life philosophy of your own'? Are you 'trying to' propose that only 'you' adult human beings could do such a thing?

If yes, then provide just one 'complete personal perspective on the world' or just one 'coherent life philosophy' formulated on your own, and let us SEE if 'you', adult human beings, are even capable of doing any thing like this "yourselves".

All that leads to a compelling thesis that you are a teenager.

Any and Every 'thesis' is just a statement or a proposition that could actually be wrong. Only with clarity are things KNOWN, for sure, to be Right or Wrong.

Once again I will ask: Why do 'you', human beings, waste time making 'theories' and/or have a 'thesis' when the Truth of things can be KNOWN and UNDERSTOOD almost immediately?

Probably mid teens, around 17 or 18. That is going to be my assumption, because the data you have provided so far compels that conclusion.

Is the so called "data" that I have provided, which supposedly "compels that assumed conclusion", of yours, the exact same for every one, or could you be seeing things/data differently than "others" do?

If it is the latter, then "others" may have arrived at a completely whole different scenario and/or conclusion.

Are you absolutely 100% sure that the "data" that I have supposedly provided is absolutely true, right, and correct?

Could the actual Truth be that what you are basing every thing off and from here, which you say is factual, is actually just your very OWN assumptions, from the beginning?

If that's not the case, feel free to disconfirm it, and to explain what contrary evidence I should be seeing, and to say what the truth is.

Also, feel free to become that the age of "age" has absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with the writings in this forum. The words speak for themselves, not matter what age one is or not.

As I pointed out earlier discovering and knowing the age of the one with the label, whose writings are under, only distracts from the actual words being written. I suggest focusing on the the views/arguments being put forward and expressed rather than focusing on the person behind them.

After all 'philosophy' is about logical reasoning and becoming wiser, rather than forming personal views of "others", correct? Or, am I in the wrong place? Does 'philosophy' mean some thing completely different than I thought it did?

Other than that, I think any other reader is going to share my impression.

Once again another example of perceiving what "others" think and see, and 'trying to' speak for "them", instead of just concentrating on one's own views and perceptions of things.

Anyway, after all of this, you have arrived at the "compelling conclusion" that I am around 17 or 18 years of "age". Now that that is finally sorted out, then let us proceed, back to where it all began in your first post here in this thread ;
Is your simple example of the well known and frequent phenomenon of 'self-deception' in that post, something like believing in God, and God's supposed word about being rewarded with eternal life after one person's own death, but not really trusting that, and not really wanting go there because people will do absolutely every thing they can to stay alive, in this place, that they know and can actually trust?

In other words, do you people do all you can to stay alive in this place, because you do not seriously believe that there is some other place of eternity?

When you clarify this, then I can move onto other clarifying questions.

You also noted in that post of your that the woman in the example is deceived. She's her own deceiver. And she's not so deceived she doesn't know on some level. But it's hard to say what it is she really knows.

Some might also suggest that you people are also deceived. You are also your own deceiver. Do you really want to leave this place and be eternally happy in some other told to you place, or do you much prefer to stay here, no matter what happens to here? The obvious fact that you are here in this place shows that you are not so deceived that they do not know on some level that the "other" place you were told about and would love to believe is true, is not actually true at all though. But it is hard to say what it is that you really know, that is; until you tell us so.

[Age]

I have already shown and proven, with evidence, what I set out to do here in this thread.

Prove the affirmative?

By why?

If I have already done some thing, then why I want I want to do it again?

[Immanuel Can]

Also, feel free to become that the age of "age" has absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with the writings in this forum. The words speak for themselves, not matter what age one is or not.

That is true. A proposition stands or falls on its own merit.

But the words also say more than their mere propositions do, in the sense that they reveal the mind of the one who issued them. Certain kinds of propositions are the kinds of things only a youth -- or one fixated to the level of a youth -- could be expected to advance. For example, no mature adult is going to refer to others as "adults" in distinction from himself. And no person with a middle level of life experience is going to fail to understand that age does not substantially change human nature from good to evil. Only either a youth or a fixated adult could hold either view.

Manifestly, it's one or the other, in this case; and the former is more statistically likely than the latter. And the former is more charitable, as a thing to think.

[Age]

Also, feel free to become that the age of "age" has absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with the writings in this forum. The words speak for themselves, not matter what age one is or not.

That is true. A proposition stands or falls on its own merit.

True. This is where more words, to clarify what was being proposed, come in perfectly handy to see just how much those words stand or fall.

By not using any words to clarify previous propositions is a great sign and indicator that the proposition can not stand up at all on its own.

But the words also say more than their mere propositions do, in the sense that they reveal the mind of the one who issued them.

There is no one that "has a mind".

Therefore, the words under the name "immanuel can" are saying more than their mere propositions do. Those words are revealing what that one with the label "immanuel can" is yet to discover and/or learn.

The merit of the proposition that there is an actual "mind of the one" who proposes with words will either stand or fall with clarification, and obviously will crumble if no clarity is given. So;

What is this 'mind' thing? How does the 'mind' work? And, who and/or what is this 'one' who has a "mind"?

Certain kinds of propositions are the kinds of things only a youth -- or one fixated to the level of a youth -- could be expected to advance.

ONLY these two?

Is the continual propositioning of the 'age' of "another" one of this kinds of propositions that ONLY a youth or one fixated to the level of a youth would have and say?

For example, no mature adult is going to refer to others as "adults" in distinction from himself.

That may well be VERY True.

In fact, using the term 'you', adults, implies a very strong sense of that one is a being of some thing else, correct?

And no person with a middle level of life experience is going to fail to understand that age does not substantially change human nature from good to evil.

What is "middle level of life experience"?

How long is "life experience" for there to be a "middle level" of?

Only either a youth or a fixated adult could hold either view.

Fixated on 'what' exactly? And,

If 'age' does not substantially change human nature from good to evil, (Besides the fact that considering 'age' could or would substantially change human nature from good to evil, which is a Truly laughable proposition to even imagine, from my perspective, let alone to think about, and then worse still to then write down in words for "others" to see, why do you also consider that it is possible for a youth to hold that view but not an adult who is not fixated?

At what 'age' does one have to be when they substantially change views, like the one you are proposing here?

If you BELIEVE a "youth" can hold certain views but non fixated "adults" can not, then you must have some 'age' that substantially changes human nature from looking one way to looking another way.

Manifestly, it's one or the other, in this case; and the former is more statistically likely than the latter. And the former is more charitable, as a thing to think.

WHY are 'you', "immanuel can", fixated on the 'age' of "age" for?

Every after all has been said about looking at and discussing words, views, and ideas, ONLY, especially in a philosophy forum, and especially in the light of how to be wiser, 'you' are still fixated on looking at the person and how old or young "they" ARE.

Is this looking at and 'trying to' ridicule or make inferior the 'person' your ONLY way of 'trying to' dismissing, rejecting, or just plain refusing to look at the written word under the label "age" and responding to that only?

Does believing one is younger than you MEAN that they know less than you or unable to be as wise as you, and therefore they are less superior to you, and this is the only way you can feel better about "yourself" and your obvious lack of ability to answer the clarifying questions I ask of you and inability to just look at and discuss in relation to the words in front of you only?

What is with the continual persistence with the age of some one?

Are you just hoping that I am young?

What is the reason for this continual fixation of 'yours' on "age", "immanuel can"?

When are you going to STOP looking at the person, STOP assuming things, STOP being fixated on one thing, and move on and LOOK AT the words, and discuss them instead?

Remember the words in my simple clarifying question;

Is your simple example of the well known and frequent phenomenon of 'self-deception' in your first post in this thread, something like when 'one', just like "yourself", believes in God, and God's supposed word about being rewarded with eternal life after one person's own death, but 'you' really do not trust that, and 'you' really do not want to go there, because of and based on the obvious fact that 'you' will do absolutely every thing 'you' can to stay alive, in this place, that 'you' know of and actually can and actually do trust?


In other words;

Are you actually 'trying to' deceive "yourself", and/or, are you actually telling lies to "yourself", although deep-down you actually do KNOW what thee Truth IS?

Or, are you not yet up to this stage of self-discovery and self-realization yet?

Until 'you' are Truly Honest, you will NEVER know.

You can keep 'trying to' LOOK AT "others" and keep 'trying to' judge them instead of LOOKING AT 'you', just like you continue to do here, but this is just another form of lying to, and deceiving, your own "self".

[Immanuel Can]

True.

I have no further comment. That will do.

[Age]

True.

I have no further comment. That will do.

Fair enough. This is what usually happens when it comes to 'you', adult human beings, having to LOOK AT your own behaviors.

you are very afraid to SEE and reveal the Truth of things about "yourselves", but you are very quick to LOOK AT and JUDGE "others".

[Immanuel Can]

Fair enough. This is what usually happens when it comes to 'you', adult human beings, having to LOOK AT your own behaviors.

you are very afraid to SEE and reveal the Truth of things about "yourselves", but you are very quick to LOOK AT and JUDGE "others".

In a few years, you'll know better.

Just clearly not right now.

[Age]

Fair enough. This is what usually happens when it comes to 'you', adult human beings, having to LOOK AT your own behaviors.

you are very afraid to SEE and reveal the Truth of things about "yourselves", but you are very quick to LOOK AT and JUDGE "others".

In a few years, you'll know better.

Just clearly not right now.

What is that you think or believe I will in a few years know better?

[Immanuel Can]

What is that you think or believe I will in a few years know better?

You'll understand that "adult" is not some separate kind of humanity that can be blamed from the viewpoint of a child, and that children are not really sufficiently equipped to understand the causes and nature of what they're criticizing. By that time, you'll have discovered that your humanity is not higher than theirs, and that the added years do not suddenly reduce wisdom. Rather, you'll likely realize that the problem you're criticizing is more complicated than you knew, and that you are yourself part of that problem. But that perspective takes maturity to develop. It doesn't come without experience.

[Age]

What is that you think or believe I will in a few years know better?

You'll understand that "adult" is not some separate kind of humanity that can be blamed from the viewpoint of a child, and that children are not really sufficiently equipped to understand the causes and nature of what they're criticizing. By that time, you'll have discovered that your humanity is not higher than theirs, and that the added years do not suddenly reduce wisdom. Rather, you'll likely realize that the problem you're criticizing is more complicated than you knew, and that you are yourself part of that problem. But that perspective takes maturity to develop. It doesn't come without experience.

Well considering your ASSUMPTION is absolutely WRONG at the very start, absolutely EVERY thing else you are saying here is WRONG also.

As I continually say, If you want to SEE and KNOW the actual Truth of things, then do NOT assume any thing and certainly do NOT believe any thing also as they will lead you astray and away from thee truth of thing. As you are continually PROVING here.

Assuming things to be true, which are in fact NOT true, is a form of telling lies to one's "self". Believing things to be true, which are in fact NOT true, is a more detrimental form of lying to one's "self".

[Immanuel Can]

Well considering your ASSUMPTION is absolutely WRONG at the very start, absolutely EVERY thing else you are saying here is WRONG also.

Then your argument is, "I'm not a teen, I'm a fixated adult."

Not a great defence, that.

[Nick_A]

The Magic Mirror is a mystical object that is featured in the story of Snow White, depicted as either a hand mirror or a wall-mounted mirror. It is used by the Evil Queen in order to find out who is the "fairest of them all". Each time the Evil Queen asks this question, the mirror states "My Queen, you are the fairest of them all

In the modern version Nancy Pelosi asks the mirror on the wall who is the fairest of them all. She hears the mirror answer it is you. Has she lied to herself or just telling the truth agreed upon by all the indoctrinated snowflakes hiding in safe spaces?

[Age]

Well considering your ASSUMPTION is absolutely WRONG at the very start, absolutely EVERY thing else you are saying here is WRONG also.

Then your argument is, "I'm not a teen, I'm a fixated adult."

Not a great defence, that.

Are you even able to tell the difference between an 'argument' and your very own 'assumption'?

I have NOT argued for "age" here. I have just been questioning 'you' on your obsession with "age" here. This as I pointed out is so 'you' do NOT look at what the actual Truth is in regards to 'you' lying to "yourself" about some sort of eternity in some other also very questionable place.

Why are 'you', "immanuel can" so fixated on 'me' and "age" for?

[Immanuel Can]

I have NOT argued for "age" here.

You didn't need to. The way you write marked it clearly. There were only those two possibilities.