Which of these is Real and True?

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

surreptitious57
Posts: 3703
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:46 pm

Age wrote:
I also ALREADY KNEW this about you and so that is WHY I did NOT pose this nor the other question directly to you surreptitious57
Sometimes I like to answer questions that you ask of others for they are easier to answer than the ones you ask of me
And try if you can not to spell my name wrong since this is now at least the fourth time you have done this you know

surreptitious57
Posts: 3703
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:52 pm

Age wrote:
I ALREADY KNOW that you the one known as surreptitious57 does NOT believe any such thing nor any thing else
I was just merely reminding you in case you forgot so all is well then
And can you try not to spell my name wrong again if you possibly can
Last edited by surreptitious57 on Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Age
Posts: 3865
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by Age » Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:55 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:40 pm
Age wrote:
I also ALREADY KNEW this about you and so that is WHY I did NOT pose this nor the other question directly to you surreptitious57
Sometimes I like to answer questions that you ask of others for they are easier to answer than the ones you ask of me
Ah okay. Just as long as you KNOW that I already KNEW those things about you previously?
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:40 pm
And try if you can not to spell my name wrong since this is now at least the fourth time you have done this you know
Okay. I did NOT know that a human being could, nor would, get so uptight and upset, as it appears here now, about some misspelling of some word, which is in essence just a completely made up and false name, to hide the actual name or identity that that one usually goes by. By the way I did NOT know that I have done this at least four times now. If I did KNOW, I would have corrected when I NOTICED and thus KNEW I was spelling wrong.

Would 'you' like me to go back and correct ALL four of them for you? If you would, then would be so kind as to direct me to where they are EXACTLY?

Also I do NOT recall 'you', the one known here in this forum as "surreptitious57", EVER previously informing me that I have misspelled that name before.

Did I spell that name wrong four times in the post that 'you' are replying to, in this thread, in this discussion group, or in this whole forum?

By the way, what way or ways was I EXACTLY spelling that name WRONG?

surreptitious57
Posts: 3703
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:58 pm

Age wrote:
I ALREADY KNOW that you the one known as surreptitious57 does NOT believe any such thing nor any thing else
I was just merely reminding you in case you forgot so all is well then
And can you try not to spell my name wrong again if you possibly can

Age
Posts: 3865
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by Age » Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:58 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:52 pm
Age wrote:
I ALREADY KNOW that you the one known as surreptitious57 does NOT believe any such thing nor any thing else
Was just simply reminding you in case you forgot so all is well then
And try not to spell my name wrong again if you possibly can now
If that is NOT how 'you' spell "your" name, then HOW do 'you' spell "your" name?

They LOOK the SAME to me. But I maybe BLIND and can NOT see things correctly at all.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3703
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:02 pm

Age wrote:
I did NOT know that a human being could nor would get so uptight and upset as it appears here now about some misspelling of some
word which is in essence just a completely made up and false name to hide the actual name or identity that that one usually goes by
How much mental energy do I need to reply to all of this
I shall see if I have a sufficient amount in order to do so

surreptitious57
Posts: 3703
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:13 pm

Age wrote:
I did NOT know that a human being could nor would get so uptight and upset as it appears here now about some misspelling of some
word which is in essence just a completely made up and false name to hide the actual name or identity that that one usually goes by
Two things - I am not uptight or upset at all but am simply pointing out your repeated errors so that you do not repeat them again
And whether the name is false and completely made up does not change the fact that it was spelled incorrectly at least four times

I have corrected them myself so there is no need for any superfluous questions from you now
And any you do ask will be ignored because I will not have the mental energy to answer them

They will be off topic and clogging up the thread so it has to stop you know so no more of them please
Others post off topic too you once said but theirs are usually more interesting and so I dont mind them

Age
Posts: 3865
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by Age » Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:54 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:02 pm
Age wrote:
I did NOT know that a human being could nor would get so uptight and upset as it appears here now about some misspelling of some
word which is in essence just a completely made up and false name to hide the actual name or identity that that one usually goes by
How much mental energy do I need to reply to all of this
BUT there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to respond to here.

I just expressed a view I have.
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:02 pm
I shall see if I have a sufficient amount in order to do so
There is NO right NOR wrong in what I said, AND, there are NO questions being asked. So, what would 'you' actually be replying to anyway?

Age
Posts: 3865
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by Age » Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:26 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:13 pm
Age wrote:
I did NOT know that a human being could nor would get so uptight and upset as it appears here now about some misspelling of some
word which is in essence just a completely made up and false name to hide the actual name or identity that that one usually goes by
Two things - I am not uptight or upset at all
I NEVER said you were.

This is CLEARLY EVIDENCED in MY writings here.
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:13 pm
but am simply pointing out your repeated errors so that you do not repeat them again
What would have HELP me tremendously if 'you' actually quoted were I spelled that name WRONG, so then I would KNOW EXACTLY how to NOT repeat MY ERROR.

Telling me, or any one "else", "You are wrong", or telling/pointing out errors by just saying, "I am simply pointing out your repeated errors", BUT never actually highlighting the ACTUAL ERROR, and suggesting ways to correct, I found is NOT the best way to obtain the change WANTED in "others".

Actually HIGHLIGHTING and SHOWING the ERROR, AND THEN explaining WHY it is WRONG, is what I found is helpful and what I continually ASK FOR.

Even better, which I only just now discovered, IS ALSO suggesting to me (them?) HOW to do things BETTER, as well, AFTER the MISTAKE is SHOWN, and the reason WHY it is a WRONG MISTAKE is PROVIDED.

And whether the name is false and completely made up does not change the fact that it was spelled incorrectly at least four times[/quote]

I KNOW and KNEW that that NEVER changed the FACT that I spelled one word WRONG, at least four times.

I was just pointing out that what appeared to me, which was just a serious disapproval of some thing, was in fact done over some thing that was NOT even an actual REAL Thing anyway.
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:13 pm
I have corrected them myself so there is no need for any superfluous questions from you now
But if 'you' change things, and therefore there is NO actual PROOF, then HOW do we KNOW that I actually spelled a word WRONG, AT LEAST FOUR TIMES, and WHERE those FOUR TIMES WERE EXACTLY?

How am I going to Truly BETTER thy Self if my OWN WRONGNESS is HIDDEN from Me?

If I do NOT correct my OWN ERRORS and WRONG DOING, then I am NOT really LEARNING how to become BETTER.

If "others" do EVERY thing for me, then I will NOT learn HOW to become BETTER.

By the way my questions are NOT "superfluous" to me. If they were, then I would NOT have asked them, correct?
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:13 pm
And any you do ask will be ignored because I will not have the mental energy to answer them
Okay, so I will NOT ask 'you' if 'you' would prefer I give 'you' 1,000 dollars or 1,000,000 dollars today because this would just be a "superfluous" question to you, and one that was not needed to be asked, am I right?
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:13 pm
They will be off topic and clogging up the thread so it has to stop you know so no more of them please
WHY do 'you' continually accuse me of going "off topic", while appearing as though, to 'you', you do NOT do this?

IF we cared to LOOK BACK over our conversations now, are 'you' at all OPEN to the FACT that who has gone "off topic" might NOT be the one who 'you' have made out it might be?
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:13 pm
Others post off topic too you once said but theirs are usually more interesting and so I dont mind them
Well take it back "on topic" if you REALLY are NOT finding talking like this interesting.

To me, 'you' AND 'me' would be pretty close to agreeing the same way in this topic. So, just telling me what I ALREADY KNEW was NOT very interesting at all.

'you' answering my questions, which were OBVIOUSLY posed for some one "else", with answers, which I ALREADY KNEW, then I WILL question 'you' WHY you do this. If 'you' do NOT like the question, then leave it. But then going on and worrying about having some Truly insignificant named spelled wrong is NOT what I would call STAYING ON TOPIC, myself. Continually informing us that 'you' constantly do NOT have the "mental energy" is ALSO NOT what I call STAYING ON TOPIC, either.

commonsense
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: We can accept that the apple exists independent of human experience...

Post by commonsense » Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:03 pm

Age wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:06 pm
commonsense wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 8:03 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:37 am
Age wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2019 10:01 am
commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:37 am
.
...but we have no means at our disposal to actually prove it exists.

The problem I highlighted was about what happens to the apple when no one is looking.
Age wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2019 10:01 am
Considering 'you' are calling 'it' an "apple", implies or infers that 'it' remains an 'apple', even when there are no human beings looking at 'it', thee 'apple'.
commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:37 am
.
I wrote the word “apple” as a (mistaken) matter of convenience.
Age wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2019 10:01 am
True, but 'you' could place a video camera there and record it, and then 'you' could see if it was there when 'you' were personally not looking at 'it'.
commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:37 am
.
Interesting. However a Solopsist could claim that the camera and its images were imagined.
Age wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2019 10:01 am
you could also do other experiments to see and know if the thing known as an "apples" remains, or does some thing incomprehensible and/or magical, while 'you' are not looking at 'it'.
commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:37 am
.
Honestly, I wonder if you have a few experiments in mind. If so, please share.
Age wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2019 10:01 am
WHY would any one even really care if it was there or not there when they are not looking at it, anyway?

Do 'you' care about all of the other uncountable things also, when 'you' are not looking at them as well?

What is the actual point of this type of discussion about this type of issue, anyway?

And, what is the actual 'problem' when 'you' look at some thing and prove to "yourself" ONLY that it is there while 'you' are looking.

Are you SURE 'you' can NOT prove any thing?
commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:37 am
.
Each of these questions seems to be making a point rather than asking for an answer. Thank you for spicing up the discussion with rhetorical questions such as these.
My apologies for breaking up the format.
My apologies for breaking up the format.
Firstly, WHY did 'you' break up the format?

And, WHY did 'you' NOT fix the format?

If 'you', A human being, which mistakenly calls its self a "solopsist"?, can claim ABSOLUTELY ANY THING. But without PROOF and EVIDENCE, then what are 'you/they' really basing that claim on exactly?

If a so called "solopsist" claims that the camera and its images are imagined, then WHY are they imagining it? Also, while they are 'it', that is; pondering, how about they also Answer, properly AND correctly, who/what exactly IS this 'self' thing, which is the ONLY thing they supposedly KNOW or BELIEVE exists?

I have ALREADY explained EXACTLY HOW that one is the ONLY thing that can be Truly KNOWN, 100% for sure. So, how about Answering 'My' questions also?

Since there is some thing wondering what if "another" thing has a few experiments, then that in itself infers the first 'self' is recognizing and/or somewhat BELIEVING there is some thing "other" than itself, just to begin with. Otherwise WHY would that 'self' wonder what "another" has?

Could 'you' feel the apple, while 'you' are NOT looking at it, to SEE and KNOW if the apple still remains existing? That is One example of just one experiment, which could be done. I am sure if that thing, known as "self", WORKED WITH the "other" things, also known as "selfs, which 'you', "yourself", were wondering what those "selfs" have in mind, then surely ALL of 'you' 'selfs' could imagine AND devise up some more other experiments. What does that 'self' reckon?

Are 'you' basing the supposed KNOWING here that I am making a point rather than just asking OPEN clarifying questions on some thing factual or some thing learned, or some thing both?
Re format: I am working with a phone and a physical disability. After cut and paste erroneously I became too fatigued to fix. Btw, this post (3 sentences) took more time (> 3 minutes) to write, but only seconds to think up.

Will reply other in your post later.

commonsense
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Common

Post by commonsense » Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:34 pm

henry quirk wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:02 pm
This would make you smart enough to be fooled that things still exist when you are not experiencing them.

How so?
Just suppose there is something you don’t know AND you don’t know that you don’t know it AND you come across it later. You must have been able to imagine it all along but you didn’t know you were smart enough to imagine it.

Let’s take as an example a time when I didn’t know what run time errors in programming were. I had no idea that I didn’t know what they were. BUT I really did know what they were and I imagined them into existing in my imaginary course on coding in Java.

Hey! I was smarter than I thought all along! I was able to imagine lots of things about programming that I didn’t know I could imagine.

After that I imagined having gone down the rabbit hole.

commonsense
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Which of these is Real and True?

Post by commonsense » Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:55 pm

Age wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:43 am

Human beings came to exist, or evolved into Existence, from other things.

Before human beings started existing there MUST OF been other things previously. (Unless, of course, 'you' BELIEVE otherwise.)

ALL 'things', by definition, are objects, so 'other things' also are objects.

Before human beings started existing obviously there were NO human beings experiencing and thinking.

Objects, therefore, MUST OF existed when NO human beings were yet experiencing or thinking, of ANY thing.

So, IF this is True, Right, Accurate, and Correct, THEN an object exists even when NO human being experiences or thinks of it.
The above is so important that it merits re-posting.

The premise is a priori for most rational beings.

The steps are well ordered.

The argument is absolutely true, right, accurate and correct.

The conclusion is well supported.

I thank you again for providing what I was looking for.

Dare I believe that there is and never will be a cogent refutation?

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Common

Post by henry quirk » Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:56 pm

commonsense wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:34 pm
henry quirk wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:02 pm
This would make you smart enough to be fooled that things still exist when you are not experiencing them.

How so?
Just suppose there is something you don’t know AND you don’t know that you don’t know it AND you come across it later. You must have been able to imagine it all along but you didn’t know you were smart enough to imagine it.

Let’s take as an example a time when I didn’t know what run time errors in programming were. I had no idea that I didn’t know what they were. BUT I really did know what they were and I imagined them into existing in my imaginary course on coding in Java.

Hey! I was smarter than I thought all along! I was able to imagine lots of things about programming that I didn’t know I could imagine.

After that I imagined having gone down the rabbit hole.
Which is more reasonable (there's still room for reasonability in the world, yeah?)...

You learned about run time errors.

...or...

You created run time errors.

I get your point, Common, but there's healthy, questioning, skepticism and then there's insane, droolin' & pissin' on one's self skepticism. I'm thinkin' some folks here have dwelt too long in the land of the latter. Me, I stay firmly in the land of the former.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Which of these is Real and True?

Post by henry quirk » Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:59 pm

commonsense wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:55 pm
Age wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:43 am

Human beings came to exist, or evolved into Existence, from other things.

Before human beings started existing there MUST OF been other things previously. (Unless, of course, 'you' BELIEVE otherwise.)

ALL 'things', by definition, are objects, so 'other things' also are objects.

Before human beings started existing obviously there were NO human beings experiencing and thinking.

Objects, therefore, MUST OF existed when NO human beings were yet experiencing or thinking, of ANY thing.

So, IF this is True, Right, Accurate, and Correct, THEN an object exists even when NO human being experiences or thinks of it.
The above is so important that it merits re-posting.

The premise is a priori for most rational beings.

The steps are well ordered.

The argument is absolutely true, right, accurate and correct.

The conclusion is well supported.

I thank you again for providing what I was looking for.

Dare I believe that there is and never will be a cogent refutation?
It does seem to hold up, illustratin' that broken clocks can be right (twice a day).

commonsense
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Common

Post by commonsense » Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:05 pm

henry quirk wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:56 pm
commonsense wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:34 pm
henry quirk wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:02 pm
This would make you smart enough to be fooled that things still exist when you are not experiencing them.

How so?
Just suppose there is something you don’t know AND you don’t know that you don’t know it AND you come across it later. You must have been able to imagine it all along but you didn’t know you were smart enough to imagine it.

Let’s take as an example a time when I didn’t know what run time errors in programming were. I had no idea that I didn’t know what they were. BUT I really did know what they were and I imagined them into existing in my imaginary course on coding in Java.

Hey! I was smarter than I thought all along! I was able to imagine lots of things about programming that I didn’t know I could imagine.

After that I imagined having gone down the rabbit hole.
Which is more reasonable (there's still room for reasonability in the world, yeah?)...

You learned about run time errors.

...or...

You created run time errors.

I get your point, Common, but there's healthy, questioning, skepticism and then there's insane, droolin' & pissin' on one's self skepticism. I'm thinkin' some folks here have dwelt too long in the land of the latter. Me, I stay firmly in the land of the former.
Yes, my posts are coming from the land of ladders.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests