Philosophy AI

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:40 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:23 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:35 am

The absence of a unified mind existing through fragmented thoughts is one example.
EXCELLENT example.

Although thee Mind, Itself, CAN NOT and IS NOT EVER absent, DISTORTED, False, Wrong, or Incorrect 'thoughts' ACTUALLY does PREVENT and/or BLOCK OUT 'thee Mind'.

See, how when 'you', human beings, are JUST Truly OPEN and Honest, when CLARIFYING questions are posed to you, thee ACTUAL True, Right, AND Correct ANSWERS come SHINING through, BRIGHTLY.

Do you have ANY other examples.
Hence many minds as many thoughts. There are many minds.
Are you able to DESCRIBE or DEFINE and EXPLAIN what one 'mind' ACTUALLY IS, so that 'we' can have a LOOK and SEE if there are REALLY "many minds"?

What I continually OBSERVE is human beings just CONFUSING thee One and ONLY ACTUAL 'Mind' with the 'thoughts' within human bodies.

I AGREE that there are MANY 'thoughts'. But I have only ONLY observed One Mind, that is; AFTER I came to realize what the 'Mind' IS and what 'thoughts' ARE.

This realization came with the discovering and the learning of how the 'Mind' and the 'brain' ACTUALLY WORK.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:38 pm From a premise of all is mind the fragmentation of images where an image seems as disconnected from another image is another example.
Well that is a, so called, "premise", however, what ACTUAL evidence or proof do you have that; "ALL is mind".

See, there are some things known as trees and houses, and to some people, these things, which are a PART of ALL is NOT 'mind'.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 6:13 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:40 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:23 am

EXCELLENT example.

Although thee Mind, Itself, CAN NOT and IS NOT EVER absent, DISTORTED, False, Wrong, or Incorrect 'thoughts' ACTUALLY does PREVENT and/or BLOCK OUT 'thee Mind'.

See, how when 'you', human beings, are JUST Truly OPEN and Honest, when CLARIFYING questions are posed to you, thee ACTUAL True, Right, AND Correct ANSWERS come SHINING through, BRIGHTLY.

Do you have ANY other examples.
Hence many minds as many thoughts. There are many minds.
Are you able to DESCRIBE or DEFINE and EXPLAIN what one 'mind' ACTUALLY IS, so that 'we' can have a LOOK and SEE if there are REALLY "many minds"?

What I continually OBSERVE is human beings just CONFUSING thee One and ONLY ACTUAL 'Mind' with the 'thoughts' within human bodies.

I AGREE that there are MANY 'thoughts'. But I have only ONLY observed One Mind, that is; AFTER I came to realize what the 'Mind' IS and what 'thoughts' ARE.

This realization came with the discovering and the learning of how the 'Mind' and the 'brain' ACTUALLY WORK.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:38 pm From a premise of all is mind the fragmentation of images where an image seems as disconnected from another image is another example.
Well that is a, so called, "premise", however, what ACTUAL evidence or proof do you have that; "ALL is mind".

See, there are some things known as trees and houses, and to some people, these things, which are a PART of ALL is NOT 'mind'.
1. Mind is that which reflects, reflection is thought, thus mind is thought.

2. Mind is reflection, reflection is repeating form, this repeating form is thought given thought is the manifestation of an image from a source. If I observe a house this house ends up repeating as an image in the mind. Dually the house is repeating forms (squares, curves, circles,) thus is a thought in itself. Thought is repeating form, thus any form which repeats is a thought.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm
Age wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 6:13 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:40 pm
Hence many minds as many thoughts. There are many minds.
Are you able to DESCRIBE or DEFINE and EXPLAIN what one 'mind' ACTUALLY IS, so that 'we' can have a LOOK and SEE if there are REALLY "many minds"?

What I continually OBSERVE is human beings just CONFUSING thee One and ONLY ACTUAL 'Mind' with the 'thoughts' within human bodies.

I AGREE that there are MANY 'thoughts'. But I have only ONLY observed One Mind, that is; AFTER I came to realize what the 'Mind' IS and what 'thoughts' ARE.

This realization came with the discovering and the learning of how the 'Mind' and the 'brain' ACTUALLY WORK.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:38 pm From a premise of all is mind the fragmentation of images where an image seems as disconnected from another image is another example.
Well that is a, so called, "premise", however, what ACTUAL evidence or proof do you have that; "ALL is mind".

See, there are some things known as trees and houses, and to some people, these things, which are a PART of ALL is NOT 'mind'.
1. Mind is that which reflects, reflection is thought, thus mind is thought.
So, WHY use TWO DIFFERENT WORDS?

Also, EVERY time you use the 'mind' word can I interchange that word with the 'thought' word, and EVERY time that will still make PERFECT SENSE, in relation to absolutely EVERY thing else?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm 2. Mind is reflection, reflection is repeating form, this repeating form is thought given thought is the manifestation of an image from a source.
We ALREADY KNOW that form of CIRCULAR using of words is what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. And, I have ALREADY EXPLAINED to you that what you have CONCLUDED ALREADY is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. However, with the choice of the words that you use, to 'try to' PROVE what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED and are CLAIMING, is just NOT going to work.

All you need to do to PROVE your CLAIM is just remain OPEN in order to be able to learn the CORRECT words to use.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm If I observe a house this house ends up repeating as an image in the mind.
And remember that observation then is only happening in 'thought' ONLY. And, by definition, what IS 'thought' may NOT be ACTUALLY True, Right, NOR Correct.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm Dually the house is repeating forms (squares, curves, circles,) thus is a thought in itself.
And, what IS 'thought' is only 'that', which is NOT 'known'.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm Thought is repeating form, thus any form which repeats is a thought.
But ANY form OUTSIDE of 'thought' is OBVIOUSLY NOT 'a thought'.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 3:21 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm
Age wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 6:13 am

Are you able to DESCRIBE or DEFINE and EXPLAIN what one 'mind' ACTUALLY IS, so that 'we' can have a LOOK and SEE if there are REALLY "many minds"?

What I continually OBSERVE is human beings just CONFUSING thee One and ONLY ACTUAL 'Mind' with the 'thoughts' within human bodies.

I AGREE that there are MANY 'thoughts'. But I have only ONLY observed One Mind, that is; AFTER I came to realize what the 'Mind' IS and what 'thoughts' ARE.

This realization came with the discovering and the learning of how the 'Mind' and the 'brain' ACTUALLY WORK.




Well that is a, so called, "premise", however, what ACTUAL evidence or proof do you have that; "ALL is mind".

See, there are some things known as trees and houses, and to some people, these things, which are a PART of ALL is NOT 'mind'.
1. Mind is that which reflects, reflection is thought, thus mind is thought.
So, WHY use TWO DIFFERENT WORDS?

Also, EVERY time you use the 'mind' word can I interchange that word with the 'thought' word, and EVERY time that will still make PERFECT SENSE, in relation to absolutely EVERY thing else?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm 2. Mind is reflection, reflection is repeating form, this repeating form is thought given thought is the manifestation of an image from a source.
We ALREADY KNOW that form of CIRCULAR using of words is what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. And, I have ALREADY EXPLAINED to you that what you have CONCLUDED ALREADY is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. However, with the choice of the words that you use, to 'try to' PROVE what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED and are CLAIMING, is just NOT going to work.

All you need to do to PROVE your CLAIM is just remain OPEN in order to be able to learn the CORRECT words to use.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm If I observe a house this house ends up repeating as an image in the mind.
And remember that observation then is only happening in 'thought' ONLY. And, by definition, what IS 'thought' may NOT be ACTUALLY True, Right, NOR Correct.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm Dually the house is repeating forms (squares, curves, circles,) thus is a thought in itself.
And, what IS 'thought' is only 'that', which is NOT 'known'.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm Thought is repeating form, thus any form which repeats is a thought.
But ANY form OUTSIDE of 'thought' is OBVIOUSLY NOT 'a thought'.
1. All definitions are the mirroring of words through further words.

2. What is proof? Can you prove proof exists?

3. A thought exists as a thought, it is real as a thought.

4. All forms are thought as extensions of the universal mind.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 3:21 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm

1. Mind is that which reflects, reflection is thought, thus mind is thought.
So, WHY use TWO DIFFERENT WORDS?

Also, EVERY time you use the 'mind' word can I interchange that word with the 'thought' word, and EVERY time that will still make PERFECT SENSE, in relation to absolutely EVERY thing else?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm 2. Mind is reflection, reflection is repeating form, this repeating form is thought given thought is the manifestation of an image from a source.
We ALREADY KNOW that form of CIRCULAR using of words is what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. And, I have ALREADY EXPLAINED to you that what you have CONCLUDED ALREADY is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. However, with the choice of the words that you use, to 'try to' PROVE what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED and are CLAIMING, is just NOT going to work.

All you need to do to PROVE your CLAIM is just remain OPEN in order to be able to learn the CORRECT words to use.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm If I observe a house this house ends up repeating as an image in the mind.
And remember that observation then is only happening in 'thought' ONLY. And, by definition, what IS 'thought' may NOT be ACTUALLY True, Right, NOR Correct.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm Dually the house is repeating forms (squares, curves, circles,) thus is a thought in itself.
And, what IS 'thought' is only 'that', which is NOT 'known'.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 6:40 pm Thought is repeating form, thus any form which repeats is a thought.
But ANY form OUTSIDE of 'thought' is OBVIOUSLY NOT 'a thought'.
1. All definitions are the mirroring of words through further words.
OF COURSE, and so what?

That is just how language works, and HAS TO work.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 2. What is proof?
'Proof' is whatever 'one' defines 'proof' as, to "them".
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm Can you prove proof exists?
That all depends on how 'you' define the word 'proof', AND on what 'proof' you want and/or need to prove proof exists.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 3. A thought exists as a thought, it is real as a thought.
So what?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 4. All forms are thought as extensions of the universal mind.
What is this, so called, "universal mind" thingy, EXACTLY?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Wed Jun 30, 2021 7:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 3:21 am

So, WHY use TWO DIFFERENT WORDS?

Also, EVERY time you use the 'mind' word can I interchange that word with the 'thought' word, and EVERY time that will still make PERFECT SENSE, in relation to absolutely EVERY thing else?



We ALREADY KNOW that form of CIRCULAR using of words is what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. And, I have ALREADY EXPLAINED to you that what you have CONCLUDED ALREADY is thee ACTUAL Truth of things. However, with the choice of the words that you use, to 'try to' PROVE what you have ALREADY CONCLUDED and are CLAIMING, is just NOT going to work.

All you need to do to PROVE your CLAIM is just remain OPEN in order to be able to learn the CORRECT words to use.



And remember that observation then is only happening in 'thought' ONLY. And, by definition, what IS 'thought' may NOT be ACTUALLY True, Right, NOR Correct.



And, what IS 'thought' is only 'that', which is NOT 'known'.



But ANY form OUTSIDE of 'thought' is OBVIOUSLY NOT 'a thought'.
1. All definitions are the mirroring of words through further words.
OF COURSE, and so what?

That is just how language works, and HAS TO work.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 2. What is proof?
'Proof' is whatever 'one' defines 'proof' as, to "them".
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm Can you prove proof exists?
That all depends on how 'you' define the word 'proof', AND on what 'proof' you want and/or need to prove proof exists.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 3. A thought exists as a thought, it is real as a thought.
So what?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 4. All forms are thought as extensions of the universal mind.
What is this, so called, "universal mind" thingy, EXACTLY?
1. So you claim I have no proof but proof is defined by the observer, then your asking for proof is to ask for something which subjectively agrees with your stance.

2. The universal mind is self evidence.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8533
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Sculptor »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am The unity of all being necessitates the most seemingly seperate terms as fundamentally connected.
Why?
A "wisdom" generator, ie AI, would be the tying of these seemingly seperate terms together to form a statement. From the perspective of all being connected this necessitates the most absurd sayings as having fundamental meaning upon closer inspection. A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of any words.
That is not what AI does.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Sculptor wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:18 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am The unity of all being necessitates the most seemingly seperate terms as fundamentally connected.
Why?
A "wisdom" generator, ie AI, would be the tying of these seemingly seperate terms together to form a statement. From the perspective of all being connected this necessitates the most absurd sayings as having fundamental meaning upon closer inspection. A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of any words.
That is not what AI does.
1. Because all are reducible to a common source given all differentiation is a divergence.

2. The Wisdom of Deepak Chopra generator does this.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8533
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Sculptor »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:25 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:18 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am The unity of all being necessitates the most seemingly seperate terms as fundamentally connected.
Why?
A "wisdom" generator, ie AI, would be the tying of these seemingly seperate terms together to form a statement. From the perspective of all being connected this necessitates the most absurd sayings as having fundamental meaning upon closer inspection. A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of any words.
That is not what AI does.
1. Because all are reducible to a common source given all differentiation is a divergence.

2. The Wisdom of Deepak Chopra generator does this.
Rubbish.
Depak Chopra is an illusionist and charlatan.
Why are you so easily taken in? :lol:
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Sculptor wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 8:27 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:25 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:18 pm
Why?


That is not what AI does.
1. Because all are reducible to a common source given all differentiation is a divergence.

2. The Wisdom of Deepak Chopra generator does this.
Rubbish.
Depak Chopra is an illusionist and charlatan.
Why are you so easily taken in? :lol:
You asked for an example of an AI which ties together strings of words, the Wisdom of Deepak Chopra generator is an example of this.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:05 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jun 30, 2021 7:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm

1. All definitions are the mirroring of words through further words.
OF COURSE, and so what?

That is just how language works, and HAS TO work.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 2. What is proof?
'Proof' is whatever 'one' defines 'proof' as, to "them".
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm Can you prove proof exists?
That all depends on how 'you' define the word 'proof', AND on what 'proof' you want and/or need to prove proof exists.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 3. A thought exists as a thought, it is real as a thought.
So what?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:28 pm 4. All forms are thought as extensions of the universal mind.
What is this, so called, "universal mind" thingy, EXACTLY?
1. So you claim I have no proof but proof is defined by the observer, then your asking for proof is to ask for something which subjectively agrees with your stance.
Could your assumption, belief, and claim here be wrong?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:05 pm 2. The universal mind is self evidence.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:57 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:05 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jun 30, 2021 7:19 am

OF COURSE, and so what?

That is just how language works, and HAS TO work.



'Proof' is whatever 'one' defines 'proof' as, to "them".



That all depends on how 'you' define the word 'proof', AND on what 'proof' you want and/or need to prove proof exists.



So what?



What is this, so called, "universal mind" thingy, EXACTLY?
1. So you claim I have no proof but proof is defined by the observer, then your asking for proof is to ask for something which subjectively agrees with your stance.
Could your assumption, belief, and claim here be wrong?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:05 pm 2. The universal mind is self evidence.
You asked for proof and proof is defined by the individual according to you, thus anything I provide as proof must align subjectively with your stance on what proof is. You are asking for whatever aligns with your stance.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:25 am
Age wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:57 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:05 pm

1. So you claim I have no proof but proof is defined by the observer, then your asking for proof is to ask for something which subjectively agrees with your stance.
Could your assumption, belief, and claim here be wrong?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jul 05, 2021 7:05 pm 2. The universal mind is self evidence.
You asked for proof and proof is defined by the individual according to you, thus anything I provide as proof must align subjectively with your stance on what proof is. You are asking for whatever aligns with your stance.
Well this ANOTHER ASSUMPTION, which is COMPLETELY WRONG.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:02 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:25 am
Age wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:57 am

Could your assumption, belief, and claim here be wrong?
You asked for proof and proof is defined by the individual according to you, thus anything I provide as proof must align subjectively with your stance on what proof is. You are asking for whatever aligns with your stance.
Well this ANOTHER ASSUMPTION, which is COMPLETELY WRONG.
False, facts are determined through proof and proof is defined by the individual according to you. :D You said: 'Proof' is whatever 'one' defines 'proof' as, to "them".
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:11 am
Age wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:02 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:25 am

You asked for proof and proof is defined by the individual according to you, thus anything I provide as proof must align subjectively with your stance on what proof is. You are asking for whatever aligns with your stance.
Well this ANOTHER ASSUMPTION, which is COMPLETELY WRONG.
False, facts are determined through proof and proof is defined by the individual according to you. :D You said: 'Proof' is whatever 'one' defines 'proof' as, to "them".
Have you forgotten, you also said OTHER things.

Which was WRONG.
Post Reply