Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 11:13 amPeople who CLAIM TO KNOW the truth can NOT be UNDERMINED by ANY 'thing', if the CLAIM IS TRUE.
The problem is that even if a claim is true, there are other stories that will account for the evidence equally well.
ONCE AGAIN "will bouwman" you do NOT appear to YET be able to discern the DIFFERENCE between 'proof' and 'evidence'.
For example, if some 'thing' is only 'known' by or through 'evidence', then 'that thing' may or may NOT be true.if, however, a 'thing' is KNOWN through or by 'proof', then 'that thing' can NOT be refuted, and thus IS IRREFUTABLY True.
Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
Take you, for example. There are any number of possible stories that will account for the words on this forum attributed to Age.
LOL "will bouwman". Just saying so does NOT necessarily make it so.
Are you BRAVE ENOUGH to provide just ONE example? Or are you just "ANOTHER one" who will CLAIM some 'thing', but then just RUN AWAY and HIDE?
After all you have done this MANY times ALREADY.
If you do NOT STAY and back up and support your CLAIM, especially on a philosophy forum, then your words, literally, mean NOTHING AT ALL
Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm Hopefully avoiding any charge of "over-indexing on the “challenging” part", it is conceivable that you are some AI project being run by someone whose computer has a faulty caps lock, but I am quite prepared to believe that you, Age, are a person of some sort.
And here we are, ONCE AGAIN, "another one" who because 'it' can NOT refute NOR counter the ACTUAL WORDS that I SAY, WRITE, and USE here, 'it' will INSTEAD just 'try' and USE some kind of HUMILIATION or RIDICULE AGAINST 'me', as though this would have some king if ACTUAL effect.
Look "will bouwman" it IS PLAINLY OBVIOUS that you can NOT even CHALLENGE the WORDS I USE here, let alone ARGUE AGAINST them. And what you REALLY HATE about this Fact is that 'this' then PROVES your BELIEF about 'when people KNOW the truth that they then can be undermined' ABSOLUTELY and IRREFUTABLY False, Wrong, AND Incorrect.
Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
What sort of person? Well, there's your version, the details of which escape me but are along the lines of you being some sort of time travelling messenger.
ONCE AGAIN, 'you', "will bouwman", FOCUS ON 'the person' and 'try' and ATTACK 'that', instead of FOCUSING ON 'the words' ALONE and QUESTIONING 'them'.
And as for some 'time travelling messenger' then that is A STORY MADE UP by 'you', people, here ALONE.
Have you EVER CONSIDERED WHY the 'details of MY VERSION OF 'me' ESCAPE you'?
The ACTUAL ANSWER WHY, by the way, IS Truly VERY SIMPLE and EASY
Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pmThen's there's the view shared I think by most here, that you are a complete headcase. That's three possibilities already. Even if your version is the correct one, there is nothing you could say to eliminate the other options above, nor countless others.
The MORE you or ANY one else here spends their time LOOKING AT and FOCUSING ON 'me', and TALKING ABOUT, 'me', and NOT ON my ACTUAL WORDS, then the MORE this HELPS and PROVES MY CASE here
SO PLEASE CONTINUE ON AS you ARE here "will bouwman".
The Fact that you can NOT ARGUE AGAINST NOR COUNTER MY WORDS speaks for itself here.
The ONLY 'thing' you CONCENTRATE ON here IS 'me', AND LOL, to you, 'i' AM one of the three 'things';
An 'ai',
A 'headcase', or
A 'time traveller'.
LOL If only you KNEW. If only you KNEW.
NEXT you will be diagnosing 'me' WITH some 'condition' like "others" here DO.
How about ALL of you START CHALLENGING and QUESTIONING the ACTUAL WORDS I USE BEFORE you, you KNOW, like what is MEANT TO BE DONE in a philosophy forum?
For your information, MY VERSION OF 'me' has NEVER been expressed here and may well NEVER will be ALSO.
Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 11:13 amLOOK "will bouwman" just because one might CLAIM TO KNOW the truth does NOT equate to THAT CLAIM necessarily being False. So, WHEN are you going to START UNDERSTANDING and COMPREHENDING this IRREFUTABLE Fact here?
That would have been 1987 at the latest.
SO, WHY DO you KEEP MAKING RIDICULOUS CLAIMS like:
' What philosophy does is undermine people who claim to know the truth, by pointing out that there are alternative explanations, equally well supported by the evidence.' ?
SOMETIMES people who CLAIM TO KNOW the truth ACTUALLY DO. So, what this ACTUALLY MEANS IS there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, including so-called 'philosophy', which could undermine those. people.
Are you even AWARE that you ARE CONTRADICTING "yourself" here?
AND IF you HAVE an ACTUAL ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION for what I SAY and CLAIM here, then JUST PRESENT 'that explanation' SO THAT we CAN LOOK AT 'it'.
'TRYING TO' CLAIM that there are OTHER explanations for what one CLAIMS, and THEREFORE "the other's" CLAIM of KNOWING the truth is false, wrong, or Incorrect WITHOUT EVER PROVIDING ANY ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION IS JUST ANOTHER FORM IF DECEPTION you ARE SHOWING and DISPLAYING here.
You Keep CLAIMING TO KNOW the truth about there IS ALWAYS OTHER EXPLANATIONS YET you FAIL TO PROVIDE ABSOLUTELY ANY PROOF FOR THIS CLAIM OF YOURS here..
Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:52 pm
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 11:13 amWill Bouwman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 10:02 amThe truth is sometimes difficult to find and sometimes impossible.
The ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS EXTREMELY SIMPLE and EASY TO FIND, and UNCOVER.
So you keep saying. The thing is there are potentially infinite untruths which are irrefutable.
Like WHAT, for example?
And, what has 'this' got to do with what I have been ACTUALLY SAYING and CLAIMING here?