Free Will Mix

[chaz wyman]

With the influence of those filters you and Kant suffer, I'm surprised that you believe his ideas are necessarily 'right,' such that you assert his belief, with such conviction.

All ideas are the result of our human filters - that is the point.
Our disagreement makes this evident.
Kant was right.

I like how only you and Kant get to decide how, whom and to what extent any particular entities senses cloud the truth of any particular perception. It seems like a pretty omnipotent podium you've placed yourself upon. There is no way you can definitely know of my abilities at perception, nor I yours. We take it on 'faith' that we share the same abilities. Just as well as the senses may inhibit the understanding, they may also inhibit the not understanding, of any particular individual.

No really no.
But it seems to me that by reading other things you have written, if you 'like' something you usually want to believe in it.
In this case you do not 'like' what you read, in any sense.
None of this changes the fact that you are simply being reflexive as it is you that is on the habit of standing on an omnipotent podium. Kant and I are saying that all podia are unique to each person. If you took the trouble to read Kant's epistemology you would get that. The labour of uncovering knowledge rests on the problem that as we all occupy individual podia it takes supreme effort to be able to say anything omnipotent (as you are happily in the habit of doing at the tip of a hat).
... And that all statements to have scientific credibility have always to reserve the potential for slipping off those podia, as all statements are subjectively based.
I know that what I am typing will either be ignored by you - or go over you head but we must keep trying.

[Notvacka]

Sir Richard F Burton wrote:

'Men are four.
He who knows not, and knows not he knows not;
He who knows not, and knows he knows not;
He who knows and knows not he knows;
He who knows and knows he knows.'

I prefer to use only two categories:

Those who believe they know. (Because they know not that they believe.)
Those who know they believe. (Because they believe not that they know.)

[chaz wyman]

Sir Richard F Burton wrote:

'Men are four.
He who knows not, and knows not he knows not;
He who knows not, and knows he knows not;
He who knows and knows not he knows;
He who knows and knows he knows.'

I prefer to use only two categories:

Those who believe they know. (Because they know not that they believe.)
Those who know they believe. (Because they believe not that they know.)

Belief is about choice.
Knowledge is on a higher plain and involves reason and evidence.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Sir Richard F Burton wrote:

'Men are four.
He who knows not, and knows not he knows not;
He who knows not, and knows he knows not;
He who knows and knows not he knows;
He who knows and knows he knows.'

I prefer to use only two categories:

Those who believe they know. (Because they know not that they believe.)
Those who know they believe. (Because they believe not that they know.)

Yes I concur. Chaz in a lot of ways is an elitist, in the sense that he can only see that his understanding is the correct understanding. My understanding levels the playing field, not that I'm saying that man can never truly know, just that he is still a youngster, that largely only believes he knows. When I say that the absolute truth is out there, I mean "in time" not necessarily in space, though as we explore and understand it completely, it shall become a part of the time quotient. I see that it is important for each of us to believe we know with certainty, otherwise we feel lost and unsure. But I also see that often this need to believe with certainty causes us to hurt one another, and it's all for naught, we each cherish our lives and deserve the exact same potential as the next.

To say that no one can know of the absolute, and that it is all relative, might seem to be a level playing field for all, but in fact it is an absolute statement such that the one that wields it feels as though their solution is correct (ego). Only one that is stuck in needing to be certain above all others would say such things. The truth is that one can know of the absolute truth, but may not know that he knows. This then is the only non biased approach as the ego has been quelled with doubt, of the further potential possibility. For one to know that they know of the absolute, they would have to receive feedback from the totality of the universe, and I see this as potential as man grows older, but only at that point where the universe truly becomes small in his eyes. Man is still in that stage where he only largely believes he knows, which is not to say that he absolutely knows of no absolutes.

[Notvacka]

Belief is about choice.

Indeed.

Knowledge is on a higher plain...

Yes. Unattainably high. Unless you're a High Plains Drifter...

...and involves reason and evidence.

That's your belief, that reason and evidence is enough to produce actual knowledge.

[Notvacka]

To say that no one can know of the absolute, and that it is all relative, might seem to be a level playing field for all...

Why do you have to place everything on a playing field? Must it always be a game?

...but in fact it is an absolute statement such that the one that wields it feels as though their solution is correct (ego).

Why do you see statements like weapons being wielded? Must it always be a contest?

Only one that is stuck in needing to be certain above all others would say such things.

Why do you assume that saying something stems from a need to feel superior? I reject this.

There might indeed be an absolute truth "out there"; nothing relative about it. But each of us is viewing the world from our own perspective. It's the only perspective we have. And there is no level playing field; some have a higher vantage point. Some see more than others. Some are closer to the truth than others, but we are all equal in that nobody can know how close or how far they are from the actual truth. We can compare our different views. We can relate. But we can never know for certain, though some choose to believe that they do.

[chaz wyman]

Belief is about choice.

Indeed.

Knowledge is on a higher plain...

Yes. Unattainably high. Unless you're a High Plains Drifter...

...and involves reason and evidence.

That's your belief, that reason and evidence is enough to produce actual knowledge.

Nope. knowledge is not about choice.

[SpheresOfBalance]

To say that no one can know of the absolute, and that it is all relative, might seem to be a level playing field for all...

Why do you have to place everything on a playing field? Must it always be a game?
I don't, most do, don't kill the messenger.

...but in fact it is an absolute statement such that the one that wields it feels as though their solution is correct (ego).

Why do you see statements like weapons being wielded? Must it always be a contest?
I don't, most do, don't kill the messenger.

Only one that is stuck in needing to be certain above all others would say such things.

Why do you assume that saying something stems from a need to feel superior? I reject this.
I don't, most do, don't kill the messenger.

There might indeed be an absolute truth "out there"; nothing relative about it. But each of us is viewing the world from our own perspective. It's the only perspective we have. And there is no level playing field; some have a higher vantage point. Some see more than others. Some are closer to the truth than others,
The above sentences of yours that I've highlighted in red, could only be said if you knew of the absolute and you admitted that you don't. The above therefore is necessarily false, or rather it can't be said with certainty. If in fact everything of modern man was all wrong, unrelated to the absolute, how could proximity be judged, and by what entity, what standard?

but we are all equal in that nobody can know how close or how far they are from the actual truth.
Now you got it, after much confusion and contradiction.

We can compare our different views. We can relate. But we can never know for certain, though some choose to believe that they do.
Yes I believe you finally got it, well sort of, more appropriately those alive today can never know for certain, but those of the future, well that's another situation entirely.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Belief is about choice.

Indeed.

Knowledge is on a higher plain...

Yes. Unattainably high. Unless you're a High Plains Drifter...

...and involves reason and evidence.

That's your belief, that reason and evidence is enough to produce actual knowledge.

Nope. knowledge is not about choice.

Yes it is, as it changes daily! It's not knowledge if it's not absolute, then it's only belief. It could be that a god of sorts controls everything via electrical potential and you're just a sock puppet. If what you believe is true, that one cannot know of absolutes, then one absolutely has no knowledge.

[chaz wyman]

Nope. knowledge is not about choice.

Yes it is, as it changes daily! It's not knowledge if it's not absolute, then it's only belief. It could be that a god of sorts controls everything via electrical potential and you're just a sock puppet. If what you believe is true, that one cannot know of absolutes, then one absolutely has no knowledge.

It changes daily due to factors which do not involve choice, such as logic and evidence.
That is why there is no such thing as absolute knowledge numb-nuts.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Nope. knowledge is not about choice.

Yes it is, as it changes daily! It's not knowledge if it's not absolute, then it's only belief. It could be that a god of sorts controls everything via electrical potential and you're just a sock puppet. If what you believe is true, that one cannot know of absolutes, then one absolutely has no knowledge.

It changes daily due to factors which do not involve choice, such as logic and evidence.
That is why there is no such thing as absolute knowledge numb-nuts.

So you're interested in my nuts huh? R U a Homosexual. Thank 'GOD' it's only my nuts that are numb, while it's your brain that is numb.

Choice comes in where those that are supposed to be leading the way decide to settle on the information at hand as being complete enough to decide NOW with certainty, instead of waiting until more data is realized. That is in fact CHOICE my friend. Usually it has to do with the selfish needs of tenure and other such monetary rewards. They just got to publish that paper to try and get a noble or otherwise make sure the authorities that be, think they're worth their pay. Sure it's got to be plausible, but that's easy enough, knowing what their peers prefer to see.

Selfishness and the mighty glittering prize, sheeesh, it really sickens me to no end that humans are so fucked up! (I just finished the five(5) DVD series by the BBC titled "Planet Earth," made in 2007, I highly recommend it to those that are unfamiliar.) Yes Humanity really sickens me, the scourge that it is.

[chaz wyman]

So you're interested in my nuts huh? R U a Homosexual. .

What's wrong with being a homosexual?
Give me a kiss big boy!

[SpheresOfBalance]

So you're interested in my nuts huh? R U a Homosexual. .

What's wrong with being a homosexual?
Give me a kiss big boy!

That's not my goat, son! I fear no homosexual! I just don't usually concern myself with male genitalia other than mine. So it must be, that since you do, in fact, you are a homosexual. No worries mate, as far as I'm concerned. As you need not be concerned, that I'd ever hold anything against you. I've lived far long enough to understand homo sapiens and it's biological variances and see that no mere human is responsible for their particular chemical makeup.
Oh that crazy chemical universe of star dust, divine, with electrical potential.

Just thought you were searching for the door to your closet, please, go ahead, walk through, ladies before gentlemen.

[chaz wyman]

So you're interested in my nuts huh? R U a Homosexual. .

What's wrong with being a homosexual?
Give me a kiss big boy!

That's not my goat, son! I fear no homosexual! I just don't usually concern myself with male genitalia other than mine. So it must be, that since you do, in fact, you are a homosexual. No worries mate, as far as I'm concerned. As you need not be concerned, that I'd ever hold anything against you. I've lived far long enough to understand homo sapiens and it's biological variances and see that no mere human is responsible for their particular chemical makeup.
Oh that crazy chemical universe of star dust, divine, with electrical potential.

Just thought you were searching for the door to your closet, please, go ahead, walk through, ladies before gentlemen.

FISHED IN!

You are too easy to bait.

[reasonvemotion]

C.W.

That is why there is no such thing as absolute knowledge numb-nuts.

Are you absolutely sure of that?