Einstein on the train

[surreptitious57]

Therefore you really have NO choice other than to BE and remain OPEN

I am reasonably open given that I think that it is eternal and infinite
I have one reason for why I do but it is not actual evidence as such
But its not a position I am dogmatically committed to in any way

[Age]

So do you BELIEVE that you do exist ?

No because I do not do believe anything at all as there is no reason for me to
I am certain that I exist and so it is something I know not something I believe

Okay thank you. Just checking.

By the way this certainty that 'I' exist increases significantly when 'you' discover/learn Who and What the 'I' actually IS, which by the way 'belief' still NEVER has to come into play, even though KNOWING and UNDERSTANDING does.

[Age]

maybe some one in the future might come along and be able explain how there could be or are in fact square circles

when that person comes along then because I remain completely OPEN then I will LISTEN TO what that person has to say

But unfortunately for both you and that other person because you are completely CLOSED to this idea you will NOT listen to them

I do not accept at this point in time that there are such things as square circles as that is a logical contradiction

I KNOW. You told me this before.

But if someone at a future point in time can demonstrate that they actually exist then I will accept that they do

But HOW could some one TELL you or SHOW/DEMONSTRATE to you some thing, which you are completely CLOSED off from and to in the beginning?

I will therefore be open by both listening to and accepting what they have to say about square circles

But that in and of itself is a contradiction in terms. Although it is VERY subtle, it is still a contradiction of terms. If some thing is a 'logical contradiction', then WHY would you even consider listening to that?

And so you are therefore wrong to say I am completely closed to the idea because that is just not true

But you have NOT shown otherwise.

If some thing IS a 'logical contradiction', then HOW are you at all OPEN to that thing?

Just because you used the 'therefore' word, that does NOT mean that what you then said, logically followed on from what you previously wrote before the 'therefore' word. For example,

You wrote, (underlined):

I do not accept at this point in time that there are such things as square circles as that is a logical contradiction

If some thing IS a 'logical contradiction', then WHY would you even consider listening to it? A human brain does NOT listen to 'that' what is a 'logical contradiction'. It would be a 'logical contradiction', itself, for the human brain, itself, TO LISTEN TO 'that' what IS 'logically contradictory' to itself.

Human beings will NATURALLY not listen to that what they, themselves, SAY is a 'logical contradiction'. This is just NORMAL and NATURAL because things like a 'square circle' IS, by DEFINITION, a 'logical contradiction' to the brain, and therefor IS also 'logically impossible', as well.

So, what sort of language could be used for 'you', surreptitious57, TO START TO LISTEN TO how 'square circles' COULD exist?

But if someone at a future point in time can demonstrate that they actually exist then I will accept that they do

But how could any one demonstrate to you how some thing actually does exist when to that brain it IS already a 'logical contradiction'?

I will therefore be open by both listening to and accepting what they have to say about square circles

But WHY will you THEREFORE be OPEN by both listening to and accepting? What did you say in your two previous premises that concludes that you THEREFORE WILL be OPEN to be both LISTENING TO and ACCEPTING what they say about 'square circles'?

What has changed FROM the first premise of NOT being OPEN, TO the second premise of being OPEN? To then jump to or reach the conclusion that you WILL be OPEN?

I can SEE and KNOW that the first premise 'is in the present' and the second premise 'is in the future', but I do NOT see HOW nor WHAT has made you CHANGE.

Also, you say in the second premise/statement that IF some one CAN demonstrate that 'square circles' DO ACTUALLY EXIST, then you WILL ACCEPT THAT. But this does NOT show nor explain HOW nor WHY you WILL THEREFORE be 'listening' and 'accepting'. WHAT IS the exact moment WHERE you CHANGED from NOT listening TO listening? And, the MOST IMPORTANT of all, for me, IS; What IS the EXACT REASON WHY you CHANGED?

What EXACTLY caused 'you' TO LISTEN?

Was it the use of language in a particular way, or was it some thing else? (The answer to this MIGHT BE what I am LOOKING FOR in my quest to be able to communicate better, so that my VIEW, which I will explain one day, CAN be FULLY HEARD, FULLY LISTENED TO, and, FULLY UNDERSTOOD. I KNOW what it WAS that got me to CHANGE so that I could then FULLY HEAR and FULLY LISTEN, which led to FULLY UNDERSTANDING. But what worked for me might not necessarily work for another. So, that is WHY I would LOVE to KNOW what it is EXACTLY that gets you to also CHANGE from NOT accepting some thing to be OPEN enough to just accepting of the POSSIBILITY of some thing, which appears to be 'logically impossible'?)

And so you are therefore wrong to say I am completely closed to the idea because that is just not true

WHEN you can provide the evidence or proof of WHEN, HOW, and WHY you CHANGED from;

I do not accept at this point in time that there are such things as square circles as that is a logical contradiction
TO
It is just NOT true that I am completely closed to the idea that there are square circles.
THEN, new knowledge will be known by me, AND, IF that new knowledge is acceptable and/or reasonable, then I WILL accept and also agree with that 'new' knowledge. Until then your reasons just do NOT work, for me anyway.

I just require the evidence or proof to demonstrate that it is true but till then I will think the opposite

How could it even be possible for any one to provide, to you, what you require to been proved that there are 'square circles', when by your very own words 'square circles' ARE A 'logical contradiction'?

Whenever new knowledge becomes known to me then I accept it for what it is and so change my mind when required to

You can NOT change "your" "mind" because:
1. You do NOT have a mind.
2. Unless of course you can explain who/what 'you' ARE, and, explain what the "mind" is exactly, and then as well explain how 'you' could even, and do, HAVE a "mind".

If you can provide the evidence or proof to demonstrate that 'you have a mind' is true, then that new knowledge will become known to me, and then I CAN and will accept it. But that 'new knowledge' would have to fit in perfectly with ALL the other KNOWN knowledge, which ALREADY EXISTS, to me.

By the way I would be VERY CAREFUL accepting 'knowledge' just because it is 'new knowledge', as 'new knowledge' can be just as WRONG, or even MORE WRONG then 'old knowledge' some times.

Furthermore, you MISSED the whole point that I was just making, which was;

Being Truly OPEN is in relation to 'POSSIBILITY' or 'what COULD BE', and NOT to 'what IS'.

'What IS', by definition, is ALREADY KNOWN, (the 'new knowledge' has ALREADY been OBTAINED) and therefore there is NO need to now be OPEN to 'It'.

By just LOOKING AT 'what IS', while being Truly OPEN to 'what COULD BE', then 'new knowledge' is gained VERY simply, easily, AND quickly, and therefore becomes ALREADY KNOWN, just about instantly.

[Age]

there is a huge difference between accepting THE POSSIBILITY OF absolutely every thing BEING true FROM accepting absolutely every thing IS true

I accept and fully understand the difference between these two entirely different scenarios
So obviously dont accept that absolutely everything is true as some things are actually false

I KNOW you MIGHT accept and fully understand A difference between these two entirely different scenarios, BUT, you appear to have MISSED my point completely.

I am saying:

There IS a huge difference between;
Accepting absolutely every thing COULD BE POSSIBLY true.
FROM,
Accepting absolutely every thing IS true.
.

[Age]

But one does NOT have an open mind . There is however a Mind ( which is ALWAYS OPEN ) that can be used

This Mind ALREADY UNDERSTANDS and KNOWS HOW to solve ALL problems

I am not aware of the existence of this Mind though you have mentioned it many times
And so therefore I am not able to access it in order to see it solve all of our problems

You have mentioned that 'you HAVE A mind', many times also.
Now, are you aware of the existence of this mind?

If yes, then please explain EXACTLY what you actually KNOW of this 'mind'. Please SHOW us, (and yourself) just how AWARE of 'it' you ARE.
If no, then fair enough.

Now, you TRIED TO "argue" that just because 'you' are NOT AWARE of the existence of the one and only Truly OPEN Mind, then that means that 'you' are NOT able to access It. So, based on that logic then if 'you' do HAVE access to 'your mind', then you would be AWARE of that, correct?

If yes, then in which case you could also explain what 'it' IS EXACTLY that 'you' are AWARE OF.

By the way IF you CAN BE Truly OPEN, then you have FULL access to the one and only Mind.

The number one reason WHY human beings CAN continually discover, learn, and understand, and HAVE the ability to reason AND keep CREATING new things is because of the access that they HAVE to be Truly OPEN.

You can ONLY learn (new and more) if, and when, you are OPEN. And,
You cannot NOT learn (some thing new or more) IF and WHEN you are OPEN, (to learning more and anew).

[Age]

Now we KNOW you have no ACTUAL evidence that SHOWS that the Universe is eternal and infinite but do you have
any ACTUAL evidence that SHOWS that the Universe is NOT eternal and / or NOT infinite ?

I have no actual evidence either way but I still think it is more likely that the Universe is eternal and infinite
So unless or until there is any evidence to suggest otherwise then that will be my position with regard to this

Okay, would you like to LOOK AT things, which could POSSIBLY provide MORE evidence for either way? Or, is that not of any real interest, at this moment?

[Age]

Human beings can have and hold 'separatist' views, open new groups, isolate themselves away, and not like to associate with "others", based on their DIFFERENT views, but none of this can take away from the fact that the view, thought, assumption, belief, and/or opinion; that the Universe is getting bigger is still based on NO actual predictable, producible, nor provable, evidence.

Stating that the Universe is expanding and/or that It began is just deluding one's own self and causing the delusion in "others" to believe the same thing.

[uwot]

Human beings can have and hold 'separatist' views, open new groups, isolate themselves away, and not like to associate with "others", based on their DIFFERENT views, but none of this can take away from the fact that the view, thought, assumption, belief, and/or opinion; that the Universe is getting bigger is still based on NO actual predictable, producible, nor provable, evidence.

Well, the bad news is that you are painfully dim. The really bad news is that you are too lazy to look at the evidence that has been shown you and are determined to carry on believing the complete gibberish that your dull mind can invent for itself from a position of total ignorance.

Stating that the Universe is expanding and/or that It began is just deluding one's own self and causing the delusion in "others" to believe the same thing.

No. It's looking at the evidence, understanding how others have reached their conclusions and making your own mind up about which one, if any, suits you. Your ignorance could be fixed, but I'm afraid you are stuck with your stupidity.

[surreptitious57]

Also you say in the second premise / statement that IF someone CAN demonstrate that square circles DO ACTUALLY EXIST then you WILL ACCEPT
THAT . But this does NOT show nor explain HOW nor WHY you WILL THEREFORE be listening and accepting . WHAT IS the exact moment WHERE
you CHANGED from NOT listening TO listening ? And the MOST IMPORTANT of all for me IS What IS the EXACT REASON WHY you CHANGED ?

The general point here is when something can be demonstrated to be true I accept it whatever it might be
And what demonstrates it to be true is the quantity or quality of evidence or proof that is readily available

I can passively listen to something without accepting it or rejecting it either way
I am not dogmatic about what I think is true or equally so what I think is not true

I think I will leave it there for now as there is no more I want to or need to say

[Age]

Human beings can have and hold 'separatist' views, open new groups, isolate themselves away, and not like to associate with "others", based on their DIFFERENT views, but none of this can take away from the fact that the view, thought, assumption, belief, and/or opinion; that the Universe is getting bigger is still based on NO actual predictable, producible, nor provable, evidence.

Well, the bad news is that you are painfully dim. The really bad news is that you are too lazy to look at the evidence that has been shown you and are determined to carry on believing the complete gibberish that your dull mind can invent for itself from a position of total ignorance.

Stating that the Universe is expanding and/or that It began is just deluding one's own self and causing the delusion in "others" to believe the same thing.

No. It's looking at the evidence, understanding how others have reached their conclusions and making your own mind up about which one, if any, suits you. Your ignorance could be fixed, but I'm afraid you are stuck with your stupidity.

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

I have said things about and countering your so called evidence. You have said nothing in reply to that.

[Age]

Also you say in the second premise / statement that IF someone CAN demonstrate that square circles DO ACTUALLY EXIST then you WILL ACCEPT
THAT . But this does NOT show nor explain HOW nor WHY you WILL THEREFORE be listening and accepting . WHAT IS the exact moment WHERE
you CHANGED from NOT listening TO listening ? And the MOST IMPORTANT of all for me IS What IS the EXACT REASON WHY you CHANGED ?

The general point here is when something can be demonstrated to be true I accept it whatever it might be
And what demonstrates it to be true is the quantity or quality of evidence or proof that is readily available

I can passively listen to something without accepting it or rejecting it either way
I am not dogmatic about what I think is true or equally so what I think is not true

I think I will leave it there for now as there is no more I want to or need to say

You have said about all you can so thank you. You have already SHOWN through evidence that 'you', human beings, are able to LISTEN and SEE and UNDERSTAND things just as long as long as you are NOT in a state of BELIEF, as you are not.