The Physical, Life, Consciousness, and The Human Mind—A Preface

[Walker]

No, that's logic. Life requires form. Rationally speaking, eternal life implies eternal form.

I already made it clear I reject all versions of Hylomorphism. I do not care that you accept the idea, but it is silly to keep arguing from a premise you know is not acceptable to the one you are arguing with.

There is no, "mystical ineffable formless matter," and there are no "transforming" forms. There are only material entities and their qualities.

Of course you reject my words. You're a believer, which is the basis of your knowledge.

[RCSaunders]

Of course you reject my words.

Don't let it bother you. I reject everyone's words, especially the words of all gurus, shamans, authorities, experts, academics, and philosophers. The basis for all I know is reason from evidence, or rational explanations that do not contradict anything I already know. I have learned a great deal from others, but only when those others could present evidence I could examine for myself or rational non-contradictory explanations I could clearly understand.

I also do not allow any feeling, emotion, sentiment, or desire to influence anything I think.

The reason I do not accept your word is because you do not provide evidence or rational explanations but quote others and indicate you think feelings matter.

[Dontaskme]

The reason I do not accept your word is because you do not provide evidence or rational explanations but quote others and indicate you think feelings matter.

You yourself are quoting others all the time without realising it, you have no original knowledge of your own. All your knowledge has come from other people, a knowledge that is now your knowledge where there was previously no knowledge, the truth is humans don't like not-knowing, so they take on knowledge from others and then they repackage that old knowledge to make it look new again, but in reality it's just old rehashed same old stuff made to look new again, it's like hey everyone, here is my newer version of knowledge made purely out of the old material .. we all do it...there is nothing else to do, for what else is there to do with the blank screen of not-knowing that we truly are? ...the devil makes work for idle hands..might as well get busy with our paintbrushes and conjure up some kind of convincing picture, you never know who might be watching...better put on a show at least.

The burning question is...who was the original artist? the very first knower of knowledge, and where does that artist get it's artistic knowledge from?

When we solve that conumdrum, then maybe we can flush all that fake knowledge down the toilet where it belongs, and then have a jolly good belly laugh at the silly pictures we painted of ourselves.

[RCSaunders]

The burning question is...who was the original artist? the very first knower of knowledge, and where does that artist get it's artistic knowledge from?

Mark Twain once commented that Adam never knew how good he had it. When he said something he could be sure he was the first to say it.

I suspect Eve probably argued with that.

[Walker]

Of course you reject my words.

Don't let it bother you. I reject everyone's words, especially the words of all gurus, shamans, authorities, experts, academics, and philosophers. The basis for all I know is reason from evidence, or rational explanations that do not contradict anything I already know. I have learned a great deal from others, but only when those others could present evidence I could examine for myself or rational non-contradictory explanations I could clearly understand.

I also do not allow any feeling, emotion, sentiment, or desire to influence anything I think.

The reason I do not accept your word is because you do not provide evidence or rational explanations but quote others and indicate you think feelings matter.

Nonsense. You only accept what comports with your beliefs.

[Dontaskme]

The burning question is...who was the original artist? the very first knower of knowledge, and where does that artist get it's artistic knowledge from?

Mark Twain once commented that Adam never knew how good he had it. When he said something he could be sure he was the first to say it.

I suspect Eve probably argued with that.

I doubt Eve would have argued with herself, but then I guess there was no one else.

I AM the first and last..the rest is his story.

[RCSaunders]

... I reject everyone's words, especially the words of all gurus, shamans, authorities, experts, academics, and philosophers. The basis for all I know is reason from evidence, or rational explanations that do not contradict anything I already know. I have learned a great deal from others, but only when those others could present evidence I could examine for myself or rational non-contradictory explanations I could clearly understand.

I also do not allow any feeling, emotion, sentiment, or desire to influence anything I think.

The reason I do not accept your word is because you do not provide evidence or rational explanations but quote others and indicate you think feelings matter.

Nonsense. You only accept what comports with your beliefs.

I told you how I decide what to accept. Perhaps you can tell me how you decide what to accept.

[RCSaunders]

I doubt Eve would have argued with herself, ...

Know many women?

[Walker]

I told you how I decide what to accept. Perhaps you can tell me how you decide what to accept.

Rational assessments leading to the highest probability.

A believer is one who accepts what comports with his beliefs, and rejects what does not.

For instance, according to rational, objective assessment, Donald Trump is an excellent president. According to believers he is not.

For instance, here is an adult who believes that hamster is spelled, "hampster." No evidence will convince her otherwise. The same can be said for folks who don't believe dictionary definitions that fail to comport with their beliefs.
https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/millenn ... -spelling/

For instance, because "gay" is now defined as homosexual, I figure when someone is using the word that's the intended meaning. Belief is not a part of that figuring.

[Walker]

Look at the people here (0.57).
Many of them are likely believers in obvious bs.

Fake Martial Arts Compilation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e8NOrooy_U

[RCSaunders]

Look at the people here (0.57).
Many of them are likely believers in obvious bs.

"The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind."
— H L Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy (1949)

[Ramu]

Of course you reject my words.

Don't let it bother you. I reject everyone's words, especially the words of all gurus, shamans, authorities, experts, academics, and philosophers. The basis for all I know is reason from evidence, or rational explanations that do not contradict anything I already know. I have learned a great deal from others, but only when those others could present evidence I could examine for myself or rational non-contradictory explanations I could clearly understand.

I also do not allow any feeling, emotion, sentiment, or desire to influence anything I think.

The reason I do not accept your word is because you do not provide evidence or rational explanations but quote others and indicate you think feelings matter.

Hey RC, has it ever occurred to you that the Universe is not rational...nor irrational...but arational? Why do you feel the need to project a human quality on something far more intelligent than you will ever be? (Or myself for that matter). Why do we project these things upon the Universe? Remember this....models of reality only get you so far...it ain't the real thing...dont mistake the map for the actual territory.

[RCSaunders]

Hey RC, has it ever occurred to you that the Universe is not rational...nor irrational ...?

Why would it? Only human beings have the ability to reason. To attribute human nature to the entire universe is absurd. Of course, human beings are part of the universe, so at least that part is rational.

It won't be of interest to you, but others might be interested to know, if it were possible for there to be anything about the universe that could not be identified and understood by means of reason it would not matter.

[Dontaskme]

Hey RC, has it ever occurred to you that the Universe is not rational...nor irrational ...?

Why would it? Only human beings have the ability to reason. To attribute human nature to the entire universe is absurd. Of course, human beings are part of the universe, so at least that part is rational.

It won't be of interest to you, but others might be interested to know, if it were possible for there to be anything about the universe that could not be identified and understood by means of reason it would not matter.

There is no requirement to reason other than the unreasonable demand to know what cannot be known twice. As everything is already being known. Knowing is only and ever one with the knowing in the instantaneous moment. Knowing is not for another to know (twice known) because knowing is already first known one with itself all alone.

As human sentient awareness we can only know what we know as and when that knowing arises in us when that knowing is known instantly in the moment of knowing...we can't know what we don't know until we do.

We are the knowing that cannot be known, we are already being known and what is known cannot know anything, for then the immediate knowing would be twice known...in knowing twice the second knowing would already know something before it was known...and that is impossible...and that second knowing would alter the first knowing and would turn what is into what isn't.

There is a knowingness that has nothing to do with knowledge and which is not personal.

Knowingness is only ever one with the knowing which is consciousness the only knowing there is as and when that knowing arises one with itself in the instantaneous moment.

Watch this space, it is always under construction, the neverending story within the dream of sepration in spacetime duality is being written now as these words are being typed onto our screen of awareness projected to be outside of us appearing on a mechanical computer screen ...the mechanical image is the projection of consciousness, not the other way around....the projection is for the one reader to read about it's not-knowing self...to become known to itself as and through it's projected image.

confused? ..you will be, that until you realise that that which appears to be confused is never confused about itself.

In trying to reason the self info bombs itself in the process with all sorts of ideas that it cannot possibly understand via the mental route, it's like the contents of consciousness looking for consciousness, and this confusion only serves to cover over what is actually going on, which is already perfect just as it is with or without it's story about itself.

.

[RCSaunders]

There is no requirement to reason ...

That's true. "Requirement," like, "good," "bad," "important" are all relative terms. If there is no end, or purpose, or goal specified, nothing is required, good, bad, or important. If one does not choose to live and succeed, nothing is required. Failure and death are the default conditions of those who refuse to reason.