Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:01 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:17 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:07 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:13 pm


You assumed it was not there, it was there all along. Also If you reread the chronological order, I stated I did not read what you wrote (multiple times) because of your assumption I never addressed your examples...which page four response proving this is false as each point has a response to it.

You actually provided multiple examples and the "one" was defined.

Actually I am not refuting anything of my own argument.

I will provide an example....make sure to actually look at point 2.

• will be assumed as symbol for "an assumption".

Example:

1. This statement is not assumed.

2. •(•(•T•h•i•s) •(•s•t•a•t•e•m•e•n•t) •(•i•s) •(•n•o•t) •(•a•s•s•u•m•e•d) •.)

3. This statement appears as a contradiction because it is self negating. This is considering if I state it is not assumed, and it is assumed, the statement is both an assumption and not assumption.

4. However it is always an assumption, therefore its nature as false or contradictory is it is incomplete in defintion due to an absense of context.

5. If I include a new context to define it: "This statement is not an assumption because the word assumption is not observed the same chain of symbols in x language". ...then the statement is no longer a contradiction by first glance. However, paradoxically it is still a contradiction because it is undefined by "x". Contradiction is a deficiency in definition, an absense or order as the connection of one assumption to another. X could be a variable observing the word assumption as "supposition" in French. In this case certain chains of symbols, letters in this case, do exist...just not all of them. So again the assumption is both true and false because of context.

6. All assumptions are simultaneously true and false because of context.

7. Thus "no assumption" is true because relative to another context this is not an assumption in symbol, but it is always an assumption as is.

8. Assumptions are thus symbols in nature considering the nature of the symbol, as a form, is assumed as is where this form is always not just taken as is but observes the point of awareness, the linear definition and circularity of the statement as necessitating assumption is an actual form.
You are still mistaken as you keep missing things.

Of course many of my assumptions are disconnected, but it does not necessitate all assumptions are not connected as assumptions.

Also, have you proven that absolutely EVERY thing is an assumption?

"All" is assumed.
Thus my example stands as true, right and correct. Shame you missed it.

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6056
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:07 pm

Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:01 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:17 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:07 pm


You are still mistaken as you keep missing things.

Of course many of my assumptions are disconnected, but it does not necessitate all assumptions are not connected as assumptions.

Also, have you proven that absolutely EVERY thing is an assumption?

"All" is assumed.
Thus my example stands as true, right and correct. Shame you missed it.
You assumed I did. Assumption is Knowledge.

Everything is assumed, as the concept of everything is not only assumed but a process of assumption.


You standards of proof...are not only not defined but fundamentally assumed.

Age
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:38 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:07 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:01 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:17 pm
Thus my example stands as true, right and correct. Shame you missed it.
You assumed I did. Assumption is Knowledge.

Everything is assumed, as the concept of everything is not only assumed but a process of assumption.


You standards of proof...are not only not defined but fundamentally assumed.
How do you know this?

And, is it true?

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6056
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:47 pm

Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:38 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:07 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:01 pm


Thus my example stands as true, right and correct. Shame you missed it.
You assumed I did. Assumption is Knowledge.

Everything is assumed, as the concept of everything is not only assumed but a process of assumption.


You standards of proof...are not only not defined but fundamentally assumed.
How do you know this?

And, is it true?
Are these the right questions?

Age
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:44 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:47 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:38 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:07 pm


You assumed I did. Assumption is Knowledge.

Everything is assumed, as the concept of everything is not only assumed but a process of assumption.


You standards of proof...are not only not defined but fundamentally assumed.
How do you know this?

And, is it true?
Are these the right questions?
Of course they are. Now are you doing to answer them?

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6056
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:47 pm

Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:44 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:47 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:38 pm


How do you know this?

And, is it true?
Are these the right questions?
Of course they are. Now are you doing to answer them?
"Why are they the right questions?" is your answer.

Age
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:19 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:47 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:44 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:47 pm


Are these the right questions?
Of course they are. Now are you doing to answer them?
"Why are they the right questions?" is your answer.
Obviously not. Your assumption is wrong again.

They are producing the results, which I sought.

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6056
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am

Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:47 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:44 pm


Of course they are. Now are you doing to answer them?
"Why are they the right questions?" is your answer.
Obviously not. Your assumption is wrong again.

They are producing the results, which I sought.
Yeah when the arguments response is "you are wrong because I said so"...it just makes you look dumb...(sipping cup of coffee)....this is where I openly state "I have no respect for you, you are acting like a bitch...this is where I just start sipping coffee and reorganizing other work."

So to continue...(sipping coffee)

Your "producing the results, which I sought" not only necessitates you following the brain bias which you project (thus furthering my point about all is assumed and proving you are bias as you claim all are bias), but it becoming looping and recursive just backs up the trillema as the inherent form of how consciousness and axioms work.

So yeah......(sipping coffee)...uh let me give further definition....

As to why "no" is an assumption:

- Symbol use, ie letters...we take them as they are with little to no thought.

- The actual word, we just assume we "know" what "no" means...but it is taken on little thought and very little is defined.

- You are also assuming everyone else knows why I am wrong, and you are also assuming you have a complete non contradictory definition as to why you know...considering it is subjective on this case.

So...yeah (again sips coffee)...and to continue...


My proof is the "form" of my stance and your argument (which does great in justifying my stance), considering form is the most axiomatic state there is, it is what we assumed (beginning with base linearism and the point of awareness in all arguments) and how we assume form and assumption are inseperable as stated many times prior.



Apparently wisdom does not come with age....(sipping coffee).

But please go on and be clever, don't assume any of my responses have a respectful tone in them. You have to say something to save face...(sipping coffee)...yeahhh...

Oh yeah, you also forgot how to read as well...my responses where on page 4 first post which you seem to have failed to address respectively...

So...(sipping coffee)...yeah...

Age
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:55 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:47 pm

"Why are they the right questions?" is your answer.
Obviously not. Your assumption is wrong again.

They are producing the results, which I sought.
Yeah when the arguments response is "you are wrong because I said so"...it just makes you look dumb...
But I NEVER said such thing. You assuming such a thing, and then saying it some might say that this makes you look dumb. But in all honesty to say such a thing would just be as stupid.

What I said and gave you was an example of 'what is not assumed'. You asked for it, so I gave it.

When you decide to discuss that, then lets do it?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
(sipping cup of coffee)....this is where I openly state "I have no respect for you, you are acting like a bitch...this is where I just start sipping coffee and reorganizing other work."

So to continue...(sipping coffee)

Your "producing the results, which I sought" not only necessitates you following the brain bias which you project (thus furthering my point about all is assumed and proving you are bias as you claim all are bias), but it becoming looping and recursive just backs up the trillema as the inherent form of how consciousness and axioms work.

So yeah......(sipping coffee)...uh let me give further definition....

As to why "no" is an assumption:

- Symbol use, ie letters...we take them as they are with little to no thought.
If that is what 'you' do, then that helps in explaining some of your responses. But just remember that 'I' am NOT 'you', so 'we' do NOT all do what 'you' assume and say 'we' do.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
- The actual word, we just assume we "know" what "no" means...but it is taken on little thought and very little is defined.
'you' keep assuming that 'you' "know" that 'we' just assume things, just like 'you' keep doing. 'you' appear to give no thought to how the words 'you', 'I', and 'we' are actually defined and mean.

The absurdity of ssuming that just because 'you' do some thing, then EVERY one else MUST also do the same thing, speaks for itself.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
- You are also assuming everyone else knows why I am wrong,
I NEVER assumed any such thing. So, your assumption is wrong again.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
and you are also assuming you have a complete non contradictory definition as to why you know...considering it is subjective on this case.
Once again I NEVER assumed any such thing. Each time you make these assumptions they are letting you down completely.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
So...yeah (again sips coffee)...and to continue...


My proof is the "form" of my stance and your argument (which does great in justifying my stance), considering form is the most axiomatic state there is, it is what we assumed (beginning with base linearism and the point of awareness in all arguments) and how we assume form and assumption are inseperable as stated many times prior.


Apparently wisdom does not come with age....(sipping coffee).

But please go on and be clever, don't assume any of my responses have a respectful tone in them. You have to say something to save face...(sipping coffee)...yeahhh...

Oh yeah, you also forgot how to read as well...my responses where on page 4 first post which you seem to have failed to address respectively...
But because you already admitted that you did not and will not read what I wrote/write, you apparently have MISSED that those "examples" do NOT contain thee 'example', which I have been talking about.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
So...(sipping coffee)...yeah...
Saying, "So...(sipping coffee)...yeah..." some may say sounds very similar to; "you are wrong because I said so...So, yeah".

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6056
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:49 pm

Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:55 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:19 am


Obviously not. Your assumption is wrong again.

They are producing the results, which I sought.
Yeah when the arguments response is "you are wrong because I said so"...it just makes you look dumb...
But I NEVER said such thing. You assuming such a thing, and then saying it some might say that this makes you look dumb. But in all honesty to say such a thing would just be as stupid.

What I said and gave you was an example of 'what is not assumed'. You asked for it, so I gave it.

When you decide to discuss that, then lets do it?

Page 4 first post...reread it.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
(sipping cup of coffee)....this is where I openly state "I have no respect for you, you are acting like a bitch...this is where I just start sipping coffee and reorganizing other work."

So to continue...(sipping coffee)

Your "producing the results, which I sought" not only necessitates you following the brain bias which you project (thus furthering my point about all is assumed and proving you are bias as you claim all are bias), but it becoming looping and recursive just backs up the trillema as the inherent form of how consciousness and axioms work.

So yeah......(sipping coffee)...uh let me give further definition....

As to why "no" is an assumption:

- Symbol use, ie letters...we take them as they are with little to no thought.
If that is what 'you' do, then that helps in explaining some of your responses. But just remember that 'I' am NOT 'you', so 'we' do NOT all do what 'you' assume and say 'we' do.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
- The actual word, we just assume we "know" what "no" means...but it is taken on little thought and very little is defined.
'you' keep assuming that 'you' "know" that 'we' just assume things, just like 'you' keep doing. 'you' appear to give no thought to how the words 'you', 'I', and 'we' are actually defined and mean.


The absurdity of ssuming that just because 'you' do some thing, then EVERY one else MUST also do the same thing, speaks for itself.

False, causal order. It is not because I do it or dont do it.

Assumption -> (All people € I)

"€" stands for "contains as an element" because of the iPad I am using.


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
- You are also assuming everyone else knows why I am wrong,
I NEVER assumed any such thing. So, your assumption is wrong again.

"You are wrong", or any variation, is dually subjective and objective. Subjective from the point of the observer, objective in the wrongness can be observed from the angle of the group.

Second, the fact the statement is readable to public necessitates a declarative stance conducive to the point above this one.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
and you are also assuming you have a complete non contradictory definition as to why you know...considering it is subjective on this case.
Once again I NEVER assumed any such thing. Each time you make these assumptions they are letting you down completely.

Good, then you can have a contradictory position that necessitates me being right as well.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
So...yeah (again sips coffee)...and to continue...


My proof is the "form" of my stance and your argument (which does great in justifying my stance), considering form is the most axiomatic state there is, it is what we assumed (beginning with base linearism and the point of awareness in all arguments) and how we assume form and assumption are inseperable as stated many times prior.


Apparently wisdom does not come with age....(sipping coffee).

But please go on and be clever, don't assume any of my responses have a respectful tone in them. You have to say something to save face...(sipping coffee)...yeahhh...

Oh yeah, you also forgot how to read as well...my responses where on page 4 first post which you seem to have failed to address respectively...
But because you already admitted that you did not and will not read what I wrote/write, you apparently have MISSED that those "examples" do NOT contain thee 'example', which I have been talking about.

And what specific example am I missing that you keep pushing?

State it here:


---------------------

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
So...(sipping coffee)...yeah...
Saying, "So...(sipping coffee)...yeah..." some may say sounds very similar to; "you are wrong because I said so...So, yeah".

Age
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:47 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:49 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:55 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am

Yeah when the arguments response is "you are wrong because I said so"...it just makes you look dumb...
But I NEVER said such thing. You assuming such a thing, and then saying it some might say that this makes you look dumb. But in all honesty to say such a thing would just be as stupid.

What I said and gave you was an example of 'what is not assumed'. You asked for it, so I gave it.

When you decide to discuss that, then lets do it?
Page 4 first post...reread it.
IF you were to read my last few posts I have been informing you that the example I have been referring to is NOT in those ones.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:49 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:55 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:51 am
Oh yeah, you also forgot how to read as well...my responses where on page 4 first post which you seem to have failed to address respectively...
But because you already admitted that you did not and will not read what I wrote/write, you apparently have MISSED that those "examples" do NOT contain thee 'example', which I have been talking about.
And what specific example am I missing that you keep pushing?

State it here:


---------------------
Okay. Finally, how many pages did that take for you to STOP insisting that you "knew" some thing, and finally just ask a clarifying question? If you just admitted that you did not know what the example was previously, we could have had this sorted out pages ago.

You would even absolutely agree that you never really knew, and were really only just assuming, but still you kept persisting as though you knew. Why would you do such a thing when your whole "theory/argument" is based on 'all is an assumption' and you continually making assumptions means that you could obviously be completely wrong, which you obviously were?

The evidence and proof of 'all of this' is here in your writings. I like to provide examples of how easy the brain misses the obvious, by showing why they do that, and, provide examples of how important asking clarifying questions is by showing what happens when they are not asked, and instead just assumptions are being made. Thank you for being an example, by providing such examples of these.

'you assume every thing'.

By the way, and contrary to your assumption, I did not fail to respectively address your responses at all. My actual address to your responses are even in the exact same post you referred us to.

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6056
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm

Age wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:47 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:49 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:55 am


But I NEVER said such thing. You assuming such a thing, and then saying it some might say that this makes you look dumb. But in all honesty to say such a thing would just be as stupid.

What I said and gave you was an example of 'what is not assumed'. You asked for it, so I gave it.

When you decide to discuss that, then lets do it?
Page 4 first post...reread it.
IF you were to read my last few posts I have been informing you that the example I have been referring to is NOT in those ones.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:49 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:55 am

But because you already admitted that you did not and will not read what I wrote/write, you apparently have MISSED that those "examples" do NOT contain thee 'example', which I have been talking about.
And what specific example am I missing that you keep pushing?

State it here:


---------------------
Okay. Finally, how many pages did that take for you to STOP insisting that you "knew" some thing, and finally just ask a clarifying question? If you just admitted that you did not know what the example was previously, we could have had this sorted out pages ago.

You would even absolutely agree that you never really knew, and were really only just assuming, but still you kept persisting as though you knew. Why would you do such a thing when your whole "theory/argument" is based on 'all is an assumption' and you continually making assumptions means that you could obviously be completely wrong, which you obviously were?

The evidence and proof of 'all of this' is here in your writings. I like to provide examples of how easy the brain misses the obvious, by showing why they do that, and, provide examples of how important asking clarifying questions is by showing what happens when they are not asked, and instead just assumptions are being made. Thank you for being an example, by providing such examples of these.

'you assume every thing'.

By the way, and contrary to your assumption, I did not fail to respectively address your responses at all. My actual address to your responses are even in the exact same post you referred us to.
(Sipping coffee)

On page four first post:

Age you state "example is" and "another example is" and I address them.

Then you claim I don't.

(Sipping coffee)

Then I claim if I am not addressing them, strictly just copy and past the examples provided and I will address them.

(Sipping coffee)

And you don't....

To which you argue your example is all of my writings.

Sipping coffee...

To which my response, in prior posts is proof os definition as form. All is assumed because all arguments are forms and form is completely assumed as form is taken as is. Arguments are points of observation which linearly and circularly (through a spiral) progress to further definition and maintain through self reference or dissolve (produce further assumptions).

Arguments thus are judged as form with form being assumed. This symbol: ⊙ is assumed because it is a form. We observe it and take it as is. This symbol is how arguments exist as it shows, but it not limited too, how the Munchausseen trillema operates. It also assumes infinity and finitenss, one and many, point/line/circle, monad/triad, quantity/quality, awareness and a variety of other phenomenon as a phenomenon.

(Sipping coffee).

Constantly point to my writings as an example of why I am wrong, and your stance of not all is assumed...is not only an assumption but effectively further necessitates all false assumptions are strictly just disconnected assumptions which are still assumed.

(Drops mic...sips coffee).

Age
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:13 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:47 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:49 pm


Page 4 first post...reread it.
IF you were to read my last few posts I have been informing you that the example I have been referring to is NOT in those ones.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:49 pm

And what specific example am I missing that you keep pushing?

State it here:


---------------------
Okay. Finally, how many pages did that take for you to STOP insisting that you "knew" some thing, and finally just ask a clarifying question? If you just admitted that you did not know what the example was previously, we could have had this sorted out pages ago.

You would even absolutely agree that you never really knew, and were really only just assuming, but still you kept persisting as though you knew. Why would you do such a thing when your whole "theory/argument" is based on 'all is an assumption' and you continually making assumptions means that you could obviously be completely wrong, which you obviously were?

The evidence and proof of 'all of this' is here in your writings. I like to provide examples of how easy the brain misses the obvious, by showing why they do that, and, provide examples of how important asking clarifying questions is by showing what happens when they are not asked, and instead just assumptions are being made. Thank you for being an example, by providing such examples of these.

'you assume every thing'.

By the way, and contrary to your assumption, I did not fail to respectively address your responses at all. My actual address to your responses are even in the exact same post you referred us to.
(Sipping coffee)

On page four first post:

Age you state "example is" and "another example is" and I address them.

Then you claim I don't.
I NEVER made any such claim at all.

Your assumptions really are letting you down.

I NEVER claimed that you did not address those examples.

I have claimed that you missed thee example that I was referring to. I also showed how the brain MISSES things, which it does not want to see nor recognize.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
(Sipping coffee)

Then I claim if I am not addressing them, strictly just copy and past the examples provided and I will address them.

(Sipping coffee)

And you don't....
Because you said you already knew which example I was referring to.

I asked you that if you already knew, then which example are you referring to? As of yet you have failed to provide that example.

I inferred that you MISSED it.

You never acknowledged that you had missed it, or even that you could have missed it. You said, however, that you had not missed it. So, I have just been waiting.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
To which you argue your example is all of my writings.

Sipping coffee...
Did I?

Are you able to point us to any actual 'argument' that I have formulated here?

All I have really done is just to provide an example of what you asked for, which was; "Give me an example of something that is not assumed ...".

So I did.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
To which my response, in prior posts is proof os definition as form. All is assumed because all arguments are forms and form is completely assumed as form is taken as is. Arguments are points of observation which linearly and circularly (through a spiral) progress to further definition and maintain through self reference or dissolve (produce further assumptions).

Arguments thus are judged as form with form being assumed. This symbol: ⊙ is assumed because it is a form. We observe it and take it as is. This symbol is how arguments exist as it shows, but it not limited too, how the Munchausseen trillema operates. It also assumes infinity and finitenss, one and many, point/line/circle, monad/triad, quantity/quality, awareness and a variety of other phenomenon as a phenomenon.

(Sipping coffee).

Constantly point to my writings as an example of why I am wrong, and your stance of not all is assumed...is not only an assumption but effectively further necessitates all false assumptions are strictly just disconnected assumptions which are still assumed.

(Drops mic...sips coffee).
And, because you have already informed us that you do not read what I write you may have MISSED where I said that I agree wholeheartedly with you.

Did you MISS that one as well?

So, do you KNOW what example that I have been referring to, and, are you AWARE that I have already agreed with you?

Now, your honest answers would be most welcomed.

Also, you appear to be flustered and frustrated with my stance. But, like ALL assumptions are to me, this appearance could be completely and utterly WRONG.

By the way, why do you tell us what you are doing while you are writing?

Do you feel somehow more superior doing that, or do you just want us to know what you are doing, and thus do not want us to assume any thing at all regarding this? Or, is there some other reason you do it?

surreptitious57
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by surreptitious57 » Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:42 am

Age wrote:
By the way why do you tell us what you are doing while you are writing ?

Do you feel somehow more superior doing that or do you just want us to know what you are doing and
thus do not want us to assume any thing at all regarding this ? Or is there some other reason you do it ?
[ drops mic ] means that your argument has been comprehensively demolished and so there is nothing more to say
Whether it has actually been demolished is another matter entirely but from his perspective it most definitely has

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6056
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:59 pm

Age wrote:
Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:13 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:47 am


IF you were to read my last few posts I have been informing you that the example I have been referring to is NOT in those ones.




Okay. Finally, how many pages did that take for you to STOP insisting that you "knew" some thing, and finally just ask a clarifying question? If you just admitted that you did not know what the example was previously, we could have had this sorted out pages ago.

You would even absolutely agree that you never really knew, and were really only just assuming, but still you kept persisting as though you knew. Why would you do such a thing when your whole "theory/argument" is based on 'all is an assumption' and you continually making assumptions means that you could obviously be completely wrong, which you obviously were?

The evidence and proof of 'all of this' is here in your writings. I like to provide examples of how easy the brain misses the obvious, by showing why they do that, and, provide examples of how important asking clarifying questions is by showing what happens when they are not asked, and instead just assumptions are being made. Thank you for being an example, by providing such examples of these.

'you assume every thing'.

By the way, and contrary to your assumption, I did not fail to respectively address your responses at all. My actual address to your responses are even in the exact same post you referred us to.
(Sipping coffee)

On page four first post:

Age you state "example is" and "another example is" and I address them.

Then you claim I don't.
I NEVER made any such claim at all.

"another example is there are thoughts existing.

"Another is"....

and it just goes on.


Page 4.


Your assumptions really are letting you down.

I NEVER claimed that you did not address those examples.

I have claimed that you missed thee example that I was referring to. I also showed how the brain MISSES things, which it does not want to see nor recognize.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
(Sipping coffee)

Then I claim if I am not addressing them, strictly just copy and past the examples provided and I will address them.

(Sipping coffee)

And you don't....
Because you said you already knew which example I was referring to.

I asked you that if you already knew, then which example are you referring to? As of yet you have failed to provide that example.

I inferred that you MISSED it.

You never acknowledged that you had missed it, or even that you could have missed it. You said, however, that you had not missed it. So, I have just been waiting.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
To which you argue your example is all of my writings.

Sipping coffee...
Did I?

Are you able to point us to any actual 'argument' that I have formulated here?

All I have really done is just to provide an example of what you asked for, which was; "Give me an example of something that is not assumed ...".

So I did.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:51 pm
To which my response, in prior posts is proof os definition as form. All is assumed because all arguments are forms and form is completely assumed as form is taken as is. Arguments are points of observation which linearly and circularly (through a spiral) progress to further definition and maintain through self reference or dissolve (produce further assumptions).

Arguments thus are judged as form with form being assumed. This symbol: ⊙ is assumed because it is a form. We observe it and take it as is. This symbol is how arguments exist as it shows, but it not limited too, how the Munchausseen trillema operates. It also assumes infinity and finitenss, one and many, point/line/circle, monad/triad, quantity/quality, awareness and a variety of other phenomenon as a phenomenon.

(Sipping coffee).

Constantly point to my writings as an example of why I am wrong, and your stance of not all is assumed...is not only an assumption but effectively further necessitates all false assumptions are strictly just disconnected assumptions which are still assumed.

(Drops mic...sips coffee).
And, because you have already informed us that you do not read what I write you may have MISSED where I said that I agree wholeheartedly with you.

Did you MISS that one as well?

So, do you KNOW what example that I have been referring to, and, are you AWARE that I have already agreed with you?

Now, your honest answers would be most welcomed.

Also, you appear to be flustered and frustrated with my stance. But, like ALL assumptions are to me, this appearance could be completely and utterly WRONG.

By the way, why do you tell us what you are doing while you are writing?

Do you feel somehow more superior doing that, or do you just want us to know what you are doing, and thus do not want us to assume any thing at all regarding this? Or, is there some other reason you do it?
After the example dilemma I did not bother reading the rest.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests