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

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:07 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
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
Okay, thanks for that.

I wonder what "argument" they think or believe I actually made?

I do not see that by just providing an example of what was asked for constitutes an 'argument'. Although an example could comprehensively demolish a whole so called "argument". To me, an example is not an 'argument'.

By the way, do you by any chance know what '(sipping coffee)' means?

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:30 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
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


(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.
You continually not reading all of what I say could very well help in explaining WHY you keep MISSING things I write here, like for example; Thee example I provided and have been talking about, as well as, that I have already agreed with you.

Also, was that a "dilemma" or a "trilemma"? After all, to 'you', absolutely every thing revolves around in circles in some so called "trilemma problem" anyway, correct?

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5123
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:59 am

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:30 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:59 pm
Age wrote:
Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:13 am


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.



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.



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.



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.
You continually not reading all of what I say could very well help in explaining WHY you keep MISSING things I write here, like for example; Thee example I provided and have been talking about, as well as, that I have already agreed with you.

Also, was that a "dilemma" or a "trilemma"? After all, to 'you', absolutely every thing revolves around in circles in some so called "trilemma problem" anyway, correct?
Sipping coffee...

You are absolute right, I do not bother reading all you have to say....

Sipping coffee....

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 2:07 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:59 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:30 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:59 pm

After the example dilemma I did not bother reading the rest.
You continually not reading all of what I say could very well help in explaining WHY you keep MISSING things I write here, like for example; Thee example I provided and have been talking about, as well as, that I have already agreed with you.

Also, was that a "dilemma" or a "trilemma"? After all, to 'you', absolutely every thing revolves around in circles in some so called "trilemma problem" anyway, correct?
Sipping coffee...

You are absolute right, I do not bother reading all you have to say....

Sipping coffee....
Thus your lack of understanding and knowing.

'Sipping coffee' could also mean it is one way of deflecting away from having to respond to 'that' what you inevitably can not refute any way.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5123
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:11 am

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 2:07 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:59 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:30 am


You continually not reading all of what I say could very well help in explaining WHY you keep MISSING things I write here, like for example; Thee example I provided and have been talking about, as well as, that I have already agreed with you.

Also, was that a "dilemma" or a "trilemma"? After all, to 'you', absolutely every thing revolves around in circles in some so called "trilemma problem" anyway, correct?
Sipping coffee...

You are absolute right, I do not bother reading all you have to say....

Sipping coffee....
Thus your lack of understanding and knowing.

'Sipping coffee' could also mean it is one way of deflecting away from having to respond to 'that' what you inevitably can not refute any way.
(Sipping coffee)...you have alot of disconnected assumptions...(sipping coffee)...sipping coffee means sipping coffee (sipping coffee)...

Arabica beans = taste of 3rd world despair

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:12 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:11 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 2:07 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:59 am

Sipping coffee...

You are absolute right, I do not bother reading all you have to say....

Sipping coffee....
Thus your lack of understanding and knowing.

'Sipping coffee' could also mean it is one way of deflecting away from having to respond to 'that' what you inevitably can not refute any way.
(Sipping coffee)...you have alot of disconnected assumptions...
If this is known, then NOT every thing is assumed. Therefore there is NO actual "trilemma problem" at all.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:11 am
(sipping coffee)...sipping coffee means sipping coffee (sipping coffee)...

Arabica beans = taste of 3rd world despair
This says and shows a lot about one's attitude.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5123
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:12 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:11 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 2:07 am


Thus your lack of understanding and knowing.

'Sipping coffee' could also mean it is one way of deflecting away from having to respond to 'that' what you inevitably can not refute any way.
(Sipping coffee)...you have alot of disconnected assumptions...
If this is known, then NOT every thing is assumed. Therefore there is NO actual "trilemma problem" at all.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:11 am
(sipping coffee)...sipping coffee means sipping coffee (sipping coffee)...

Arabica beans = taste of 3rd world despair
This says and shows a lot about one's attitude.
(Sipping coffee)...I think atla needs coffee too.

Assuming is knowing...

(Sipping coffee)

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:56 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:12 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:11 am

(Sipping coffee)...you have alot of disconnected assumptions...
If this is known, then NOT every thing is assumed. Therefore there is NO actual "trilemma problem" at all.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:11 am
(sipping coffee)...sipping coffee means sipping coffee (sipping coffee)...

Arabica beans = taste of 3rd world despair
This says and shows a lot about one's attitude.
(Sipping coffee)...I think atla needs coffee too.
Okay. You might, however, find, and contrary to popular belief, that no one "needs" coffee.

Like 'you', they only 'want' coffee.

But, as history has proven many times, 'popular belief' is very often completely and utterly WRONG.

Also, I am not sure why an "atla" was brought up here now, nor what an "atla" has to do with this thread, but I do not really care anyway.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am
Assuming is knowing...

(Sipping coffee)
That is what 'you' assume, 'assuming' is.

Some would say 'assuming' is assuming, whereas 'knowing' is knowing.

These are two, obviously, very distinctly different things to some human beings. But they are, obviously, the exact same thing, to 'you'.

This is obviously because if they were not the exact same thing, then your argument/theory would not work.

Changing the definitions of words, is a little trick some human beings (unintentionally?) try to use, to try and make their own beliefs/arguments/theories work logically. But, unfortunately, this trick just does not ever work successfully. When people try to 'trick' "others" they eventually get caught out.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5123
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:56 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:12 am


If this is known, then NOT every thing is assumed. Therefore there is NO actual "trilemma problem" at all.



This says and shows a lot about one's attitude.
(Sipping coffee)...I think atla needs coffee too.
Okay. You might, however, find, and contrary to popular belief, that no one "needs" coffee.

Like 'you', they only 'want' coffee.

But, as history has proven many times, 'popular belief' is very often completely and utterly WRONG.

Also, I am not sure why an "atla" was brought up here now, nor what an "atla" has to do with this thread, but I do not really care anyway.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am
Assuming is knowing...

(Sipping coffee)
That is what 'you' assume, 'assuming' is.

Some would say 'assuming' is assuming, whereas 'knowing' is knowing.

These are two, obviously, very distinctly different things to some human beings. But they are, obviously, the exact same thing, to 'you'.

This is obviously because if they were not the exact same thing, then your argument/theory would not work.

Changing the definitions of words, is a little trick some human beings (unintentionally?) try to use, to try and make their own beliefs/arguments/theories work logically. But, unfortunately, this trick just does not ever work successfully. When people try to 'trick' "others" they eventually get caught out.
Sipping coffee...

We assume reality, it imprints us, these imprints form our perspective and these perspectives give us the identity through which we assume further reality. Assumption and knowing are inseperable.

People fail not because of assuming, but because they fail to assume. When we observe reality we assume it. To not assume is to not observe.

People fail for not assuming enough of reality, this leaves a disconnect between assumptions.

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:16 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:56 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am

(Sipping coffee)...I think atla needs coffee too.
Okay. You might, however, find, and contrary to popular belief, that no one "needs" coffee.

Like 'you', they only 'want' coffee.

But, as history has proven many times, 'popular belief' is very often completely and utterly WRONG.

Also, I am not sure why an "atla" was brought up here now, nor what an "atla" has to do with this thread, but I do not really care anyway.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:14 am
Assuming is knowing...

(Sipping coffee)
That is what 'you' assume, 'assuming' is.

Some would say 'assuming' is assuming, whereas 'knowing' is knowing.

These are two, obviously, very distinctly different things to some human beings. But they are, obviously, the exact same thing, to 'you'.

This is obviously because if they were not the exact same thing, then your argument/theory would not work.

Changing the definitions of words, is a little trick some human beings (unintentionally?) try to use, to try and make their own beliefs/arguments/theories work logically. But, unfortunately, this trick just does not ever work successfully. When people try to 'trick' "others" they eventually get caught out.
Sipping coffee...
IF 'sipping coffee' MEANS sipping coffee, then WHERE IS the assumption?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
We assume reality, it imprints us, these imprints form our perspective and these perspectives give us the identity through which we assume further reality. Assumption and knowing are inseperable.
To you, obviously. But, 'assumption' and 'knowing' are NOT inseparable, to EVERY one, which is also completely obvious.

If you are incapable of defining the word 'assuming' and the word 'knowing' separately, then that is a dysfunction of 'you'. It is not proof that those two obviously different words, with obviously different meanings, are incapable of being separated.

You just CHOOSE to not separate them, and again this is not proof that they are inseparable.

How 'you' CHOOSE to look at and see things is NOT proof of any thing. Understood?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
People fail not because of assuming, but because they fail to assume.
People fail 'what' exactly?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
When we observe reality we assume it.
OF COURSE. This is what human beings do. Did you MISS the part where I said I agree with you wholeheartedly?

But just because 'you', adult human beings, do that, sometimes, does NOT mean that EVERY one does it.

If I knew you read what I wrote, then I would ask are you at all able to understand this? But I do NOT know, so then I will not.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
To not assume is to not observe.
Another assumption, which, to some, is OBVIOUSLY WRONG.

I can CERTAINLY observe, without assuming. In fact I am doing it right HERE and NOW.

Lots of other human beings can do this as well. In fact ALL human beings, once upon a time, observed without assuming.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
People fail for not assuming enough of reality, this leaves a disconnect between assumptions.
This is YOUR assumption, which obviously could be WRONG.

To me, there is only ONE thing that can be KNOWN, FOR SURE, without ANY assumption what so ever. Therefore, absolutely every thing else could just be assuming. But obviously if there is ONE thing that is NOT assumed, then 'NOT all is assumed'. Contrary to YOUR BELIEF.

You can say ALL you like and NOT listen to, or question or challenge any one, nor any thing else, other than what you already assume and believe is true, but by doing that, does that make one's assumptions correct?

If you are NOT open to the 'fact' that you could be WRONG, then that says more about 'you' then it does about your "theory/argument".

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5123
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:08 am

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:16 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:56 am


Okay. You might, however, find, and contrary to popular belief, that no one "needs" coffee.

Like 'you', they only 'want' coffee.

But, as history has proven many times, 'popular belief' is very often completely and utterly WRONG.

Also, I am not sure why an "atla" was brought up here now, nor what an "atla" has to do with this thread, but I do not really care anyway.



That is what 'you' assume, 'assuming' is.

Some would say 'assuming' is assuming, whereas 'knowing' is knowing.

These are two, obviously, very distinctly different things to some human beings. But they are, obviously, the exact same thing, to 'you'.

This is obviously because if they were not the exact same thing, then your argument/theory would not work.

Changing the definitions of words, is a little trick some human beings (unintentionally?) try to use, to try and make their own beliefs/arguments/theories work logically. But, unfortunately, this trick just does not ever work successfully. When people try to 'trick' "others" they eventually get caught out.
Sipping coffee...
IF 'sipping coffee' MEANS sipping coffee, then WHERE IS the assumption?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
We assume reality, it imprints us, these imprints form our perspective and these perspectives give us the identity through which we assume further reality. Assumption and knowing are inseperable.
To you, obviously. But, 'assumption' and 'knowing' are NOT inseparable, to EVERY one, which is also completely obvious.

If you are incapable of defining the word 'assuming' and the word 'knowing' separately, then that is a dysfunction of 'you'. It is not proof that those two obviously different words, with obviously different meanings, are incapable of being separated.

You just CHOOSE to not separate them, and again this is not proof that they are inseparable.

How 'you' CHOOSE to look at and see things is NOT proof of any thing. Understood?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
People fail not because of assuming, but because they fail to assume.
People fail 'what' exactly?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
When we observe reality we assume it.
OF COURSE. This is what human beings do. Did you MISS the part where I said I agree with you wholeheartedly?

But just because 'you', adult human beings, do that, sometimes, does NOT mean that EVERY one does it.

If I knew you read what I wrote, then I would ask are you at all able to understand this? But I do NOT know, so then I will not.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
To not assume is to not observe.
Another assumption, which, to some, is OBVIOUSLY WRONG.

I can CERTAINLY observe, without assuming. In fact I am doing it right HERE and NOW.

Lots of other human beings can do this as well. In fact ALL human beings, once upon a time, observed without assuming.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
People fail for not assuming enough of reality, this leaves a disconnect between assumptions.
This is YOUR assumption, which obviously could be WRONG.

To me, there is only ONE thing that can be KNOWN, FOR SURE, without ANY assumption what so ever. Therefore, absolutely every thing else could just be assuming. But obviously if there is ONE thing that is NOT assumed, then 'NOT all is assumed'. Contrary to YOUR BELIEF.

You can say ALL you like and NOT listen to, or question or challenge any one, nor any thing else, other than what you already assume and believe is true, but by doing that, does that make one's assumptions correct?

If you are NOT open to the 'fact' that you could be WRONG, then that says more about 'you' then it does about your "theory/argument".
Sipping coffee...

Assumptions, you take your point of view and those of others "as is".

surreptitious57
Posts: 3672
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:58 am

Age wrote:
By the way do you by any chance know what ( sipping coffee ) means
Yes it simply means sipping coffee while patiently reading your words

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 11:48 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:58 am
Age wrote:
By the way do you by any chance know what ( sipping coffee ) means
Yes it simply means sipping coffee while patiently reading your words
We now then come back to my original question, which I asked that person; By the way why do you tell us what you are doing while you are writing ?

That person has already admitted that they do not read my words.

Age
Posts: 3832
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 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 11:58 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:08 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:16 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am

Sipping coffee...
IF 'sipping coffee' MEANS sipping coffee, then WHERE IS the assumption?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
We assume reality, it imprints us, these imprints form our perspective and these perspectives give us the identity through which we assume further reality. Assumption and knowing are inseperable.
To you, obviously. But, 'assumption' and 'knowing' are NOT inseparable, to EVERY one, which is also completely obvious.

If you are incapable of defining the word 'assuming' and the word 'knowing' separately, then that is a dysfunction of 'you'. It is not proof that those two obviously different words, with obviously different meanings, are incapable of being separated.

You just CHOOSE to not separate them, and again this is not proof that they are inseparable.

How 'you' CHOOSE to look at and see things is NOT proof of any thing. Understood?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
People fail not because of assuming, but because they fail to assume.
People fail 'what' exactly?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
When we observe reality we assume it.
OF COURSE. This is what human beings do. Did you MISS the part where I said I agree with you wholeheartedly?

But just because 'you', adult human beings, do that, sometimes, does NOT mean that EVERY one does it.

If I knew you read what I wrote, then I would ask are you at all able to understand this? But I do NOT know, so then I will not.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
To not assume is to not observe.
Another assumption, which, to some, is OBVIOUSLY WRONG.

I can CERTAINLY observe, without assuming. In fact I am doing it right HERE and NOW.

Lots of other human beings can do this as well. In fact ALL human beings, once upon a time, observed without assuming.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:22 am
People fail for not assuming enough of reality, this leaves a disconnect between assumptions.
This is YOUR assumption, which obviously could be WRONG.

To me, there is only ONE thing that can be KNOWN, FOR SURE, without ANY assumption what so ever. Therefore, absolutely every thing else could just be assuming. But obviously if there is ONE thing that is NOT assumed, then 'NOT all is assumed'. Contrary to YOUR BELIEF.

You can say ALL you like and NOT listen to, or question or challenge any one, nor any thing else, other than what you already assume and believe is true, but by doing that, does that make one's assumptions correct?

If you are NOT open to the 'fact' that you could be WRONG, then that says more about 'you' then it does about your "theory/argument".
Sipping coffee...

Assumptions, you take your point of view and those of others "as is".
And this is exactly WHY I do not like to make any assumptions at all.

If I were to make assumptions about points of views "as is", then I would not be open. If, and when, I am not fully open, then I am not able to see the actual and real Truth of things. I do not like to assume any thing is 'what IS'. Therefore, I make as few assumptions as I am able to consciously constantly be aware of.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5123
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 » Mon Aug 26, 2019 12:39 am

Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 11:58 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:08 am
Age wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:16 am


IF 'sipping coffee' MEANS sipping coffee, then WHERE IS the assumption?



To you, obviously. But, 'assumption' and 'knowing' are NOT inseparable, to EVERY one, which is also completely obvious.

If you are incapable of defining the word 'assuming' and the word 'knowing' separately, then that is a dysfunction of 'you'. It is not proof that those two obviously different words, with obviously different meanings, are incapable of being separated.

You just CHOOSE to not separate them, and again this is not proof that they are inseparable.

How 'you' CHOOSE to look at and see things is NOT proof of any thing. Understood?



People fail 'what' exactly?



OF COURSE. This is what human beings do. Did you MISS the part where I said I agree with you wholeheartedly?

But just because 'you', adult human beings, do that, sometimes, does NOT mean that EVERY one does it.

If I knew you read what I wrote, then I would ask are you at all able to understand this? But I do NOT know, so then I will not.



Another assumption, which, to some, is OBVIOUSLY WRONG.

I can CERTAINLY observe, without assuming. In fact I am doing it right HERE and NOW.

Lots of other human beings can do this as well. In fact ALL human beings, once upon a time, observed without assuming.



This is YOUR assumption, which obviously could be WRONG.

To me, there is only ONE thing that can be KNOWN, FOR SURE, without ANY assumption what so ever. Therefore, absolutely every thing else could just be assuming. But obviously if there is ONE thing that is NOT assumed, then 'NOT all is assumed'. Contrary to YOUR BELIEF.

You can say ALL you like and NOT listen to, or question or challenge any one, nor any thing else, other than what you already assume and believe is true, but by doing that, does that make one's assumptions correct?

If you are NOT open to the 'fact' that you could be WRONG, then that says more about 'you' then it does about your "theory/argument".
Sipping coffee...

Assumptions, you take your point of view and those of others "as is".
And this is exactly WHY I do not like to make any assumptions at all.

If I were to make assumptions about points of views "as is", then I would not be open. If, and when, I am not fully open, then I am not able to see the actual and real Truth of things. I do not like to assume any thing is 'what IS'. Therefore, I make as few assumptions as I am able to consciously constantly be aware of.
Sipping coffee...age you are assuming you are seeing the real truth of things. You claim reality is cold and cruel in some post, and when I make the most philosophically ruthless statement about reality that can be made (ie "it is all assumed")...you cry about it and say its untrue.

Get over it, and stop ruining all the threads...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest