The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
Age, no matter what I say to you doesn’t matter anymore because nothing I say ever makes sense anyway, so on that note, I’m out of this discussion, in fact I’m done talking to you ever again period.
You will not get a response from me ever again, besides nothing I say makes sense anyway, and I know that, and I’m ok with that, so I will just continue making no sense, and I am not going to care what other people think or say about my nonsense.
I’m just going to continue talking nonsense because well, that’s what I like to do.
Its always a big mistake when ever I engage talking to others, so I’m going to stop doing that from now on. I know self so I do not have to prove or explain what I know to anyone but myself, and that’s all I’m doing anyway.
You will not get a response from me ever again, besides nothing I say makes sense anyway, and I know that, and I’m ok with that, so I will just continue making no sense, and I am not going to care what other people think or say about my nonsense.
I’m just going to continue talking nonsense because well, that’s what I like to do.
Its always a big mistake when ever I engage talking to others, so I’m going to stop doing that from now on. I know self so I do not have to prove or explain what I know to anyone but myself, and that’s all I’m doing anyway.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
But you KNOW 'nothing'.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 4:32 pmNo, I wont explain what you ask me to explain, just as I have never asked you to to explain this. Not that I ever would because I'm simply not interested in another persons explanation of NONDUAL SELF. I already KNOW.
So, to you, asking OPEN clarifying questions on a philosophy forum is being disrespectful. Noted. But that will NOT stop me asking you OPEN clarifying questions, to you.
I could say something also, like; NOT being forthcoming in answering OPEN clarifying questions, especially after claiming to KNOW some thing, is "just so disrespectful of you. But I will NOT because of the absurdity, stupidity AND ridiculousness if I did so.
As I said previously you can inform me as many times as you like. But this only detracts from your continually changing and contradicting ways. Seriously EVERY time I challenge, detraction AND contradiction appear. This is because "dontaskme" is the MOST unknowing one I have ever met.
LOL I have NEVER met someone so STUCK in humanhood as the ones known as "dontaskme" and "veritas aequtas".
I do NOT have a BELIEF. And 'you' ask me how many times things have to be repeated.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
This claim now that there is no one or thing making a claim can NOT be backed up NOR supported. Therefore this claim is about as WRONG as one can be.
ANY claim could be claimed an infinite amount of times. But if it can not backed up NOR supported, then it can NOT be backed up NOR supported. If a claim can NOT be backed up NOR supported, then WHY repeat it.
Also, the STUPIDITY of some ONE asking how many times does "another" want the claim, which that ONE IS MAKING, to PROVE that there is NO ONE making a claim is about as STUPID as any thing could get.
That is one way of ALWAYS being RIGHT.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 4:20 pmChallenge all you want, if that's the game you want to play, it's of no interest to me, for I don't have any interest in playing that game, I've kind of moved out of that dull place a long time ago, now all I do is just enjoy talking to myself unchallenged.
.
Just seems like a contradiction, in and of itself, to come to a philosophy forum and talking but having absolutely NO interest in being challenged.
Seems like a lot of effort and ridiculousness writing here, in a philosophy forum, and replying to words, if one really just enjoys talking to one's own self "unchallenged". From what I can SEE there is a hell of a lot of dishonesty going on here.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
No one cares about other people’s opinions, they care only for their own.
Especially when it comes to the actual premise behind the title of this thread.
Debating others is a waste of energy and time, when all ones real aim is to
to attempt to win over the other debater to their side of the argument.
It’s the sickness of the human mind. It’s such a stupid game. One that loves to play. As that is so plainly evidenced. Everyone loves the sound of their own voice including mine.
Just saying...the obvious.
Especially when it comes to the actual premise behind the title of this thread.
Debating others is a waste of energy and time, when all ones real aim is to
to attempt to win over the other debater to their side of the argument.
It’s the sickness of the human mind. It’s such a stupid game. One that loves to play. As that is so plainly evidenced. Everyone loves the sound of their own voice including mine.
Just saying...the obvious.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
This is one way to go unchallenged.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 4:39 pmThere is no such real character as Dontaskme, it's a fiction, so no claimer, nor blamer, no one to claim fame or be blamed for what doesn't exist except as an imagined character.Age wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 4:06 pm
So, on that note, 'you', the human being known as "dontaskme", is a follower and BELIEVER of the dual life.
Obviously if there is a "my life" and a "your life", which you just stated there IS, then this is in direct contradiction of a 'nondual life and thee nondual Self'.
The One True Self, of which 'you' obviously are NOT, obviously cares about what goes on and in the One and ONLY Life.
Whenever challenged as to why 'you' wrote some thing down, just say there is no (real) thing writing any thing down. Words just magically appear. That way this one could NEVER be questioned over what is written down under the identity to which they answer to.
Well that was the words under the name "dontaskme". They certainly were NOT the words under the name "age".
And, IF there is NO self, which you like to say when you are challenged and questioned, then WHY ask how many time 'you' (that self) wants to inform?
Either the 'you' informs using words or there is no 'you' and words just appear.
How could it be that so many times the words under the same label have so many obvious and blatant STUPID, ABSURD and RIDICULOUS contradictions?
Once again, the words under the label "donataskme" are just completely and utterly WRONG. It is just that SIMPLE.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
Who and/or what is this 'God' thing, which is being thanked here?
Sounds like such a relief, for 'you', NOT having to do what is IMPOSSIBLE for you?
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
We will see.
Sounds like a fair bit of dishonesty here.
If that is what you Truly like to do, then enjoy. But I suspect this may NOT be the real Truth of things.
But you told us you are NOT talking to "others" as it is only the self that is being talked to.
But WHY do it here, in a philosophy forum, with "others"?
By the way WHY is so hard for 'you' to just accept that just maybe there is another way that might be simpler and easier to say what it is that I am 'trying to' say here?
What is it that 'you' fear losing?
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
Your replies to me are alien to my own understanding, so I'm telling you now, I do not relate to what is alien to my own understanding so it's goodbye AGE, please show some respect and accept that I have no more desire to engage with what is alien to my own understanding.
.
.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
This is NOT true at all.
It only takes one who cares about "other" people's opinions for this claim to be absolutely FALSE.
What IS the actual premise behind the title of this thread?
I NEVER did even understand what the title was saying.
I have been saying this since before I came to this forum.
The whole premise behind 'debating', of picking a side and fighting, "to the death", for that "side" is beyond ridiculousness. Especially considering in Life there is NO "sides".
Also, 'philosophy' itself has NOTHING to do with debating anyway.
There is NO human "mind". Debating is just a drawback from a seemingly never changing "education system". Human beings just teach what they were taught, and debating is just another one of those things schooled and which is believed to be a good thing to learn.
Debating is just a learned behavior, and as such it can also just be unlearned.
Or, this could be just another one of those tales, which are just believed to be true, but actually are NOT.
Does absolutely EVERY one actually "love" the sound of their own voice?
Or is it just one of those things we are TOLD is true, and so just end up believing it IS true?
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 6:11 pm Your replies to me are alien to my own understanding, so I'm telling you now, I do not relate to what is alien to my own understanding so it's goodbye AGE, please show some respect and accept that I have no more desire to engage with what is alien to my own understanding.
.
I have ALREADY ACCEPTED that you have no more desire, at this moment, to engage with me. But HOW do I, to you, "show some respect"?
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
Good then stop talking to me.
You can't show respect, no more than you can show up to your own show, ok, hope that clears this up now, so now can you please go away as I cannot tolerate what is alien to my own understanding.
.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
But that is 'your' desire, not MINE.
And considering that 'you' are a no self, talking to a nondual self, and the nondual Self wants to keep informing that there is a much easier way to explain 'that' what 'you' are 'trying to' explain, then although 'you' want to keep talking but not engage, 'you' unfortunately will HAVE TO engage.
The more that is claimed, which is obviously WRONG, then the more thee nondual Self will inform you of this in Its own way.
So, 'you' say to me, "please show some respect", but when I ask you to clarify how I do this, 'you' then tell me that actually I can NOT do it anyway.
Once again, very contradictory and confusing use of words appear under the label "dontaskme".
There is now no wonder why what is written under other labels appears alien to 'you'. 'you' appear totally confused 'trying to' "justify" those already HELD BELIEFS, any thing else would be even more alien, from that confused perspective.
'you' can NOT even explain your own understanding, so really that is even alien to you. Therefore, understanding any thing else must be even far more alien to that wrong understanding of yours.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
The REAL truth about reality is that it is NONDUAL...which means the ''identified self'' the one believed to exist as the name dictates is an illusion.
'' The paradoxes of nondual conversations: articulate contradictions
When we begin to speak from no-mind it is inevitable that paradoxes and contradictions will creep into our conversations. They arise when we describe unconditioned mind with any real accuracy and precision. One of the most obvious paradoxes is that the unconditioned mind is simultaneously something and nothing. It is because it isn’t.
Communicating fluently and naturally in paradoxes is the most difficult aspect to acquire. Somehow we need to make a leap of faith and be willing to articulately contradict ourselves in a totally up-front and confident way. If someone says to us that we’ve just contradicted ourselves we need to be able to say; “Yes, that’s right. I have. Because that is how it is. There’s no other way to accurately describe this state.”
At a certain point we betray the experience of the unconditioned if we aren’t willing to say that the unconditioned mind is because it isn’t; that it’s totally unrelated to our conditioned existence but indistinguishable from it; that it can’t be lost or gained, yet it repeatedly arises and disappears.
India’s most celebrated and “rational” philosopher, Nagarjuna, had no problem speaking paradoxically.
''It is unceasing yet unborn, annihilated yet not permanent, neither coming into or going out (of existence), without distinction, without identity, relatively arisen and free of conceptual constructions.''
When our thoughts are born at the point where the conceptual touches the nonconceptual we are compelled to use paradox, negation and absurdity. It's unavoidable.
.
'' The paradoxes of nondual conversations: articulate contradictions
When we begin to speak from no-mind it is inevitable that paradoxes and contradictions will creep into our conversations. They arise when we describe unconditioned mind with any real accuracy and precision. One of the most obvious paradoxes is that the unconditioned mind is simultaneously something and nothing. It is because it isn’t.
Communicating fluently and naturally in paradoxes is the most difficult aspect to acquire. Somehow we need to make a leap of faith and be willing to articulately contradict ourselves in a totally up-front and confident way. If someone says to us that we’ve just contradicted ourselves we need to be able to say; “Yes, that’s right. I have. Because that is how it is. There’s no other way to accurately describe this state.”
At a certain point we betray the experience of the unconditioned if we aren’t willing to say that the unconditioned mind is because it isn’t; that it’s totally unrelated to our conditioned existence but indistinguishable from it; that it can’t be lost or gained, yet it repeatedly arises and disappears.
India’s most celebrated and “rational” philosopher, Nagarjuna, had no problem speaking paradoxically.
''It is unceasing yet unborn, annihilated yet not permanent, neither coming into or going out (of existence), without distinction, without identity, relatively arisen and free of conceptual constructions.''
When our thoughts are born at the point where the conceptual touches the nonconceptual we are compelled to use paradox, negation and absurdity. It's unavoidable.
.
Re: The problem with religious critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate.
ALREADY KNOWN.
So WHY do 'you', human beings, believe such things as this?
I have been continuing explaining the stupidity of believing things.
Obviously that little 'self' exists, it just is NOT r
Thee real True Self. When you learn and Know HOW to distinguish between the two, then you will STOP saying some of the completely ridiculous AND contradictory things that you do.
But it does NOT have to be this way.
You believing that it has to be this way causes this to happen.
ALL OF THIS can be explained very simply in ways that can be very easily understood.
In the days of when this is written when 'you', human beings, speak from the thinking, then those contradictions, which are extremely common under the label "dontaskme" do appear. But they do NOT have to when a much better way is used
They occur because 'you', human beings, still have a LOT mire to learn and understand about how the Mind and the brain actually work.
This is stupidity at its highest level.
You could prove me wrong by explaining what that statement actually means. But you have already confessed in that you know NOTHING.
By the way, when 'you' start using words logically with the right and proper definitions, then EVERY thing becomes very easy and very simple to explain and understand.
If this is what you BELIEVE, then this is what WILL BE.
This is just a "self-justification" for being TOTALLY and UTTERLY CONFUSED.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:13 am Somehow we need to make a leap of faith and be willing to articulately contradict ourselves in a totally up-front and confident way. If someone says to us that we’ve just contradicted ourselves we need to be able to say; “Yes, that’s right. I have. Because that is how it is. There’s no other way to accurately describe this state.”
THERE is a very simple AND very easy way to accurately explain ALL OF THIS.
You are just too CLOSED and too BLIND to SEE IT and LEARN IT
Always being able to distinguish between thee Knowing Mind and the thinking brain is a very simple and very easy thing to do indeed.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:13 amAt a certain point we betray the experience of the unconditioned if we aren’t willing to say that the unconditioned mind is because it isn’t; that it’s totally unrelated to our conditioned existence but indistinguishable from it; that it can’t be lost or gained, yet it repeatedly arises and disappears.
Here is another example of a human being following, praising, and worshipping "another", yet they profess to a nondual life.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:13 amIndia’s most celebrated and “rational” philosopher, Nagarjuna, had no problem speaking paradoxically.
''It is unceasing yet unborn, annihilated yet not permanent, neither coming into or going out (of existence), without distinction, without identity, relatively arisen and free of conceptual constructions.''
Lol "self-justification" is a truly amazing thing to observe.
ALL OF THIS can be explained AND understood FULLY in completely noncontradictory ways. Life REALLY IS just, simple AND easy.