Religious Wars are born out of the BELIEF in Separation.

[Immanuel Can]

All truth is relative.

Is that "true"? Or is it only "true for you"?

If it's absolutely true, then it's false...because you said all truth is relative. But if it's only "relative" truth, then it's not true for anyone else. It's just true for you, which means false to everyone else.

You can't win by playing relativism. Epistemic relativism is logically self-defeating. QED.

And nobody cares about "your truth" or "my truth," because they are only our personal delusions, if they apply only to us.

I agree.

So....wait a minute.
You "agree" that "truth" is only your personal delusion? Because that's what I said. You want to argue that you are self-deluded?

Truth is within all of us, as jesus reminded us.

What quotation do you think you're referring to, there?

Then you won't be able to do it while exempting your own views from being subjected to reason, logic and evidence. If you continue to say that a viewpoint matters just because it's your own, you can't do philosophy.

But I can do philosophy, and so can you. That's what this forum is all about, it's about doing philosophy.

However, you're not doing it. Instead, you're shielding your views from reason, by claiming truth is relative. In that way, you're exempting yourself from the standards that philosophy uses in order to do its work. So that's not philosophy at all.

Then you're not participating in philosophy. You're just emoting.

No, I'm participating in philosophical disccusion. Stop telling me that I'm not doing what you think I should be doing, when I'm clearly doing what you think I'm not doing. You are not my dad so quit your patronising beak.

Sorry, you're missing the point completely. I'm trying to be helpful. I'm not dismissing you; I'm trying to help you redirect your efforts in a necessary way.

I fully realize you think you're doing philosophy. But I've got to tell you that by your own confession earlier, you're not. You're just doing gratuitous opinions, coupled with the excuse of epistemic relativism. A philosopher subjects his arguments to reason, evidence and logic, and opens them to critique. You show that you want to be free from critique, and claim there are no standards by which your views can be judged at all.

I can see why you'd imagine that, if that's all you know when you look inside. But I assure you, it's just not true.

You have no idea what I know.

I'm getting a really good idea, from what you're saying. All I have to do is believe you.

So I really don't care whether or not that meets with yours or anyone elses approval.

And yet, philosophy is a communal practice with communally-determined rules. So other people's agreement to participate in the specified ways (reason, evidence, logic, etc.) is essential.

I hate to tell you, but if you don't know that, you're not even in the "philosophy" game, even if you imagine you are.

And I don't find that, at present, you are yet in the habit of subjecting your own impressions to the kind of rigour that philosophy itself demands of them.

Well whatever that is supposed to mean, I mean here we go again, you are always coming out with all these weird and fancy sayings that I have absolutely no idea how to reply to them.

It's not actually all that obscure...if you were aware of what philosophy actually is.

the stuff I'm really into that is real and true philosophy, a kind of meta philosophy.

"Meta"? No, it's not really philosophy at all, it seems. It's merely the floating out of opinions, to see who (to use your word) "resonates" with them.

You're exempting them in the mistaken view the they have to be right for no more reason than that they are yours.

That's right, my philosophy comes straight from my own direct personal experience, you can't get more truthful than that.

Fine. No problem. But you then have to subject those views to rationality, examine them by logic, and consider the evidence for their reliability and truth. That's what philosophy does.

for every person is simply then locked inside his/her own confused subjectivity,

Not really, most people who post on philosophy forums are very open minded, I know I am.[/quote]
"Open minded" isn't the problem. What's the problem is your relativism. Open-mindedness plus relativism means that any idea can get into one's head, because one is not using any standard to screen illusions from truth, or good ideas from bad.

totally exempt from critique or discussion with anyone else. Is that how you would suppose it really is?

No, I have no reason to critic anyone here or argue, since each and every one of us can only know what they know so far. All we are doing is showing others what we know so far. We can only know what we know, and some know more than others.

But under relativism, "sharing" means nothing. Because remember that "truth" is merely relative and personal, and thus doesn't apply to more than one person, according to relativism. You can't "share" when nobody else can "get" anything from you.

I'm trying to show you in what way philosophy is different from mere feelings or imaginings, so you can join the program if you want.

I've already joined the program,

Apparently not. You "entered" something, but as someone who had a wrong idea about what "entering" here is for. Here, we do critique, logic, reasons, truth-seeking, argumentation, and debate. You came for something else, apparently, because you don't think any of that is even relevant or possible.

That's what relativism means. It means there's no common basis for conversation between people. There's no common grounds of truth.

You don't need to get crabby. I'm just taking what you told me about yourself seriously, and pointing out that it's not what philosophy is about. There's no reason you can't change your view if you wish...or not; but then, you won't be doing philosophy.

[Dontaskme]

IC...please stop talking to me ..you are starting to give me a headache...I’ve absolutely no idea what you are blabbering on about.

Me and you are done, I won’t be engaging with you anymore, you are just too complicated for my liking...goodbye.

.

[Immanuel Can]

IC...please stop talking to me

Okay.

Conversation's not something anybody can impose. Two people need to agree to do it.

If you're unhappy, then I'm fine with letting things stop there.

Be well.

[nothing]

Religious wars are born out of BELIEF period
as it takes any believer to believe evil is good.

KNOW all thus NOT to BELIEVE
tends towards all-knowing.
(circle expands indefinitely)

BELIEVE all thus NOT to KNOW
tends towards suffering/death.
(circle contracts indefinitely)

[Dontaskme]

Religious wars are born out of BELIEF period
as it takes any believer to believe evil is good.

I agree.

The believer is the knife of duality (a mental creation) when the non-conceptual nondual self conceptualises itself as other..artificially splitting itself in two.
This apparent duality is manifested as a ( separate self ) born out of what is always ( one-self ) a separate self that then seeks to defend that self.

That's basically all that's going on within the human brain. It believes there is an actual person inside it's head. Therefore all human wars are born out of that belief, which is a delusional fantasy and is the illusory dream of the human self-centred, selfish desire for self-preservation, this is the result of the thinking mind that evolution put there. Therefore it's no ones fault. But then there is also the default position of 'to be' or 'not to be'.

War is your own self creation. Where there is self there is other self.

.

[Age]

Religious wars are born out of BELIEF period
as it takes any believer to believe evil is good.

I agree.

The believer is the knife of duality (a mental creation) when the non-conceptual nondual self conceptualises itself as other..artificially splitting itself in two.
This apparent duality is manifested as a ( separate self ) born out of what is always ( one-self ) a separate self that then seeks to defend that self.

That's basically all that's going on within the human brain. It believes there is an actual person inside it's head. Therefore all human wars are born out of that belief, which is a delusional fantasy and is the illusory dream of the human self-centred, selfish desire for self-preservation, this is the result of the thinking mind that evolution put there. Therefore it's no ones fault. But then there is also the default position of 'to be' or 'not to be'.

War is your own self creation. Where there is self there is other self.

.

MORE EXAMPLES of WHY it is much better to NEVER believe any thing at all.