you seem to be MISSING THE MARK, or JUST MISUNDERSTANDING, here.
Universal Consciousness
Re: Universal Consciousness
1. And who are they?Age wrote: ↑Thu Aug 10, 2023 8:37 amThe ones who read, OBVIOUSLY.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 10:04 pmAnd who are the reader(s)?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 22, 2023 12:00 pm
The 'reader/s' who can SEE that you have NOT ANSWERED the QUESTIONS.
If the 'can' word here was meant to mean 'an', then the ANSWER IS NO one.
I was just ASKING you ANOTHER CLARIFYING QUESTION, which, by the way, you just, ONCE AGAIN, 'tried to' DEFLECT AWAY FROM.
To SEE if you are OPEN and Honest, or NOT.
2. And why does me being open and honest matter to you?
Re: Universal Consciousness
So you want their names, individually, or smaller collective names. Either way 'they' can, and will, infirm you if 'they' could be bothered. Does it matter to you either way?
But it does NOT matter to me. I was just curious to see what you actually do and do not know, and how open and honest you really were.
Re: Universal Consciousness
1. Group perspective falls under the bandwagon fallacy.Age wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 10:06 pmSo you want their names, individually, or smaller collective names. Either way 'they' can, and will, infirm you if 'they' could be bothered. Does it matter to you either way?But it does NOT matter to me. I was just curious to see what you actually do and do not know, and how open and honest you really were.
2. So it does matter to you because of your curiosity?
Re: Universal Consciousness
SO, WHY did 'you' WANT 'the group's' names FOR, EXACTLY?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 7:44 pm1. Group perspective falls under the bandwagon fallacy.Age wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 10:06 pmSo you want their names, individually, or smaller collective names. Either way 'they' can, and will, infirm you if 'they' could be bothered. Does it matter to you either way?But it does NOT matter to me. I was just curious to see what you actually do and do not know, and how open and honest you really were.
But 'your' COMPLETE and UTTER INABILITY here to be JUST, OPEN, and Honest, is of NO REAL 'matter' to 'me', NOW, especially considering 'you' have ALREADY PROVED, IRREFUTABLY, True what I have SAID, and CLAIMED, ABOUT 'you', human beings, BACK, in the days when this WAS being written.
Re: Universal Consciousness
'It' does NOT necessarily MEAN ANY 'thing' AT ALL.
I JUST ANSWERED the ACTUAL QUESTION, which 'you' had posed, and had ASKED 'me' here.
'That' is WHAT 'that' ESSENTIALLY MEANS.