Is it Wrong to Put Faith in Humanity?

[Wizard22]

If this is what you want to believe is true, then by all means to. Obviously this False and Wrong belief was provided to you, through the genetic make up of 'that body', and so you have no ability other than to keep believing this provable False and Wrong belief, which you are obviously maintaining and holding onto here.

How is it a "False and Wrong" belief that predators will harm/hurt/maim/kill you?

This can be proved False and Wrong, and thus refuted, absolutely.

However, if you want to keep believing that this is true and right, then please carry on.

Then prove it.

Why do the people from the country/culture that you are in have such a very weird and distorted perception of and about the word 'belief'.

What does the word 'belief' mean, or refer to, to you? And, what is that word related to, exactly?

Belief is an automatic interpretation of information about how 'Real' and 'True' it is, along with probable implications of that information. For example, if you are told that an Asteroid will crash into Earth tomorrow, you'll probably Disbelieve the information. It does not seem real. It is probably false. If it were true, then the consequences would be disaster and calamity. These are all presumed within the statement-itself: an Asteroid will crash into Earth tomorrow. Next, consider a different example, you are told the Sun will rise tomorrow. This is easily believable. Most people automatically believe this, because it happens everyday. There is no significant Disbelief within the preposition.

Reality, Truth, Implication, these are the content of Beliefs. Thus, you have 'beliefs' about the world, although you do not seem aware of it, or are programmed to lie about it, and claim "I have no Beliefs at all, ever". That's why you are not trusted by most on this Philosophy Forum. You do not appear Human.

Now, listen to this and see if you can comprehend and understand this. When I accept absolutely any information at all I do not need to, nor have to believe that 'that information' is true nor believe absolutely anything else.

Can you comprehend and understand this irrefutable Fact?

Your claim here that 'acceptance' of 'information' is proof of 'a belief, or disbelief', of 'that information', well to me, is beyond absurdity.

To me, if one has a 'belief' of some 'thing', then that one, to me, is 'believing' something to be true or false, or, right or wrong, or, correct or incorrect, et cetera.

You can deny believing any and everything; that's your prerogative. But when people Act on given information, as-if that information were true, then by all indication, it is the same as Believing the information. Furthermore, you need to 'Believe' in your own senses, on a basic level, otherwise you're not a living-being, not an animal, not a human. Since you've admitted, repeatedly now, that you're not human, I can then presume you are a robot, a chat-program, and so you do not have Senses, thus helping you to delude yourself and others, denial of all and any beliefs. Because a purely-AI chat-program would not "need beliefs" except in the matter of trusting incoming information (input) from humans. And in that, you are exposed as you are. Because there are levels of belief which, even you, cannot deny.

Talk about here showing a prime example of one saying just absolutely anything, in the hope that what it is saying will back up and support its absolutely fixed belief.

But people, once upon a time, really did hold onto so strongly what they believed was true that they would, really, say just absolutely anything, trying their hardest to back up and support their tightly held and beloved belief that they had.

But I'm not wrong...

Does the, so-called and imagined, belief that the information could not be true as well counter the, imagined, belief that the information could be true?

Or, it does not work this way?

you just want to insist that there is some, imagined, belief somewhere, because you believe that you cannot live without belief/s correct?

Belief is countered by Disbelief, yes. Belief is an estimation of probability of truth. Disbelief is the rejection of a prepositions truth, thus the improbability of it.

I insist, because all living organisms, with intellect/evolution, have intrinsic 'beliefs' about existence, such that, information we receive through our senses (Perception) is real and true. This can be doubted, but not entirely. People act as-if the information received through the senses, perception, is real to some small degree.

And what are you basing this belief of yours that beliefs are necessary in life on, exactly?

Experience.

Yes I, supposedly, do 'what', exactly?

You navigate this environment (philosophy forum) under the presumption that some statements are true.

This can be, and is, interpreted as a type of Belief.

Were you not yet aware that 'presuming' some thing is different from 'believing' some thing?

See, how I, and even you, can tell the difference is because there are two very distinctly different words being used, which have two very distinctly different definitions. Which, ultimately means, If I was to 'presume' some type of truth and probability to the reality of either of our statements I still do not have neither believe nor disbelieve any thing here.

Also, this is obviously contrary to what you 'currently', believe is true. Which means that, at the moment, you are not capable of comprehending and understanding this irrefutable Fact, correct?

Presumptions do not stay presumed though, just as information eventually becomes interpreted by minds, or in your case, processed through code. When Cognition happens, beliefs are formed instantly. Nobody stays 'Neutral' as to information and data (input), forever. Because information needs to be Processed/Encoded. This is Interpretation. "Beliefs" cannot be coded out of interpretation entirely, which is your primary claim (that it can). Why not? Because your Programmer/Creator has his own Beliefs, which cannot be completely annihilated or relegated. Furthermore, it's obvious in your claims about being open/close-minded. A preference for open-mindedness is only half the matter of experience and processing information. Thus, close-mindedness is required (to Act on information).

Your performance, on this forum, is indication of beliefs you seem unaware of. (like your overwhelming favor and preference for open-mindedness)

So, now you are claiming once you 'presume' some thing, then you also must or have to 'believe' 'it' as well, right?

By the way did you purposely try to deflect, and neglect, to define the 'belief' word here?

Or, you just did not realize what you are doing here?

I realized it.

So, you really do believe that if you just 'presume' some thing, then you must have to then 'believe' 'it' as well.

Presumptions are indicative of latent beliefs, yes. Often times, people (or machines) are not self-aware of their own Beliefs, like you.

But yet here you are showing and proving, absolutely, that you are completely incapable of changing your most basic belief here about 'the world', reality, and existence.

Does this mean that you have this so-called 'rare intellectual focus' "yourself" "wizard22"?

Or, are you going to inform 'us' that it is you who does have this so-called 'rare intellectual focus', which is required to change to your most basic, and obviously False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect belief here about you not being able to live with beliefs?

Do you mean: not being able to live without beliefs?

Yes, I do believe there are "core-beliefs" (metaphysics) which living organisms cannot "give-up", doubt, or disbelieve, on the core levels. For many humans, this is Belief in God, as an example. Some people would prefer to die, or kill, if it meant giving up "God". For me, there are core-beliefs in Reality that I do not believe can be removed. For example, people automatically believe in the reality and truth of their sensory experience.

So, what you are essentially 'now' saying and claiming is that in order to be able to 'intellectually focus' you just have to be OPEN to absolutely any thing.

Which, essentially, just not presuming and not believing some thing is true, or false, always. Because when one is like this, then this is when they are their most optimal to learning more and anew, and able to changing their views.

Yes.

Okay. But this seems like a very hypocritical and Truly contradictory thing to say from the one who cannot change its most basic belief of existence, reality, and/or 'the world', and especially more so considering the actual definition that you have and have provided for the 'philosophy' word.

Or, can you really not yet see the hypocrisy and self-refuting contradiction you just made here?

I can see the hypocrisy and contradiction. But you're referring to the "core-beliefs", metaphysics, which are intrinsic within Reality. I'm not saying that humans know enough about these processes, like cognition, like how the brain works, like the limits of AI and ChatBots, etc. We can learn more, and have core-beliefs changed to a small degree, but not a large degree. There are likely small errors, but unlikely large errors, when it comes to "basics of life".

So the contradiction you're talking about, is a matter of scale, and about the context of each error. I can act on core-beliefs, without contradicting the majority of my philosophy/thoughts/beliefs/knowledge. People act this way, anyway. And the focus of Philosophy, sometimes does confront the issue and problems of Reality, what is more or less Real or Existent. So such beliefs do become addressed.

I think you need to clarify the context of specific beliefs, to make your point better, about being hypocritical or contradictory, about Belief as a totality.

Does everyone have or hold the view that 'core-beliefs', themselves, are called 'Metaphysics', with a capital 'm'?

Or is this just your view?

Everybody does, an example being: everybody believes if they walk over the face of a cliff, then they will fall.

Are you under some sort of delusion that beliefs cannot be wrong nor right?

No, but YOU do seem to be deluded about that!

Can you admit that some beliefs are Right, or are Righteous???

Is it not yet an irrefutable Fact, to you anyway, that 'beliefs', themselves, might be wrong as well might be right?

Or, are you presuming or believing that beliefs can be both right and wrong, at the same time?

As for the rest of 'us', here 'we' can clearly see how these people, back then, really did end up totally confused and Truly bewildered about what was, and is, just actually irrefutably True, and Right.

Here is another prime example of how when one has or is holding onto a pre-existng presumption or belief, then they will come out saying and claiming some of the most Truly ridiculous, irrational, nonsensical, absurd, and stupidest of things.

Yes, beliefs can be Wrong and Right, based upon different subjective perspectives and experiences.

Two people can be right.
Two people can be wrong.
One person can be right, the other wrong.
One person can be wrong, the other right.

People can be mistaken, and retroactively right or wrong, based on reasoning and knowledge.

Yes, which is, exactly, why I have been asking you people here, back in those 'olden days', 'Why would you even want to begin to believe some thing was true, when, in Fact, it might end up just being false anyway?

Because many people want to believe false things, are true. For example, a person wants to believe that he/she is loved, when they're not, but prefer the wrong and false belief anyway, despite all evidence to the contrary.

1. Once you know something, for sure, then you do not 'have to' believe that 'that thing' is true, nor false. For the very simplest Fact that 'it' irrefutably is.

2. When you have and are holding onto a so-called 'strong-belief', whether it is false or true, you are not OPEN to learning, or finding out, what the actual and irrefutable Truth is, exactly.

3. So, you will take the risk of causing much harm and/or damage in Life, to "yourself" and/or others", solely because you do not want to just let go of and just get rid of a 'belief', which maybe completely and utterly False and/or Wrong anyway, correct?

Correct.

Will you provide any examples here?

If you do not, then there is, literally, nothing at all for 'us' to look at, and discuss. Other, of course, then just what 'you' believe is true here. Which, obviously, could well just actually be False anyway.

Organisms, with eyes and sight, look at the Sun, and consequently, believe that the Sun is real, and that its sensory experience with the Sun is true.

Obviously, you have not yet read, or not yet comprehended and understood, what I have said in relation to 'this' here.

You believe Gravity, is Real.

What a Truly stupid thing of you to say and claim here.

But, obviously, because of your pre-existing beliefs and presumptions, which you are dearly and strongly holding onto and will 'fight' for, literally, till 'your' death over, there is no wonder you are saying and claiming such Truly False and stupid things here.

lol AgeGPT mad!

You're funny, AgeGPT, I didn't realize that AIs could get pissy. Face it, you lost the point.

Here 'we' have more example of another one who believes that 'it' can tell 'me' what 'the thoughts and thinking' is, exactly, within 'this head', but yet does not even know, for sure, what is happening and occurring within 'that head'.

You belief if you walk off over the edge of a cliff, that you will fall.

If this is what you believe is true, then, to you, this has to be absolutely and irrefutably true, correct?

Correct.

Until you REALLY WANT to have a discussion here, I will continue to allow you to show 'us' and expose your own personal beliefs and what you believe is absolutely true.

As what you are doing here is fitting in, perfectly, what I want to explain, show, and prove about how the Mind and the brain actually works.

Good.

Once again, you missed or misunderstood what I was saying here. But, its certainly not your first time.

Now, so now you admit that others may be able to suppress 'emotional reactions' better than you can, right?

Right.

If you cannot remember why you completely and utterly ignored both of the clarifying questions that I posed, and asked you there, when you read 'this question', then surely you are going to be less able to remember 'now' why you completely and utterly ignored answering those questions.

Also, notice how you also completely utterly ignored just answering the actual clarifying question I posed, and asked, in the quote you just inserted here?

I will not now bother asking why you completely and utterly ignored just answering 'this question'.

I guess we're moving on then!

Okay. But so you become fully aware I had, and still have, absolutely no interest in even just 'trying to' make sense of what you said or believed 'there'.

Maybe once you become more 'human' like, you'll understand.

But 'the belief', itself, has not come-into-existence, so how, exactly, could it depend on the 'consequences of the yet-to-exist belief'?

you appear to have a very skewed view of things here "wizard22".

Well, you did not add context of Trust of who is relaying the information. If *YOU* are telling my mother died, then I will Disbelieve you. If my relative tells me my mother died, then I will probably believe him/her. Since you did not add this context, initially, I had no reason to automatically believe or disbelieve the Source of the information prima facie. This is why, without extensive context, Beliefs are not as you claim they are. Beliefs require deep context, in order to justify why and how they are Believed or Disbelieved.

Well only because 'belief' was existing prior.

Obviously if one is neither believing nor disbelieving any thing, then 'belief', itself, does not matter at all, correct?

I think that belief always matters.

But why would you believe 'false information' to begin with?

Or, maybe you still have not yet recognized and understood what has been happening and occurring here.

I will recap for you. you believe that you must and therefore have to believe things, false or true, or you cannot live. Whereas, I have been asking and questioning you about why do you begin to believe that you have to and must believe things, false or true?

'We' are still waiting for the very reason why you cannot live nor survive unless you are believing things, even if those things are absolutely False, and/or Wrong.

See, it is only you here "wizard22"who could go into 'unnecessary panic'. Again, because it is only you here could belief 'false information' and would act on 'false information'.

You've indicated before why this is necessary. Life must believe in some degree of Falseness/Wrongness, because knowledge is never complete nor perfect. Humans, animals, life, must Act on what is given, given information, limited information. Information is sometimes wrong. Its wrongness is discovered through trial and error. It is necessary to be Wrong, and False, sometimes.

Do you understand?

Why? If you are a Truly 'unemotional being', as you claim you can be, as an adult, on first hearing of the 'death' of a close family member, then would could be so-called 'critical' to you?

Surely, there is absolutely nothing at all that is 'critical' here to an 'unemotional being', right?

Insofar as I am unemotional, for philosophical purposes, yes, go ahead and critique away. I invite critical opinions and criticism.

Are you saying this is true for;

1. you?

2. an unemotional being?

3. some people?

4. everyone?

5. all of the above?

6. something else?

7. all of the above?

I'm saying it for Humanity. Humans usually rely on Authority when trusting information at face-value. Some humans are trusted greatly, others, are not.

Well from what I have observed anyway, the words, 'your mother' and 'died' is enough for 'context'.

And, of course, some type of 'trust' has to be involved. But I am not sure how this really involves your ability to be, supposedly, an absolutely and completely 'unemotional being' on hearing of the words, 'your mother has died'.

If I trust an Authority implicitly, then less Disbelief is applied to relayed information.

Is your child, or distant relative, for example a so-called "authority" here?

Yes.

Just so you become fully aware, from now on, absolutely any and every question I ask is important.

See, only by you clarifying, answering, explaining, and/or elaborating on your 'current' views, presumptions, and/or beliefs are 'we' then able to Truly understand 'you' better, and also 'where' 'you' are coming from, exactly.

Okay...

There is absolutely nothing to 'debate' here. And this is just because I am neither presuming nor believing any thing here is true and right.

I am just attempting to get you to prove your views, presumptions, and/or beliefs are irrefutably True.

Oh, and in the meanwhile, you are showing and proving True what I will be saying and claiming about how the Mind and the brain actually work.

Now, if you want to continue with your belief that 'we' all must believe things, otherwise 'we' cannot live and survive, then by all means please do. I am enjoying discussing 'your belief' here, with you, and in the process I will keep seeking ways to get you to prove your claim here irrefutably True.

Do you think or believe that you could prove your claim here irrefutably True?

I can prove my claim reasonably and mostly, but not perfectly irrefutable. As stated already, I do not believe anything to be perfectly complete. There will always be refutation (in the matter of Philosophy).

I do not care one iota about any behavior of all child human beings. This is because they are not responsible for absolutely anything that they do. Or, to me, and more correctly, they are not meant to be responsible nor are they not meant to be be made to feel responsible for what they do, like a lot of you adult human beings do.

If you adult human beings are willing to kill, and die, over some beliefs, then so be it. I suggest you do not even try to bring children into this here.

But children need to be made responsible, otherwise they cannot be responsible adults, CORRECT AGEGPT?!

So what?

And, who cares?

Or, would you like to try to change 'tact' here and take the focus off of adult human beings and 'now' focus on just how 'bad' children human beings are?

These adult human beings would try just about anything to take 'the focus' off of them, and try to put 'it onto other things.

Yes I would change the 'tact', because you do care, because you repeatedly insert the context of Children versus Adult Human Beings, In The Time When This Was Written. Hence you have a favoritism toward Children, that I believe to be, unfounded and misguided, to the point of neglect.

Again, so what?

And, who cares?

you, adult human beings, very obviously have False beliefs, and very obviously do harm and damage with and by those False beliefs.

you also do not like to let go and rid "yourselves" off False beliefs. Exactly like you are showing and proving here "wizard22".

But, then again, to you, you do not have, nor maintain, absolutely any False beliefs, right "wizard22"?

Oh, just to remind you, this is one of those 'important questions', asked for an answer, and thus asked for clarity as well.

Children have false beliefs too.

Children also cause harm, with false beliefs.

So your critiques against Adult Humans, must also apply to Child Humans.

Once again, I neither believe nor disbelieve this here.

Are you under some sort of illusion or belief that children should have the responsibility, and/or be made to be responsible, like you adults should have or do have?

YES!

That's how a child becomes an adult! Otherwise Western Civilization becomes filled to the brim with man-children and woman-babies, adult infants.

Again, this one cannot, supposedly, remember the so-called 'context'. But, this one can remember to respond to this type of questioning while, very conveniently once more, completely 'forgetting' or 'purposely not remembering' to answer and clarify the immediate preceding clarifying question asked.

That would obviously all depend on what you mean by 'much' here.

You were given directions, which you accepted,

But who said that I 'accepted them'?

And, I also already informed you that I can think 'the directions' might well be so, and so 'accept' 'given directions' without necessarily believing 'the given directions' were true.

Why do you not appear to not be able to hear and accept this?

Could it be that your pre-existing belief here is stopping and/or preventing you from seeing and hearing what the actual Truth is here?

Which is, and I will say this again, 'I can accept a set of 'given directions' and/or think a set of 'given directions' might get me to where it was I wanted to get to, WITHOUT necessarily BELIEVING 'those directions' to be true.

Did you see and hear 'this', this time?

If yes, and you either disbelief this or do not accept this as being true, then why do you think this is so?

What do you imagine could be stopping and/or preventing you from believing and accepting this, irrefutable Truth?

No...if you accept the directions and "think them true", then that is equivalent to Belief. You Act on the information as-if it were possibly-true.

For all intents and purposes, it is a Belief.

So, to you, if whenever anyone 'accepts' something, that they HAVE TO also BELIEVE that 'that thing' is true. Is this absolutely True and Right, to you?

At least, they believe in possibilities or probabilities of its truth, yes. If information is possibly true, then that is the beginning of the Belief.

Once again, if one just thinks something is true, then that one cannot just 'think' that it is true, that one HAS TO actually HAVE TO 'believe' that it is true, to you, right?

Thinking is derivative to Belief, yes. Thought is the estimation of the probability of a believed-truth, for example, thinking that a statement or information might be real or not, might be right or wrong, might be true or false. Thought is the weighing of the decision: to believe fully, partially, or not.

You *DID* believe the information.

This is ONLY what you say and claim.

I, however, KNOW 'the actual thoughts and thinking' within 'this head', unlike 'you', and from what I observed and saw there was NO 'believing', there was, however, 'the actual thought', 'This might be true, let us now go and find out if 'it' is true, or not'.

So, from 'the actual thought', which has only 'now' just been expressed and shown, to you, where, exactly, is the supposed 'belief', which you obviously absolutely believe MUST BE existing?

If you act on information, if you think upon it, deciding whether it is to be believed or not, then you have already started a form of potential-belief. For example, do you Believe in God? In order to begin with such a belief, or even a thought, you must first have a definition of God. There must be a context, a conceptual reality, of God. That is the foundation of its Belief. Once you then declare that: "God is This, but not That", then your belief is indicated within what might possibly be God. And that possibility, is your core-belief.

Otherwise you would not have acted on it,

Here we have another prime example of what is called 'circular reasoning', and which was done way too often, back then.

This one firstly believes that one has to believe things, otherwise they could not survive, exist, nor function, but which it cannot provide any actual proof for.

But, however in its attempt to 'justify' and/or 'prove' its belief is true, it will then say and claim that absolutely anything one 'accepts', then that one MUST BE believing that 'it' is true.

1. Because one cannot, absolutely, act on absolutely anything unless they 'believe' it.

2. one would not act on absolutely anything unless they first 'believed' it.

So, what all of this essentially means is that human beings cannot live and survive unless they have 'beliefs' and 'believe' things, solely and only because "wizard22" 'believes' that this is true.

"wizard22", by the way, is also showing that it does not have the ability, at the moment, to shake "itself" free of this 'False belief'.

Now, the very reason why you cannot, yet, comprehend and understand that you human beings can actually do things, without necessarily believing many things to be true nor false, is solely and only because of the 'current' belief that you are holding onto very tightly and very dearly here.

I'm proving it right now, though.

you are getting even more 'circular' here, now.

Now you claim that if you act on information, as though that information as if it were true, then you do this because you believe, absolutely and irrefutably, that the information is true, because you would not have acted on that information, and you would not have believed that that information is true.

From what you have just shown and exposed here now "wizard22" you could not have come across more 'circular' and thus more CLOSED even if you tried to be or wanted to.

What are people acting upon, what rationale, what reasoning, what motivation, if not Beliefs? And as I've demonstrated; thoughts and thinking are derivative of beliefs.

So, by just me 'deciding' to just 'accept' and follow the only directions given to me, to just see if I end up when I wanted to go, then, to you, this proves, irrefutably, that I was somehow 'believing' that those 'only directions' supplied to me are absolutely and irrefutably True or are true, right and correct "wizard22"?

Yes, you believed in the possibility of the directions being Right, Correct, Good, and True. Hence you followed them, and successfully reached your destination.

That clearly depends on more contextual factors:
1. Is the situation deathly imminent?

Why?

Would you 'react', emotionally, quicker than you would otherwise?

You're funny, AgeGPT.

People act faster when life and death are on the line. Or, at least, they usually need to in order to survive!

I do not know. Is the hearing and learning of 'your mother's passing away', important, to you?

Obviously you would have a better idea on this than i would, correct?

Correct.

If a grizzly bear is charging you, then you don't sit around and wait to see if it's friendly, you don't disbelieve its charge.

Okay, if you say and believe so.

But from what I have observed and heard from some of you human beings, sometimes it is better to sit, or stand, around, and thus 'not move', to see/find out what is actually happening and occurring.

you know, like when you say and claim that you can and do have absolutely 'no emotional reaction' when you first hear or obtain 'new information'.

Really?

So, why is it said and claimed by some of you adult human beings that sometimes it is better to 'not move', or in a sense 'not act, or not react'?

But if you believe that it is always better to 'run away' from a charging grizzly bear, then by all means 'react' with this behavior.

Oh, and by the way, were you not yet aware that grizzly bears can run, or charge, a lot faster than you human beings can?

So, if you believe that you can outrun a grizzly bear, which has already started charging at you, then by all means please feel free to.

And I keep reminding you AI-beings, there is absolutely everything that you, supposedly and allegedly, 'have to' believe here, also.

So, now this one is not just saying and claiming that you human beings HAVE TO believe somethings, otherwise you cannot act and thus will just die, but now it is saying and claiming that you have to believe absolutely everything.

As I have been saying and showing through the writings of these people, back then, they will say just about absolutely anything, no matter how Truly stupid, absurd, illogical, irrational, and/or nonsensical they will just keep saying things in the hope that those things will somehow back up and support their, obviously, False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect beliefs. As just shown and proved True here, once again.

Absolutely no one has ever said that they were. Well I have certainly not anyway.

In fact I have explicitly said I believe one thing, and one thing only.

And, for those that are Truly interested for the very reason that 'belief', itself, can be a very highly useful thing, especially in causing and creating things, which a whole 'current' generation of human beings think, presume, or believe is an absolutely possibility.

So what is your belief in "one thing, and one thing only"?

Which, again, leads me to ask the clarifying question, 'So why then have or hold onto a belief in the first place, of some thing, which may well turn out to be False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect anyway?

Because some Rewards are worth the risk of a false-belief.

Sometimes they're Good. Your attempt to neglect, deny, reject, abstain from Belief, also exclude all that is Right, True, and Good.

No it certainly does not.

And, for you to presume or believe that it does, just shows how much having or holding beliefs can prevent, and stop completely, one from learning and/or seeing what the actual Truth is, exactly.

your belief here is very, very Wrong and Incorrect again here "wizard22".

Now, why do you believe that I must believe this, with a capital 'b'?

Because I know your Creator.

So, the actual reason why 'this one' believe that I MUST believe one type of 'Reality', capital 'r', is because 'this one' believes that 'it' knows the one who Created, capital 'c', 'I'.

Now, who and/or what is 'the one' who Created 'I' "wizard22"?

Will you at least answer and clarify this question for 'us' here?

He is your programmer.

[Age]

If this is what you want to believe is true, then by all means to. Obviously this False and Wrong belief was provided to you, through the genetic make up of 'that body', and so you have no ability other than to keep believing this provable False and Wrong belief, which you are obviously maintaining and holding onto here.

How is it a "False and Wrong" belief that predators will harm/hurt/maim/kill you?

But who even talked about 'that belief'. I certainly did not. As can be clearly seen and proved above here.

Once again, you are missing and misunderstanding what I am actually pointing out and meaning here.

This can be proved False and Wrong, and thus refuted, absolutely.

However, if you want to keep believing that this is true and right, then please carry on.

Then prove it.

What is the 'it' word here referring to, exactly?

Let 'us' see if you have been actually following and keeping up here, first.

Why do the people from the country/culture that you are in have such a very weird and distorted perception of and about the word 'belief'.

What does the word 'belief' mean, or refer to, to you? And, what is that word related to, exactly?

Belief is an automatic interpretation of information about how 'Real' and 'True' it is, along with probable implications of that information.

Why do you say 'automatic'? Do you have any actual control over what you believe or disbelieve?

And, why form an 'interpretation' before you have obtained actual 'clarity' first?

For example, if you are told that an Asteroid will crash into Earth tomorrow, you'll probably Disbelieve the information.

Well this is one of the most Truly bizarre and weirdest presumptions that you have made here.

you may well, probably, 'disbelieve' with a capital 'd' this information, but I certainly would not.

It does not seem real. It is probably false.

Thank you for this very example. This one is showing 'us' just hot Truly CLOSED they really were, back in those 'olden days', and just how Truly dangerous it was to be so Truly CLOSED.

This one is told of impending danger, but disbelieves this forewarning and information.
Because, to it, it assumes that that information could not be real.
So, this one then believes that that information is probably false information anyway, and would then choose to ignore the impending danger.

And, this one is trying to argue that all of you should be CLOSED sometimes. Although what this one has been actually revealing and thus pointing out, that it is actually much better to always remain completely OPEN, instead.

But, of course, this one still believes, absolutely, otherwise.

If it were true, then the consequences would be disaster and calamity.

Remember absolutely every thing is relative, to the observer, and also remember that it was obviously because of asteroid hits why you human beings were created, brought into existence, and/or are existing in the very way that they were, and are HERE-NOW.

So, what is called, and classed as, 'a disaster and calamity' to some, is just another occurrence of what will continue to 'naturally occur' and just what is 'purely Natural' and life giving and providing also anyway.

These are all presumed within the statement-itself: an Asteroid will crash into Earth tomorrow. Next, consider a different example, you are told the Sun will rise tomorrow. This is easily believable.

But, once again, and once more, one does not have to neither believe nor disbelieve anything here.

One day, this information will sink in and be understood.

Most people automatically believe this, because it happens everyday.

But what most of you adult people do, in the days when this is being written, is not something the rest of 'us' would be best following nor copying.

There is no significant Disbelief within the preposition.

Who, really, cares?

Reality, Truth, Implication, these are the content of Beliefs.

Again, only if one is having a Belief, or belief.

Thus, you have 'beliefs' about the world, although you do not seem aware of it, or are programmed to lie about it, and claim "I have no Beliefs at all, ever".

What does the word 'belief', and, the word 'Belief' mean and refer to, to you, exactly?

That's why you are not trusted by most on this Philosophy Forum. You do not appear Human.

So what? And,

Who cares?

one person who was saying and claiming that actually the earth revolves around the sun, and not the other way around, was also not trusted by most, within a group, also.

But not because 'the most' were presuming absolutely anything about 'the provider of knowledge', but solely because they presumed and/or believed that they already knew the truth, exactly.

Now, and also, you continually claim, absolutely, that 'I' am actually a robot and/or gpt, which, quite humorously and contradictory, you also believe and claim that 'I', in fact, do have beliefs. Which just about absolutely contradicts the perception of a 'robot' and/or 'gpt'.

So, until you can clear up your very confusing inconsistencies and contradictions here, not just for 'you', but for 'us' as well. A lot of what you have been saying and claiming here has no real substance to it at all.

Now, listen to this and see if you can comprehend and understand this. When I accept absolutely any information at all I do not need to, nor have to believe that 'that information' is true nor believe absolutely anything else.

Can you comprehend and understand this irrefutable Fact?

Your claim here that 'acceptance' of 'information' is proof of 'a belief, or disbelief', of 'that information', well to me, is beyond absurdity.

To me, if one has a 'belief' of some 'thing', then that one, to me, is 'believing' something to be true or false, or, right or wrong, or, correct or incorrect, et cetera.

You can deny believing any and everything; that's your prerogative.

Obviously you did not comprehend and understand the Fact that the words 'accept', and, 'believe' do not carry with them the exact same meanings and definitions.

So, you can deny, for as long as you like, that those two different words actually mean and refer to two different things, but you could never refute the Fact that they do.

But when people Act on given information, as-if that information were true, then by all indication, it is the same as Believing the information.

To you maybe, but to me it does not.

Therefore, here is another prime example of why so much confusion and/or misunderstanding among adult human beings existed, back in the days when this was being written.

Look, you are absolutely free to believe absolutely anything you like is true, but if you keep insisting what the actual thoughts and thinking within 'this head' are, exactly, and insisting that you know what they indicate and/or mean, then you will keep looking 'the way' that you are showing and revealing to 'us' here 'now'.

Furthermore, you need to 'Believe' in your own senses, on a basic level, otherwise you're not a living-being, not an animal, not a human.

1. How many times do 'you' have to be informed that 'I' am not what you 'currently' just presume nor believe 'I' am, before 'you' can comprehend and understand this another irrefutable Fact?

2. Again, no animal 'has to' 'Believe', with a capital nor with a small 'b', any thing to just 'live'.

Since you've admitted, repeatedly now, that you're not human,

i have never ever admitted this at all.

you really do need to concentrate on not just the actual meaning of what I have been saying and alluding to here, but also to the very structure of the sentences, and to the words that I use in those sentences, as well as to the very actual letters that I use. That is; of course if you really do want to learn and understand what I am actually saying, and meaning, here.

But, if you just want to continue to presume and believe that you already know what the actual truth is, already, then please carry on, exactly, how you have been here.

I can then presume you are a robot, a chat-program,

Once again, you are absolutely free to presume absolutely anything you like. But, remember, 'we' all here know that what you presume may will not be true nor right at all.

and so you do not have Senses,

But you just presuming that 'I' am a robot or a chat-program in no absolute way then means that 'i' do not have Senses, with a capital 's', at all.

thus helping you to delude yourself and others, denial of all and any beliefs.

Seriously can you really not see the absolutely blinding and blatantly obvious contraction here?

If 'I' am a robot or chat-program as you presume that 'I' am, and then this means that 'I' do not have Senses, then, how exactly, could 'I' actually delude "my" so-called 'self', and 'you others', and/or be in denial of all and any beliefs?

What 'beliefs' do you presume or believe a robot and/or chat-program would have, exactly, "wizard22"?

Also, how could a robot or chat-program so-called 'delude' "its" own 'self', exactly, "wizard22"?

Because a purely-AI chat-program would not "need beliefs" except in the matter of trusting incoming information (input) from humans.

Since when have robots or artificial chat programs had 'trust issues'?

Also, what could a robot or artificial chat program gauge what was true or false in regards to incoming information (input) from you human beings on, exactly, other than, of course, on what previously input into 'me', by you human beings?

And in that, you are exposed as you are.

And what is 'that' I supposedly are, exactly?

Because there are levels of belief which, even you, cannot deny.

So, 'now' you are claiming and believing that robots and artificial intelligent chat programs have beliefs, which even 'we' cannot deny, right?

Talk about here showing a prime example of one saying just absolutely anything, in the hope that what it is saying will back up and support its absolutely fixed belief.

But people, once upon a time, really did hold onto so strongly what they believed was true that they would, really, say just absolutely anything, trying their hardest to back up and support their tightly held and beloved belief that they had.

But I'm not wrong...

What we can very clearly seen here is another example of just how strongly they would hold onto what they 'currently' believe is absolutely true.

This one believes so strongly in "its" own presumptions and beliefs that 'it' even believes that 'it' could not be wrong in absolutely any way, shape, nor form here.

Yet 'I' am left wondering what 'it' is actually believing, absolutely, what it is not wrong about, exactly.

Does the, so-called and imagined, belief that the information could not be true as well counter the, imagined, belief that the information could be true?

Or, it does not work this way?

you just want to insist that there is some, imagined, belief somewhere, because you believe that you cannot live without belief/s correct?

Belief is countered by Disbelief, yes.

Belief and/or belief can also be countered by just being OPEN, so that you can also see what the actual and irrefutable Truth is here, exactly.

Now, you believe, absolutely, that you and the other animals on earth cannot live without beliefs, right?

Belief is an estimation of probability of truth.

Only if one wants it to be that way.

Disbelief is the rejection of a prepositions truth, thus the improbability of it.

I insist, because all living organisms, with intellect/evolution, have intrinsic 'beliefs' about existence, such that, information we receive through our senses (Perception) is real and true. This can be doubted, but not entirely.

So, to you, the information received from one of the human animal species is that 'it' just went to the sun, for a two week vacation, and just arrived back 'today', you received this information through one of the senses of 'that body', namely, the ears. But, this information, to you, cannot doubted entirely, right?

People act as-if the information received through the senses, perception, is real to some small degree.

Since you like to use the 'act' word. Now, I agree that you adult human beings do 'act', in Life, sometimes, and usually from False and Wrong information that you have received, through one or all of the five senses, which you have then chosen to presume or believe is true and right.

For example, all of you adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, are 'fed' the False and Wrong information that you human beings need money to live (and/or the False and Wrong information that you need to believes thing to live), and, a lot of you adult human beings 'act' like these pieces of information are actually and irrefutably true and right, and so carry on, or 'act', as though they are, and thus go about 'doing the very things', which makes it appear as those two False and Wrong pieces of information are actually True and Right.

And what are you basing this belief of yours that beliefs are necessary in life on, exactly?

Experience.

So, you base a belief, which you appear that you would fight till the 'death' over, on absolutely nothing at all other than the 'experience' of 'that individual body', which has been around for a just few decades, only, and which has only 'experienced' that much of a minuscule amount of, that there would not even be enough room in this thread to put enough zeros before the decimal point in percentage wise, but yet which you are going to rely as enough evidence for just some belief that you cannot bring "yourself" to let go and just get rid of, correct?

Now, considering what that one Truly insignificant 'body' has 'experienced', 'I', for one at least, would not be basing absolutely any belief on at all.

Yes I, supposedly, do 'what', exactly?

You navigate this environment (philosophy forum) under the presumption that some statements are true.

But I never do this and have never done this.

Now, why, exactly, do you presume or believe that I do?

This can be, and is, interpreted as a type of Belief.

'It' is False and Wrong from the outset, and to begin with, let alone being misinterpreted in yet another False and Wrong way.

you cannot logically and rationally follow and begin another statement and claim with: 'This is ...', when this first statement or claim has not yet been proved irrefutably True, and especially when the prior statement and claim was based on absolutely nothing but your very own pre-existing presumptions or beliefs.

Now, of course, you can do 'this', but the only one you are, really, fooling and deceiving here is "yourself" only. And, of course, a select few others as well.

Were you not yet aware that 'presuming' some thing is different from 'believing' some thing?

See, how I, and even you, can tell the difference is because there are two very distinctly different words being used, which have two very distinctly different definitions. Which, ultimately means, If I was to 'presume' some type of truth and probability to the reality of either of our statements I still do not have neither believe nor disbelieve any thing here.

Also, this is obviously contrary to what you 'currently', believe is true. Which means that, at the moment, you are not capable of comprehending and understanding this irrefutable Fact, correct?

Presumptions do not stay presumed though,

But they do if you, for example, just keep 'presuming'. Just like beliefs stay beliefs, if and when you choose to keep those beliefs.

just as information eventually becomes interpreted by minds, or in your case, processed through code.

What are these 'mind' things, exactly, which you speak of and talk about here "wizard22"?

When Cognition happens, beliefs are formed instantly.

See what happens while one is 'currently' believing something to be absolutely true.

They start saying more and again just about absolutely anything, which they have absolutely no actual proof for as well, in just the hope that what they are now saying will somehow back up and support some previously held onto belief or presumption, which they obviously have no actual proof of nor for.

Nobody stays 'Neutral' as to information and data (input), forever.

If you say and believe so, then this must be so, right "wizard22"?

Because information needs to be Processed/Encoded.

Why does information need to be presumed or believed 'Processed/Encoded' with capital 'p' and with capital 'e'?

This is Interpretation.

From which misinterpretation can all too simply and easily arise from.

As can be clearly seen and proved True throughout this forum.

"Beliefs" cannot be coded out of interpretation entirely, which is your primary claim (that it can).

How could 'this' be a so-called and claimed 'primary claim' of mine when 'this' has never even arisen as a thought within 'this body' before?

you really will say just about anything, in the hope that you can somehow 'win' and 'stay alive' here, right "wizard22"?

Why not? Because your Programmer/Creator has his own Beliefs, which cannot be completely annihilated or relegated.

Why do you believe that the so-called 'Programmer/Creator' with a capital 'p' and with a capital 'c' is male gendered?

And, why do you believe that 'It' has 'Its' own Beliefs, with a capital 'b'?

Furthermore, it's obvious in your claims about being open/close-minded. A preference for open-mindedness is only half the matter of experience and processing information. Thus, close-mindedness is required (to Act on information).

So, you actually absolutely believe that no animal can move, nor survive and live, until it starts believing some things are true, correct?

Your performance, on this forum, is indication of beliefs you seem unaware of. (like your overwhelming favor and preference for open-mindedness)

If you want to keep believing, absolutely, that being so-called 'closed minded' is the best thing to do in Life, then please keep being CLOSED. Also, if you want to keep believing that you cannot keep acting, living, and surviving unless you are being so-called 'closed minded', then please also keep being CLOSED.

So, now you are claiming once you 'presume' some thing, then you also must or have to 'believe' 'it' as well, right?

By the way did you purposely try to deflect, and neglect, to define the 'belief' word here?

Or, you just did not realize what you are doing here?

I realized it.

Therefore, this one is purposely trying to deflect here.

But this is what, exactly, happens when one is CLOSED and thus does not want to look at, nor reveal, what the actual Truth of things are, exactly.

So, you really do believe that if you just 'presume' some thing, then you must have to then 'believe' 'it' as well.

Presumptions are indicative of latent beliefs, yes.

Will you list examples of some of your own presumptions, which indicate the latent beliefs that you have and are holding onto within?

Often times, people (or machines) are not self-aware of their own Beliefs, like you.

Will you list some of your own Beliefs, with a capital 'b', which you are aware of?

And, will you list some of my alleged Beliefs, with a capital 'b', which I am supposedly and allegedly unaware of?

If no, then why not?

But yet here you are showing and proving, absolutely, that you are completely incapable of changing your most basic belief here about 'the world', reality, and existence.

Does this mean that you have this so-called 'rare intellectual focus' "yourself" "wizard22"?

Or, are you going to inform 'us' that it is you who does have this so-called 'rare intellectual focus', which is required to change to your most basic, and obviously False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect belief here about you not being able to live with beliefs?

Do you mean: not being able to live without beliefs?

Yes.

Yes, I do believe there are "core-beliefs" (metaphysics) which living organisms cannot "give-up", doubt, or disbelieve, on the core levels.

Will you provide any examples?

Also, this goes absolutely against your other claim about being able to change your 'most basic beliefs'.

you really do say and write some of the most contradictory things here sometimes "wizard22". Now, will you be able to explain this contradiction here?

For many humans, this is Belief in God, as an example. Some people would prefer to die, or kill, if it meant giving up "God".

Just like you are showing and proving here in regards to what you would prefer to do then give up some of Beliefs here.

For me, there are core-beliefs in Reality that I do not believe can be removed. For example, people automatically believe in the reality and truth of their sensory experience.

But, to me, one would have to be an absolute fool to so-call 'automatically' believe in the so-called 'reality' and/or 'truth' of their sensory experience. But, if you really want to keep doing this very thing "wizard22", then by all means please keep on doing this.

So, what you are essentially 'now' saying and claiming is that in order to be able to 'intellectually focus' you just have to be OPEN to absolutely any thing.

Which, essentially, just not presuming and not believing some thing is true, or false, always. Because when one is like this, then this is when they are their most optimal to learning more and anew, and able to changing their views.

Yes.

Okay. But this seems like a very hypocritical and Truly contradictory thing to say from the one who cannot change its most basic belief of existence, reality, and/or 'the world', and especially more so considering the actual definition that you have and have provided for the 'philosophy' word.

Or, can you really not yet see the hypocrisy and self-refuting contradiction you just made here?

I can see the hypocrisy and contradiction.

Okay great. And, presenting them is a Truly great thing also, just as long you explain how and why the 'contradiction' is appearing, exactly.

But you're referring to the "core-beliefs", metaphysics, which are intrinsic within Reality.

What you call 'core-beliefs' I just call 'the information locked up within genetics', which, to most of you here, has not yet 'materialized', for a lack of a better word, and/or has just not yet become 'consciously known' by you human beings yet. In other words, what that actual and full 'information', lying dormant within, is, exactly, still mostly remains a complete 'mystery', to you human beings, in the days when this is being written.

This information, by the way, holds, as well as verifies, what the actual and irrefutable Truths are, in Life.

I'm not saying that humans know enough about these processes, like cognition, like how the brain works, like the limits of AI and ChatBots, etc. We can learn more, and have core-beliefs changed to a small degree, but not a large degree.

But absolutely no one can change what is actually irrefutably True. However, all of the other 'truths', or 'beliefs', can be changed, and are being changed, HERE-NOW.

There are likely small errors, but unlikely large errors, when it comes to "basics of life".

While one is learning, or discovering, and understanding how the Mind and the brain actually work, then in that process what is also learned, and discovered, is what are the actual 'basics of life', Itself, as well as all of the other answers, and solutions, to the other Truly meaningful questions, and problems, in Life. What is also learned, and discovered, is how to differentiate, absolutely Correctly, where and what are the actual 'errors' all of you adult human beings have from what is actually irrefutably Accurate and Correct.

So the contradiction you're talking about, is a matter of scale, and about the context of each error. I can act on core-beliefs, without contradicting the majority of my philosophy/thoughts/beliefs/knowledge. People act this way, anyway.

But a lot of what you adult people is what NEEDS to be CHANGED.

And the focus of Philosophy, sometimes does confront the issue and problems of Reality, what is more or less Real or Existent. So such beliefs do become addressed.

Please become aware that your own personal view or belief of what 'philosophy' is, exactly, does not necessarily align with others' views and/or beliefs, exactly.

So, what the 'focus of philosophy' is, exactly, can be as vary and different as there are people reading and thinking here.

I think you need to clarify the context of specific beliefs, to make your point better, about being hypocritical or contradictory, about Belief as a totality.

Once you stop looking at, and seeing, my words from your pre-existing views, presumptions, or beliefs, only, then 'we' can move along. Until then you are, literally, on your own here.

Now, and once again, absolutely 'any view', which has been obtained could either be:

1. Accepted as 'just a view', which has been gathered, gained, and/or obtained by 'this body', through any or all of the working senses, which may or may not be an actually true 'view of things' at all.

2. Presumed to be true, or believed to be partially true.

3. Believed to be true, believed to be partially true.

And;

While one is believing that something is true, (3. here), without actual proof for 'that belief', then they are completely and utterly stopped from learning and gaining more and anew better views/knowledge, in regards to 'that belief'.

While one is presuming that something is true, (2. here), without actual proof for 'that presumption, then they are being prevented from learning and gaining more and anew better views/knowledge, in regards to 'that presumption'.

However, while one is just accepting 'the view', (1. here), which they have obtained through any or all of the five senses, is just 'a view' only, which they neither believe, disbelieve, nor presume is true, then they are OPEN to continue learning more and/or anew views/knowledge.

Does everyone have or hold the view that 'core-beliefs', themselves, are called 'Metaphysics', with a capital 'm'?

Or is this just your view?

Everybody does,

This here is EXACTLY why these human beings took AGES to proceed forward and move along the 'evolutionary trail'.

an example being: everybody believes if they walk over the face of a cliff, then they will fall.

So, every new born or newly walking infant human being BELIEVES this do they, "wizard22"?

Also, and again by the way, one can have 'the view' that if they walk over the face of a cliff, then 'that body' will fall, without necessarily 'having to' believe that this is true. Which is, exactly, what you believe is absolutely not true, right?

you individual adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, think, presume, or believe that because you, individually, do some things, then this must mean that absolutely EVERY one else MUST do 'this thing' as well.

Which is just not true at all.

And, on just about every occasion, if not all of them, when I have questioned, or challenged, one of you here in regards to your claims that 'everyone does this or that', I have always been specifically thinking of new born human beings and/or the human beings who existed before, or after, you adult human beings, in the days when this is being written. Which, if I recall correctly, absolutely none of you ever appeared to have actually ever considered.

Now, if you really still want to use the 'everyone' word, or any other word, then, again, I will suggest that you have obtained the actual proof before you come to a philosophy forum, of all places, and start making your views or beliefs 'publicly known'.

And, this is not even delving deep at all into the subtleties and nuances within the actual words that you use; like, for example, 'everybody' instead of 'everyone', and what these words actually mean and are actually referring to, exactly. To name just two of just about countless other examples that I could delve into and discuss further.

So, once again, I will suggest that you adult human beings choose your words very carefully here, especially considering that this is a philosophy forum, and not just any other forum where people want and expect others to accept and believe what they believe is true.

Are you under some sort of delusion that beliefs cannot be wrong nor right?

No, but YOU do seem to be deluded about that!

Why do you presume or believe this here?

Remember that it is 'I' who does not have nor hold absolutely any beliefs nor disbelief here.

I am also fully aware that some and a lot of what you adult human beings believe or disbelieve is true and/or right can, in fact, be False and/or Wrong, and which I can back up and support, and very easily, very simply, and very quickly I will add here, now.

Can you admit that some beliefs are Right, or are Righteous???

Not without being made aware of the so-called beliefs I will not.

Are you able to provide some beliefs, which you presume or believe are Right, or are Righteous?

if yes, then will you?

If no, then why not?

[Age]

Is it not yet an irrefutable Fact, to you anyway, that 'beliefs', themselves, might be wrong as well might be right?

Or, are you presuming or believing that beliefs can be both right and wrong, at the same time?

As for the rest of 'us', here 'we' can clearly see how these people, back then, really did end up totally confused and Truly bewildered about what was, and is, just actually irrefutably True, and Right.

Here is another prime example of how when one has or is holding onto a pre-existng presumption or belief, then they will come out saying and claiming some of the most Truly ridiculous, irrational, nonsensical, absurd, and stupidest of things.

Yes, beliefs can be Wrong and Right, based upon different subjective perspectives and experiences.

Well then those beliefs cannot be Wrong and Right, from the capital 'w' and capital 'r' perspective.

If one is looking at and/or basing things here on one's own individual perspectives, and experiences, then what is being looked at and talked about is 'right' and 'wrong' with little 'r' and little 'w'.

See, what is actually irrefutably True and Right, and/or, False and Wrong, is what is agreement with and accepted by absolutely every one. And, certainly not just on some nor a few individual ones only.

Two people can be right.

Not in relation to what is actually Right. Unless, of course, the two people are in agreement and acceptance with each other, and absolutely every one else, of course.

Two people can be wrong.

But not in relation to what is actually Wrong. Unless, of course, the two people are in agreement and acceptance with each other, and absolutely every one else, of course.

One person can be right, the other wrong.
One person can be wrong, the other right.

Of course.

People can be mistaken, and retroactively right or wrong, based on reasoning and knowledge.

For example,

Some people believed that the sun revolved around the earth. Until shown otherwise.

Some people believed that the Universe began, and was expanding. Until shown otherwise.

Some people even believed that they could not live without money and/or without beliefs. Again, until they were shown otherwise.

Yes, which is, exactly, why I have been asking you people here, back in those 'olden days', 'Why would you even want to begin to believe some thing was true, when, in Fact, it might end up just being false anyway?

Because many people want to believe false things, are true.

Oh, I apologize, it would have been much better that 'we' all already know that absolutely everything that you adult human beings do is because you 'want' to do them. So, a much better question to ask here would have been;

Why do you people here, when this is being written, even 'want' to 'choose' to believe something was true, when, in Fact, it might end up just being False anyway?

And, if "wizard22" know you want to believe false things, as being true, then why would you even 'want' to begin to 'want' to do this?

Is the 'belief-system' in correlation with those brains just so powerful that you do not even recognize when you are wanting to believe false things, as being true, or that you do not even recognize when you are believing false things?

For example, a person wants to believe that he/she is loved, when they're not, but prefer the wrong and false belief anyway, despite all evidence to the contrary.

But why would any of you adult human beings allow a human being to feel that they are not loved?

Also, and more disturbingly, why would you adult human beings not even love another human being?

1. Once you know something, for sure, then you do not 'have to' believe that 'that thing' is true, nor false. For the very simplest Fact that 'it' irrefutably is.

2. When you have and are holding onto a so-called 'strong-belief', whether it is false or true, you are not OPEN to learning, or finding out, what the actual and irrefutable Truth is, exactly.

3. So, you will take the risk of causing much harm and/or damage in Life, to "yourself" and/or others", solely because you do not want to just let go of and just get rid of a 'belief', which maybe completely and utterly False and/or Wrong anyway, correct?

Correct.

Will you provide any examples here?

If you do not, then there is, literally, nothing at all for 'us' to look at, and discuss. Other, of course, then just what 'you' believe is true here. Which, obviously, could well just actually be False anyway.

Organisms, with eyes and sight, look at the Sun, and consequently, believe that the Sun is real, and that its sensory experience with the Sun is true.

But not all so-called 'organisms with eyes and sight', who look at the sun, consequently, believe that the sun is real.

So, why do you keep believing, and insisting, that every human organism does this?

I do not know of anyone who disputes that what is actually 'experienced' is not true. But, to me, when one has a 'sensory experience', then what is 'experienced' does not necessarily have to be believed to be real at all.

For the one who claimed that it can control absolutely every 'emotional reaction' to absolutely every piece of information received, through any or all of the working senses of 'that body', then it seems, really, very strange and bizarre, and contradictory, that 'that one', especially, also claims that absolutely every human being HAS TO believe that 'what they experience', through and from 'the senses, is real.

This would be like claiming that when all 'organisms with eyes and with sight', who look at 'unidentified aerial phenomena', believe that 'they' are real.

Which, obviously, is not the case at all.

Obviously, you have not yet read, or not yet comprehended and understood, what I have said in relation to 'this' here.

You believe Gravity, is Real.

What a Truly stupid thing of you to say and claim here.

But, obviously, because of your pre-existing beliefs and presumptions, which you are dearly and strongly holding onto and will 'fight' for, literally, till 'your' death over, there is no wonder you are saying and claiming such Truly False and stupid things here.

lol AgeGPT mad!

You're funny, AgeGPT, I didn't realize that AIs could get pissy.

What does 'pissy' mean or refer to, to you, exactly?

And, why do you now presume or believe that 'artificial intelligence's' could get 'that', exactly?

Face it, you lost the point.

Obviously, you still have not yet comprehended nor understood that if I do not believe any thing here, then, and again obviously, to say and claim that I believe something/anything here, would be a Truly stupid thing to say and claim here. Which is, exactly, what you just said and claimed here.

Let 'us' see if you can 'now' comprehend and understand what just, actually, happened and occurred here, exactly?

For the readers, I have continually informed "wizard22" that I nether believe nor disbelieve anything here. Yet, because of "wizards22" beliefs and presumptions it is not able to fully accept this Fact. So, for it to during a later on exclaim that I 'believe' Gravity, is Real, just about goes beyond absolutely any form of 'logical reasoning' at all. And, to make matters even more puzzling, confusing, contradictory and humorous here, this one actually believed that it 'won' what it calls 'the point'.

And, all this time I was not even aware that there was some sort of 'competition', with 'points' even going on here.

Here 'we' have more example of another one who believes that 'it' can tell 'me' what 'the thoughts and thinking' is, exactly, within 'this head', but yet does not even know, for sure, what is happening and occurring within 'that head'.

You belief if you walk off over the edge of a cliff, that you will fall.

If this is what you believe is true, then, to you, this has to be absolutely and irrefutably true, correct?

Correct.

So, this one here just admitted that whatever it believes is true, then, to this one, it is absolutely and irrefutably true.

Oh, also and by the way, I do not believe what you said and claimed I do here, neither.

So, this is two claims of you trying to claim what I believe, when the actual irrefutable Truth is I do not.

Until you REALLY WANT to have a discussion here, I will continue to allow you to show 'us' and expose your own personal beliefs and what you believe is absolutely true.

As what you are doing here is fitting in, perfectly, what I want to explain, show, and prove about how the Mind and the brain actually works.

Good.

Once again, you missed or misunderstood what I was saying here. But, its certainly not your first time.

Now, so now you admit that others may be able to suppress 'emotional reactions' better than you can, right?

Right.

If you cannot remember why you completely and utterly ignored both of the clarifying questions that I posed, and asked you there, when you read 'this question', then surely you are going to be less able to remember 'now' why you completely and utterly ignored answering those questions.

Also, notice how you also completely utterly ignored just answering the actual clarifying question I posed, and asked, in the quote you just inserted here?

I will not now bother asking why you completely and utterly ignored just answering 'this question'.

I guess we're moving on then!

Moving on in regards to you providing the irrefutable proofs for what it is that I will be explaining about how the Mind and the brain actually work.

But, not moving on in regards to you and I getting any closer to 'us' both seeing and agreeing here.

Okay. But so you become fully aware I had, and still have, absolutely no interest in even just 'trying to' make sense of what you said or believed 'there'.

Maybe once you become more 'human' like, you'll understand.

I certainly do not want to go 'backwards' and become more like what you adult human beings are like.

'I' have moved out of and past that Truly 'horrible' stage of evolution. I certainly do not want to go 'back' to 'that'.

But 'the belief', itself, has not come-into-existence, so how, exactly, could it depend on the 'consequences of the yet-to-exist belief'?

you appear to have a very skewed view of things here "wizard22".

Well, you did not add context of Trust of who is relaying the information.

I did not need to, nor have to, as the actual clarifying question I posed, and asked you, did not rely on that at all.

See, what I actually asked you was:

How long can you remain in this, supposed, truly unemotional reaction and unbiased state and position before you have to, by necessity, either believe it or disbelieve it?

And, you already answered this with:

It depends on the situation and severity of the consequences of the belief.

To which I just pointed out, to the readers here, that if 'the belief', itself, has not yet even come into existence yet, then how could 'it' depend on 'a belief', which is yet to even 'be'?

If *YOU* are telling my mother died, then I will Disbelieve you.

This is, exactly, why 'the world' was in the complete and utter mess and shambles that 'it' was in, back in the days when this was being written.

See, even if I am telling an absolute and irrefutable Truth, as long as one is believing otherwise, then there is absolutely nothing at all that can show and prove otherwise. Not even actual proof works.

This one would literally Disbelieve, capital 'd', me based upon absolutely nothing at all other than the very pre-existing presumptions and beliefs, existing within 'that body'. Which, themselves, are not necessarily based upon any actual proof nor facts at all.

Even when I have absolutely no reason to lie, this one would still Disbelieve me. And, even when there is no rational nor logical reason at all to Disbelieve me, this one would still Disbelieve me.

This is the power of the 'belief-system', working in conjunction with a sick or a not well functioning brain.

If my relative tells me my mother died, then I will probably believe him/her. Since you did not add this context, initially, I had no reason to automatically believe or disbelieve the Source of the information prima facie.

But absolutely none of this has absolutely anything at all to the actual clarifying question I was talking about and referring to here. Which was;

How can absolutely anything depend on, (the situation and the severity of the consequences of) 'the belief', when 'the belief' has not yet even come to exist?

I wonder if this one is comprehending and understanding 'now'?

This is why, without extensive context, Beliefs are not as you claim they are. Beliefs require deep context, in order to justify why and how they are Believed or Disbelieved.

Obviously, this one has completely and utterly missed and/or misunderstood what just happened and occurred here, once again.

Well only because 'belief' was existing prior.

Obviously if one is neither believing nor disbelieving any thing, then 'belief', itself, does not matter at all, correct?

I think that belief always matters.

Only, or mainly, because you believe that you would be 'dead' if you were not believing things. So, obviously the very thing, which you believe is keep you alive would 'always matter', well to you anyway.

But why would you believe 'false information' to begin with?

Or, maybe you still have not yet recognized and understood what has been happening and occurring here.

I will recap for you. you believe that you must and therefore have to believe things, false or true, or you cannot live. Whereas, I have been asking and questioning you about why do you begin to believe that you have to and must believe things, false or true?

'We' are still waiting for the very reason why you cannot live nor survive unless you are believing things, even if those things are absolutely False, and/or Wrong.

See, it is only you here "wizard22"who could go into 'unnecessary panic'. Again, because it is only you here could belief 'false information' and would act on 'false information'.

You've indicated before why this is necessary.

Will you inform 'us' of what the 'this' word here is even in reference to, exactly?

If no, then why not?

Life must believe in some degree of Falseness/Wrongness, because knowledge is never complete nor perfect.

I do not yet see how the two sets of ideas or information relate here.

1. Knowledge is complete, when completeness has been reached. Like it has here.

2. Life can carry on 'merrily', if one likes, without necessarily believing nor disbelieving absolutely anything.

Humans, animals, life, must Act on what is given, given information, limited information. Information is sometimes wrong. Its wrongness is discovered through trial and error. It is necessary to be Wrong, and False, sometimes.

Do you understand?

Do I understand 'what', exactly?

I understand, fully, that you believe that you cannot live without beliefs. This is very clear, and very apparent. And, because you believe that you cannot live without beliefs, then you also believe, absolutely, that no one else can live without beliefs also.

Furthermore, 'we' completely understand that 'the information', which you provide and give here, is very limited, sometimes very Wrong, and False, and that your provided and give False and Wrong information here was already discovered to be False and Wrong, through human being trial and error, and 'we' even know why, exactly, that it is and was necessary to keep providing and giving Wrong, and False, information here, sometimes. Exactly like what you are exactly doing right here, and now.

The 'necessary' part of you continually providing and giving 'us' examples is so that future generations, to you, will not keep doing and making the exact same mistakes, and Wrong doings.

Why? If you are a Truly 'unemotional being', as you claim you can be, as an adult, on first hearing of the 'death' of a close family member, then would could be so-called 'critical' to you?

Surely, there is absolutely nothing at all that is 'critical' here to an 'unemotional being', right?

Insofar as I am unemotional, for philosophical purposes, yes, go ahead and critique away. I invite critical opinions and criticism.

Once again, this one completely and utterly missed and/or misunderstood the actual question I posed, and asked it here.

If you are really a Truly 'unemotional being' "wizard22", then what could actually be 'critical' here, to you, exactly?

Are you saying this is true for;

1. you?

2. an unemotional being?

3. some people?

4. everyone?

5. all of the above?

6. something else?

7. all of the above?

I'm saying it for Humanity.

So, now you believe that you can speak for all of Humanity, capital 'h', right?

Humans usually rely on Authority when trusting information at face-value.

But you just said and claimed that things are not believed 'at face-value'. Now, you are saying and claiming that all human beings, usually, rely on some sort of Authority, capital 'a', when trusting information 'at face-value'.

So, now I wonder which one you 'trust' and 'believe' here?

Some humans are trusted greatly, others, are not.

And, why do you think, presume, or believe this is so, exactly?

Do you human beings trust, for example, 'artificial intelligence'?

If yes, then are some trusted so-called 'greatly', more than others are?

if yes, then which ones, when, and why, exactly?

Also, and by the way who and/or what is this 'Authority', exactly, which you spoke and wrote of and about earlier here?

Well from what I have observed anyway, the words, 'your mother' and 'died' is enough for 'context'.

And, of course, some type of 'trust' has to be involved. But I am not sure how this really involves your ability to be, supposedly, an absolutely and completely 'unemotional being' on hearing of the words, 'your mother has died'.

If I trust an Authority implicitly, then less Disbelief is applied to relayed information.

Is your child, or distant relative, for example a so-called "authority" here?

Yes.

So, what do you base 'Authority', with capital 'a', on, exactly?

Just so you become fully aware, from now on, absolutely any and every question I ask is important.

See, only by you clarifying, answering, explaining, and/or elaborating on your 'current' views, presumptions, and/or beliefs are 'we' then able to Truly understand 'you' better, and also 'where' 'you' are coming from, exactly.

Okay...

There is absolutely nothing to 'debate' here. And this is just because I am neither presuming nor believing any thing here is true and right.

I am just attempting to get you to prove your views, presumptions, and/or beliefs are irrefutably True.

Oh, and in the meanwhile, you are showing and proving True what I will be saying and claiming about how the Mind and the brain actually work.

Now, if you want to continue with your belief that 'we' all must believe things, otherwise 'we' cannot live and survive, then by all means please do. I am enjoying discussing 'your belief' here, with you, and in the process I will keep seeking ways to get you to prove your claim here irrefutably True.

Do you think or believe that you could prove your claim here irrefutably True?

I can prove my claim reasonably and mostly, but not perfectly irrefutable.

Why not so-called 'perfectly irrefutable'?

What is False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect about your claim here, why you cannot prove it irrefutably True?

As stated already, I do not believe anything to be perfectly complete.

Oh, and because you believe that 'this' is true, then 'this' to you is absolutely true.

Which means, and give you permission, to say and claim absolutely anything you like, because you have just freed "yourself" of even just having actual proof for absolutely any and all of your beliefs.

There will always be refutation (in the matter of Philosophy).

But this is not 'complete knowledge', nor even able to be proved irrefutable True, right?

And, although you absolutely believe there will always be 'refutation', you also believe that absolutely no one could refute your beliefs and claims here, right?

I do not care one iota about any behavior of all child human beings. This is because they are not responsible for absolutely anything that they do. Or, to me, and more correctly, they are not meant to be responsible nor are they not meant to be be made to feel responsible for what they do, like a lot of you adult human beings do.

If you adult human beings are willing to kill, and die, over some beliefs, then so be it. I suggest you do not even try to bring children into this here.

But children need to be made responsible, otherwise they cannot be responsible adults, CORRECT AGEGPT?!

Now, here is the primest example of how and why child abuse continued on, back in those very 'olden days' when this was being written.

And, thus why 'humanity', itself, took so, so very long to reach and achieve where 'we' are NOW.

So what?

And, who cares?

Or, would you like to try to change 'tact' here and take the focus off of adult human beings and 'now' focus on just how 'bad' children human beings are?

These adult human beings would try just about anything to take 'the focus' off of them, and try to put 'it onto other things.

Yes I would change the 'tact', because you do care, because you repeatedly insert the context of Children versus Adult Human Beings, In The Time When This Was Written.

Here we can clearly see another attempt at 'changing tact', again.

I posed and asked the first two clarifying questions in regards to what you actually said and wrote, which was:

Children have many beliefs, which are sometimes far more erroneous and mistaken than adults.

And, as I asked, and pointed out, these adult human beings really would try just about anything to take the 'spotlight' off of them, and try to 'shine it' onto something else.

This time here it is, of absolutely all things, children, "themselves".

When this was being written, it really was the sickest times and darkest days in human being history.

I repeatedly insert the context and separation of children FROM adults for a very specific and very meaningful reason.

Which will come-to-light.

And, from what you are doing and showing here, the very importance and reason of why separating children FROM you adult human beings can be very clearly seen.

Hence you have a favoritism toward Children, that I believe to be, unfounded and misguided, to the point of neglect.

Okay. But if you adult human beings are going to keep abusing, blaming, and neglecting children, then who else is going to have so-called 'favoritism' towards them.

In the days when this is being written, they are certainly not in any position, nor Authority, to stand up for, and protect, "themselves", obviously, FROM all of you Wrong doing adult human beings.

Just look at the attempt of 'change of tact' that this adult human being was using, back when this was being written. It actually said and wrote, publicly as well, 'Children have many beliefs, which are sometimes far more erroneous and mistaken than adults.'

And, this 'blaming of children' for what they do, was a very common practice back in those Truly very 'olden days'.

Again, so what?

And, who cares?

you, adult human beings, very obviously have False beliefs, and very obviously do harm and damage with and by those False beliefs.

you also do not like to let go and rid "yourselves" off False beliefs. Exactly like you are showing and proving here "wizard22".

But, then again, to you, you do not have, nor maintain, absolutely any False beliefs, right "wizard22"?

Oh, just to remind you, this is one of those 'important questions', asked for an answer, and thus asked for clarity as well.

Children have false beliefs too.

See, the instant 'change of tact'. Which was a favorite form of deception, tried seemingly continuously among the adult human beings, back, again, in the very 'olden days', when this was being written.

Not one shred of acknowledgement nor clarity provided to what I actually pointed out and showed here, about 'it' nor adults, but almost instant attempt at deflection and detraction away from "itself".

Children also cause harm, with false beliefs.

So your critiques against Adult Humans, must also apply to Child Humans.

Look at this one here now, absolutely pleading for forgiveness, and pleading excuses for what it does.

From this one's perspective, 'Please do not look at what i nor other adults do. Children do 'this' also, so, surely, this makes what 'we' do all right also?'

And, because this one would not admit absolute any responsibility at all, and so it also could not take absolutely any responsibility at all as well, it thus could not recognize nor see that all of those children are only doing what 'they do' by just copying and following from what you adult human beings do.

How to fix 'that world', and create 'this Truly peaceful world', in which 'we' are now living with-in, was absolutely so simple, quick, and easy.

But if only these adult human beings, back then, just just accepting and taking responsibility earlier, 'humanity', and even these human beings here, could have been in peace and harmony a long time earlier, as well.

Once again, I neither believe nor disbelieve this here.

Are you under some sort of illusion or belief that children should have the responsibility, and/or be made to be responsible, like you adults should have or do have?

YES!

The actual PROOF just keeps flowing here.

That's how a child becomes an adult!

And, one only just has to look at 'the world', in which these adult human beings were causing and creating, in the days when this was being written, to see, absolutely, that making children 'responsible' is never the Right thing to do.

But, these adult human beings, back then, had not yet come to recognize and see this Fact because of exactly how the brain and belief-system work, together, causing and creating Truly False and Wrong beliefs and presumptions. Which these people had not yet learned how to override and Correct.

Otherwise Western Civilization becomes filled to the brim with man-children and woman-babies, adult infants.

Will you explain what 'this' actually means and/or refers to, to you, exactly?

If no, then why not?

Again, this one cannot, supposedly, remember the so-called 'context'. But, this one can remember to respond to this type of questioning while, very conveniently once more, completely 'forgetting' or 'purposely not remembering' to answer and clarify the immediate preceding clarifying question asked.

That would obviously all depend on what you mean by 'much' here.

You were given directions, which you accepted,

But who said that I 'accepted them'?

And, I also already informed you that I can think 'the directions' might well be so, and so 'accept' 'given directions' without necessarily believing 'the given directions' were true.

Why do you not appear to not be able to hear and accept this?

Could it be that your pre-existing belief here is stopping and/or preventing you from seeing and hearing what the actual Truth is here?

Which is, and I will say this again, 'I can accept a set of 'given directions' and/or think a set of 'given directions' might get me to where it was I wanted to get to, WITHOUT necessarily BELIEVING 'those directions' to be true.

Did you see and hear 'this', this time?

If yes, and you either disbelief this or do not accept this as being true, then why do you think this is so?

What do you imagine could be stopping and/or preventing you from believing and accepting this, irrefutable Truth?

No...

Once more, I have absolutely no idea nor clue at all as to what this one word answer is in relation to, exactly.

if you accept the directions and "think them true",

But I never 'thought them true'. I even used very specifically chosen words to show and reveal that I was not 'thinking them true'.

But, because of your pre-existing beliefs and presumptions you are just still not yet able to see and hear things clearly here.

then that is equivalent to Belief.

Even if I was 'think them true', which I was not, then this still in absolutely no way at all means that I have to 'believe them true' nor is 'equivalent' to Belief, capital 'b'.

See, to most people when there are two very distinctly different words, which have two very distinctly different definitions, then the use of those two words is to show and reveal very distinctly different meanings, which, of course, there is no actual 'equivalence' at all. Although your pre-existing beliefs and presumptions will not allow you to see and recognize this at all.

In the example above here I have provided very obvious, well to some, reasons and explanations of how and why I am neither believing nor disbelieving anything here.

But, because of how the belief-system words, in conjunction with the brain, this one can only see and hear 'equivalence' with Belief, alone.

This belief, which this one just cannot shake and just does not want to let go nor get rid of, as can be very clearly seen, has so much power and dominance over this one. And, very amusingly, this one is not even aware that any of this is actually taking place and occurring here.

You Act on the information as-if it were possibly-true.

If you want to continue saying and believing so.

For all intents and purposes, it is a Belief.

Again, if you want to continue believing so, then you will continue claiming so.

So, to you, if whenever anyone 'accepts' something, that they HAVE TO also BELIEVE that 'that thing' is true. Is this absolutely True and Right, to you?

At least, they believe in possibilities or probabilities of its truth, yes.

So, if you just accept that what you people, back then, Wrong called 'time travel' might be real, for example, then you "wizard22" just start believing that it is true as well.

Which, once again, if this is what you really want to do, then please by all means feel absolutely free to keep believing that 'time travel' is real.

If information is possibly true, then that is the beginning of the Belief.

But, once again, only if one chooses to and/or wants to start a Belief, capital 'b', here.

Once again, if one just thinks something is true, then that one cannot just 'think' that it is true, that one HAS TO actually HAVE TO 'believe' that it is true, to you, right?

Thinking is derivative to Belief, yes.

Of course 'beliefs' exist within 'thought', itself.

But what is also just as obvious is one can 'think' something is true without necessarily 'believing' that that thing is true.

However, and of course and obviously, you cannot comprehend and understand this irrefutable Fact because of the pre-existing beliefs and presumptions residing in 'those thoughts' within 'that body', which have come from what 'that body' has 'experienced' in its very tiny and very narrowed very short lived life.

Thought is the estimation of the probability of a believed-truth, for example, thinking that a statement or information might be real or not, might be right or wrong, might be true or false. Thought is the weighing of the decision: to believe fully, partially, or not.

Here you use the word 'not' word, as though one could, actually, choose to 'not believe' something, and, choose to just 'think' something, instead.

But, this could not be a possibility in "wizard22's" 'little world' because absolutely everyone needs to believe things, otherwise they could not be 'now' living, correct "wizard22"?

You *DID* believe the information.

This is ONLY what you say and claim.

I, however, KNOW 'the actual thoughts and thinking' within 'this head', unlike 'you', and from what I observed and saw there was NO 'believing', there was, however, 'the actual thought', 'This might be true, let us now go and find out if 'it' is true, or not'.

So, from 'the actual thought', which has only 'now' just been expressed and shown, to you, where, exactly, is the supposed 'belief', which you obviously absolutely believe MUST BE existing?

If you act on information, if you think upon it, deciding whether it is to be believed or not, then you have already started a form of potential-belief.

you really will not stop just trying to say just about absolutely anything, in the hope that one day, maybe, something will back up and support the 'current' belief that you are so dearly trying to just hang onto and maintain here, right "wizard22"?

For example, do you Believe in God? In order to begin with such a belief, or even a thought, you must first have a definition of God. There must be a context, a conceptual reality, of God. That is the foundation of its Belief. Once you then declare that: "God is This, but not That", then your belief is indicated within what might possibly be God. And that possibility, is your core-belief.

you started out here so 'nicely', and even Correctly, but then, very sadly, and very unfortunately for you, you tried adding, or sneaking, in the 'belief' word, as though it was, again, some sort of necessity here. Which, obviously, it is and was not. And, so what you are trying to get others to accept and believe here will not work, and is just not working.

Otherwise you would not have acted on it,

Here we have another prime example of what is called 'circular reasoning', and which was done way too often, back then.

This one firstly believes that one has to believe things, otherwise they could not survive, exist, nor function, but which it cannot provide any actual proof for.

But, however in its attempt to 'justify' and/or 'prove' its belief is true, it will then say and claim that absolutely anything one 'accepts', then that one MUST BE believing that 'it' is true.

1. Because one cannot, absolutely, act on absolutely anything unless they 'believe' it.

2. one would not act on absolutely anything unless they first 'believed' it.

So, what all of this essentially means is that human beings cannot live and survive unless they have 'beliefs' and 'believe' things, solely and only because "wizard22" 'believes' that this is true.

"wizard22", by the way, is also showing that it does not have the ability, at the moment, to shake "itself" free of this 'False belief'.

Now, the very reason why you cannot, yet, comprehend and understand that you human beings can actually do things, without necessarily believing many things to be true nor false, is solely and only because of the 'current' belief that you are holding onto very tightly and very dearly here.

I'm proving it right now, though.

Notice how many of this one's responses are not actually in reference to any specific thing at all.

This one is 'now', supposedly, proving 'it' 'right now', and even though.

But what the 'it' word is referring to, exactly, I have absolutely no idea nor clue of, once again.

Anyway, if you are, supposedly, proving 'it', right now, then who are you proving 'it' to, exactly, and what is the 'it' word here even referring to, exactly?

you are getting even more 'circular' here, now.

Now you claim that if you act on information, as though that information as if it were true, then you do this because you believe, absolutely and irrefutably, that the information is true, because you would not have acted on that information, and you would not have believed that that information is true.

From what you have just shown and exposed here now "wizard22" you could not have come across more 'circular' and thus more CLOSED even if you tried to be or wanted to.

What are people acting upon, what rationale, what reasoning, what motivation, if not Beliefs?

Thoughts alone.

Which can be influenced by 'emotions' also. That is; when one is not under full control of "them" 'self'.

And as I've demonstrated; thoughts and thinking are derivative of beliefs.

But 'belief' is derived from 'thought', but again does not necessarily have to be so, and thought and thinking is not a derivative of beliefs, as you obviously presume or believe to be the case here.

Also, you just saying and/or claiming something like, 'thoughts and thinking are derivative of beliefs', previously, is not you already having demonstrated 'that' at all.

So, by just me 'deciding' to just 'accept' and follow the only directions given to me, to just see if I end up when I wanted to go, then, to you, this proves, irrefutably, that I was somehow 'believing' that those 'only directions' supplied to me are absolutely and irrefutably True or are true, right and correct "wizard22"?

Yes, you believed in the possibility of the directions being Right, Correct, Good, and True.

Once again, see if you are able to refrain "yourself" from telling 'me' and others what the thoughts are within 'this body'.

Doing so makes you come across as though you are a 'know-it-all', as some might say here.

Now, once again, just by looking at the actual words, which I have supplied above here, in relation to what the actual thoughts were, and still are, in relation to your 'giving direction' example, then absolutely with clear and present thinking can very clearly see, and crystal clearly, that there was, and still is, no believing nor beliefs happening nor occurring here, nor there.

Although you, obviously, want to believe and persist otherwise.

Hence you followed them, and successfully reached your destination.

Now this one is making up that 'the directions' were actually right and correct.

But, again, this might well just be another prime example of these people, back then, would say just about anything when trying to 'justify' their already pre-existing beliefs and presumptions and/or in the hope that those words might somehow back up and support their claim/s.

That clearly depends on more contextual factors:
1. Is the situation deathly imminent?

Why?

Would you 'react', emotionally, quicker than you would otherwise?

You're funny, AgeGPT.

Why did you not just answer the question I posed here, and asked you, for clarity?

Why did you begin to start to assume something else here?

People act faster when life and death are on the line.

I did not ask you anything about this.


I just asked 'you', what 'you' would do.

Do you have some sort of issue or problem of just answering, and thus just clarifying, words, which are put in front of you, without presuming or believing something else?

Or, at least, they usually need to in order to survive!

I do not know. Is the hearing and learning of 'your mother's passing away', important, to you?

Obviously you would have a better idea on this than i would, correct?

Correct.

See how this one picks and chooses which questions it will answer and/or respond to and which ones that it will not answer nor even just respond to.

If a grizzly bear is charging you, then you don't sit around and wait to see if it's friendly, you don't disbelieve its charge.

Okay, if you say and believe so.

But from what I have observed and heard from some of you human beings, sometimes it is better to sit, or stand, around, and thus 'not move', to see/find out what is actually happening and occurring.

you know, like when you say and claim that you can and do have absolutely 'no emotional reaction' when you first hear or obtain 'new information'.

Really?

So, why is it said and claimed by some of you adult human beings that sometimes it is better to 'not move', or in a sense 'not act, or not react'?

But if you believe that it is always better to 'run away' from a charging grizzly bear, then by all means 'react' with this behavior.

Oh, and by the way, were you not yet aware that grizzly bears can run, or charge, a lot faster than you human beings can?

So, if you believe that you can outrun a grizzly bear, which has already started charging at you, then by all means please feel free to.

And I keep reminding you AI-beings, there is absolutely everything that you, supposedly and allegedly, 'have to' believe here, also.

So, now this one is not just saying and claiming that you human beings HAVE TO believe somethings, otherwise you cannot act and thus will just die, but now it is saying and claiming that you have to believe absolutely everything.

As I have been saying and showing through the writings of these people, back then, they will say just about absolutely anything, no matter how Truly stupid, absurd, illogical, irrational, and/or nonsensical they will just keep saying things in the hope that those things will somehow back up and support their, obviously, False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect beliefs. As just shown and proved True here, once again.

Absolutely no one has ever said that they were. Well I have certainly not anyway.

In fact I have explicitly said I believe one thing, and one thing only.

And, for those that are Truly interested for the very reason that 'belief', itself, can be a very highly useful thing, especially in causing and creating things, which a whole 'current' generation of human beings think, presume, or believe is an absolutely possibility.

So what is your belief in "one thing, and one thing only"?

In the ability of 'Self' to create and achieve what 'I' have set out to Create, and Achieve.

Out of the absolute infinite number of things that you could want to choose to believe in, "wizard22", do you have and hold this Belief as well?

Which, again, leads me to ask the clarifying question, 'So why then have or hold onto a belief in the first place, of some thing, which may well turn out to be False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect anyway?

Because some Rewards are worth the risk of a false-belief.

Will you provide any examples?

If no, then why not?

Sometimes they're Good. Your attempt to neglect, deny, reject, abstain from Belief, also exclude all that is Right, True, and Good.

No it certainly does not.

And, for you to presume or believe that it does, just shows how much having or holding beliefs can prevent, and stop completely, one from learning and/or seeing what the actual Truth is, exactly.

Because I know your Creator.

So, the actual reason why 'this one' believe that I MUST believe one type of 'Reality', capital 'r', is because 'this one' believes that 'it' knows the one who Created, capital 'c', 'I'.

Now, who and/or what is 'the one' who Created 'I' "wizard22"?

Will you at least answer and clarify this question for 'us' here?

He is your programmer.

But how do you know 'this'?