|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Oct 6, 2022 20:59:26 GMT
Given truth A is not the same as truth T it necessitates that truth is contradictory given both A and T are truths.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on Nov 18, 2022 6:44:36 GMT
No it's different then you can comprehend I don't like your view but not for the simple fact that it is different because I like some other views that differ from mine and you keep trying to put me in a A or B kind of situation like you do with everything and that's not the case so tell me why are you being evil and continuing to try and push a dishonest narrative ? That makes you a bad person Is me being "bad", according to you, different than you being 'good'? and this is a perfect example of how you keep their from being any progress what so ever (answering a question with a question)
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Nov 18, 2022 8:20:06 GMT
Given truth A is not the same as truth T it necessitates that truth is contradictory given both A and T are truths.
Its fairly meaningless without an example, except perhaps as an emotional punchbag for that person that goes around being evil by pretending to be a psychologist and 'diagnosing' mental illnesses (that they know nothing about) in anyone who has an opposing ideology.
Pretending to be a psychologist is a sure sign of immaturity by the way, and tantamount to a confession of its own severe mental disorders.
Is it any better to insist that a contrast is a contradiction?
Well, you need to supply a specific example so we can get to how you have conflated the meaning of the word 'contrast' with 'contradiction'.
In philosophy, a contradiction is a logical impossibility, and thus also an empirical impossibility. Though sometimes people use the word thus:
"She has contradicted you", the contradiction implying that one of you is at fault.
We can have contrasting perspectives, and even reach contradictory conclusions as
a consequence. But only by one or both of us making an error in meaning or logic.
What example do YOU mean?
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on Nov 23, 2022 5:44:41 GMT
Given truth A is not the same as truth T it necessitates that truth is contradictory given both A and T are truths.
Its fairly meaningless without an example, except perhaps as an emotional punchbag for that person that goes around being evil by pretending to be a psychologist and 'diagnosing' mental illnesses (that they know nothing about) in anyone who has an opposing ideology.
Pretending to be a psychologist is a sure sign of immaturity by the way, and tantamount to a confession of its own severe mental disorders.
Is it any better to insist that a contrast is a contradiction?
Well, you need to supply a specific example so we can get to how you have conflated the meaning of the word 'contrast' with 'contradiction'.
In philosophy, a contradiction is a logical impossibility, and thus also an empirical impossibility. Though sometimes people use the word thus:
"She has contradicted you", the contradiction implying that one of you is at fault.
We can have contrasting perspectives, and even reach contradictory conclusions as
a consequence. But only by one or both of us making an error in meaning or logic.
What example do YOU mean?
Jesus Christ you whine like a big baby nothing's more pathetic then someone going around and whining because they got triggered because they can't except the reality that what someone said about them is true. You keep saying that I was pretending to be a psychologist my guess is so that you can try to get me in trouble for it but the truth is that I gave my opinion and I at no time claimed to be a psychologist infact I you made a point to emphasize how I was not a psychologist but that I have done a lot of research in that field and so I was giving my personal opinion just like you give your personal opinion on things that you don't have a degree in let alone even work in that field so unless you're willing to only speak about things you have a degree in I suggest you chill and get over it and move along with your PTSD triggered life and stop sh!tt!ng on the form over something in the past
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Nov 23, 2022 18:34:31 GMT
Is me being "bad", according to you, different than you being 'good'? and this is a perfect example of how you keep their from being any progress what so ever (answering a question with a question) So you are 'good' and I am 'bad'?
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Nov 23, 2022 18:36:30 GMT
Given truth A is not the same as truth T it necessitates that truth is contradictory given both A and T are truths.
Its fairly meaningless without an example, except perhaps as an emotional punchbag for that person that goes around being evil by pretending to be a psychologist and 'diagnosing' mental illnesses (that they know nothing about) in anyone who has an opposing ideology.
Pretending to be a psychologist is a sure sign of immaturity by the way, and tantamount to a confession of its own severe mental disorders.
Is it any better to insist that a contrast is a contradiction?
Well, you need to supply a specific example so we can get to how you have conflated the meaning of the word 'contrast' with 'contradiction'.
In philosophy, a contradiction is a logical impossibility, and thus also an empirical impossibility. Though sometimes people use the word thus:
"She has contradicted you", the contradiction implying that one of you is at fault.
We can have contrasting perspectives, and even reach contradictory conclusions as
a consequence. But only by one or both of us making an error in meaning or logic.
What example do YOU mean?
A 'hand' and a 'table'. The hand contrasts to the table and the table contrasts to the hand, one stands apart from the other. As standing out they contradict.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Nov 24, 2022 16:14:40 GMT
xxxxxxxxxThe hand is a priori to the table. So the table is but the shadow of the hand that carved it. Most seem to believe that the hand (and its owner) itself evolved out of a common ancestor with that of the tree. The protoglobular goobldigookism that the scientists say was brewing in the primordial soup that allegedly gave birth to us. Ceres then Goddess of the Earth is the core both the hand and the tree, and both are but fingers and branches of the same pagan deity. How one thing becomes another? They have always been the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Dec 1, 2022 21:32:19 GMT
xxxxxxxxx The hand is a priori to the table. So the table is but the shadow of the hand that carved it. Most seem to believe that the hand (and its owner) itself evolved out of a common ancestor with that of the tree. The protoglobular goobldigookism that the scientists say was brewing in the primordial soup that allegedly gave birth to us. Ceres then Goddess of the Earth is the core both the hand and the tree, and both are but fingers and branches of the same pagan deity. How one thing becomes another? They have always been the same thing. The hand is a posteriori in the respect that we move it through the senses. It is a priori in the respect that it is composed of space and space is a priori in the respect that without the senses all we sense is space.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Dec 2, 2022 15:58:06 GMT
xxxxxxxxx The hand is a priori to the table. So the table is but the shadow of the hand that carved it. Most seem to believe that the hand (and its owner) itself evolved out of a common ancestor with that of the tree. The protoglobular goobldigookism that the scientists say was brewing in the primordial soup that allegedly gave birth to us. Ceres then Goddess of the Earth is the core both the hand and the tree, and both are but fingers and branches of the same pagan deity. How one thing becomes another? They have always been the same thing. The hand is a posteriori in the respect that we move it through the senses. It is a priori in the respect that it is composed of space and space is a priori in the respect that without the senses all we sense is space. And the senses themselves carved by the hand of God? And space too, is a construct, and we know this because it is expanding, so in relation to what fixed marker is it expanding?
TRUE space cannot expand, any more than the number 2 can be greater than itself (which it cannot, so don't even try it, lest you feel the wrath of my keyboard).
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on Dec 3, 2022 9:04:37 GMT
and this is a perfect example of how you keep their from being any progress what so ever (answering a question with a question) So you are 'good' and I am 'bad'? If you define both of us just off 9f this 1 conversation then sure because you do that 3yr olds all or nothing junk to wast peoples time
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 3, 2022 11:18:53 GMT
So you are 'good' and I am 'bad'? If you define both of us just off 9f this 1 conversation then sure because you do that 3yr olds all or nothing junk to wast peoples time 9's has its own style. I agree that firstly not many would understand or accept it, but it doesn't mean it's not like that. Who knows the truth anyway? Personally I disappointed at too many philosophical and other schools, so for me it's even more pleasure to read something new, than those academical circular attempts. If to visit any academical philosopher sites, for instance, PhilosophyNow forum – me and 9's are also there – then there isn't much better. Of course, not only graduated ones there, however well, seems like the academics are wasted and stuck in producing just the same.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on Dec 4, 2022 8:31:07 GMT
If you define both of us just off 9f this 1 conversation then sure because you do that 3yr olds all or nothing junk to wast peoples time 9's has its own style. I agree that firstly not many would understand or accept it, but it doesn't mean it's not like that. Who knows the truth anyway? Personally I disappointed at too many philosophical and other schools, so for me it's even more pleasure to read something new, than those academical circular attempts. If to visit any academical philosopher sites, for instance, PhilosophyNow forum – me and 9's are also there – then there isn't much better. Of course, not only graduated ones there, however well, seems like the academics are wasted and stuck in producing just the same. Don't think I'm all for the standard philosophical view point because I think that what's called philosophy now days isn't philosophy at all If I had to give it a name I would say it's a philosophical quoting game wherein the person that can quote the most dead philosophers wins because that's all that ever seems to happen is a bunch of people referring to some dead guy from way back when And that's not philosophy The people being quoted if we observe how they lived life we will see that they didn't reference old dead philosophers from the past when answering questions, no what they did was they went out and lived life they went out and discovered the answers for themselves This is also why I find it insane that a person can go to college and get a degree in philosophy How on earth is it possible to go sit in a class room and read what other people have done and then get the title of masters in philosophy It's like some sort of sick joke because you can't understand life by reading about it As for 9x he is divorced from logic and reality I fully understand his point because it's not unique to him there are eastern belief systems that use that same style Allen watts covers several different practices that see the world in that same way I just find it to be unbalanced and dangerous to live in the imagination that much because the imagination will end up being the dominant awareness and when that happens the person will never know it and will be clueless as to what's actually real and what's just a fabrication.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 4, 2022 10:10:02 GMT
9's has its own style. I agree that firstly not many would understand or accept it, but it doesn't mean it's not like that. Who knows the truth anyway? Personally I disappointed at too many philosophical and other schools, so for me it's even more pleasure to read something new, than those academical circular attempts. If to visit any academical philosopher sites, for instance, PhilosophyNow forum – me and 9's are also there – then there isn't much better. Of course, not only graduated ones there, however well, seems like the academics are wasted and stuck in producing just the same. Don't think I'm all for the standard philosophical view point because I think that what's called philosophy now days isn't philosophy at all If I had to give it a name I would say it's a philosophical quoting game wherein the person that can quote the most dead philosophers wins because that's all that ever seems to happen is a bunch of people referring to some dead guy from way back when And that's not philosophy The people being quoted if we observe how they lived life we will see that they didn't reference old dead philosophers from the past when answering questions, no what they did was they went out and lived life they went out and discovered the answers for themselves This is also why I find it insane that a person can go to college and get a degree in philosophy How on earth is it possible to go sit in a class room and read what other people have done and then get the title of masters in philosophy It's like some sort of sick joke because you can't understand life by reading about it As for 9x he is divorced from logic and reality I fully understand his point because it's not unique to him there are eastern belief systems that use that same style Allen watts covers several different practices that see the world in that same way I just find it to be unbalanced and dangerous to live in the imagination that much because the imagination will end up being the dominant awareness and when that happens the person will never know it and will be clueless as to what's actually real and what's just a fabrication. Well, at least I do agree with you on those philosophical games with quoting. Oh, yeah this is 100% true. I think your description is the most precise characteristics of it. Maybe your point about 9's is also correct - you've got your own experience, and from your point of view the things are like that. However, not from mine purely. Because at least 9's is trying to break out from that cobweb of damn and idiotic quatation game. Even if you try to catch him on logical or other way - he's able to escape. It might be look like he's only manuevering or waving curly, trying to avoid of any counterarguments, but, on the other hand, should he give up and start claiming those trivial and ordinary phrases that are plenty of thousands in numerous philosophical literature? It's better, I guess, to ride away from this as far as it's possible, that to follow those pretty pulp and daily things. And plus to it, nevermind of anything else, your critics are also very support. My point is that despite of how 9's is answering your arguments help to see things clearly, because if not through critics, than how else to get to some truth?
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Dec 8, 2022 22:54:16 GMT
The hand is a posteriori in the respect that we move it through the senses. It is a priori in the respect that it is composed of space and space is a priori in the respect that without the senses all we sense is space. And the senses themselves carved by the hand of God? And space too, is a construct, and we know this because it is expanding, so in relation to what fixed marker is it expanding?
TRUE space cannot expand, any more than the number 2 can be greater than itself (which it cannot, so don't even try it, lest you feel the wrath of my keyboard).
That is one way of looking at it. The fixed marker is a form and as a form is composed of space, in these respect that space is not expanding.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Dec 8, 2022 22:57:05 GMT
So you are 'good' and I am 'bad'? If you define both of us just off 9f this 1 conversation then sure because you do that 3yr olds all or nothing junk to wast peoples time I never said the definition of "us" is based on this one conversation.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Dec 8, 2022 22:58:00 GMT
9's has its own style. I agree that firstly not many would understand or accept it, but it doesn't mean it's not like that. Who knows the truth anyway? Personally I disappointed at too many philosophical and other schools, so for me it's even more pleasure to read something new, than those academical circular attempts. If to visit any academical philosopher sites, for instance, PhilosophyNow forum – me and 9's are also there – then there isn't much better. Of course, not only graduated ones there, however well, seems like the academics are wasted and stuck in producing just the same. Don't think I'm all for the standard philosophical view point because I think that what's called philosophy now days isn't philosophy at all If I had to give it a name I would say it's a philosophical quoting game wherein the person that can quote the most dead philosophers wins because that's all that ever seems to happen is a bunch of people referring to some dead guy from way back when And that's not philosophy The people being quoted if we observe how they lived life we will see that they didn't reference old dead philosophers from the past when answering questions, no what they did was they went out and lived life they went out and discovered the answers for themselves This is also why I find it insane that a person can go to college and get a degree in philosophy How on earth is it possible to go sit in a class room and read what other people have done and then get the title of masters in philosophy It's like some sort of sick joke because you can't understand life by reading about it As for 9x he is divorced from logic and reality I fully understand his point because it's not unique to him there are eastern belief systems that use that same style Allen watts covers several different practices that see the world in that same way I just find it to be unbalanced and dangerous to live in the imagination that much because the imagination will end up being the dominant awareness and when that happens the person will never know it and will be clueless as to what's actually real and what's just a fabrication. Skyscrapers where built from imagination. So with all the technology you use today.
|
|