[Questioning Everything]

[ken]

I can be free of bias and I am free of bias. If you can prove I am not free of bias, then prove it

I just did. You didn't notice.

If you are referring to your comment of, "Your entire thread has a point of view, and without a bias you are mute", then you will find that by definition a 'view' CAN be free of bias. Therefore you have NOT proved anything. The only thing you have shown is how much you do actually assume, without knowing what is true, right, and correct.

If you know how the Mind and the brain actually work, and you use a dictionary, then you may learn and discover that while beliefs and assumptions are being shared, then biases will also. But if a view is being shared, then it may or may not contain biases. A view is just gained from past experiences, and a view may not hold any biases whatsoever. This is all depended upon how the view is being shared with others. So, views can be shared free of biases without being mute. Therefore you have not proved anything yet.

If, however, you are referring to some other comment, then what was that comment?

[surreptitious57]

Watching a baby is not going to rid human beings of their biases. So that is not a valid example

I NEVER said it would. If you read again I never said that so that assumption is wrong

You clearly suggested that human beings could become free of emotional and subjective bias simply by observing babies
You however failed to realise that babies are not actually free from such bias themselves which invalidates your position

I just made a general point about subjective and emotional biases that human beings have

why do you think you can tell what ALL human beings do

I can tell what all functioning human beings do where that feature is one common to all of them
One of those features is that all functioning human beings have subjective and emotional biases

Your proposed solution to this is purely hypothetical

And just maybe my proposed solution may also be able to be proven as being correct. But until I say ALL of what I have to say or I
am questioned openly about the things that I have already said then how much of my proposed solution i have expressed already
might only be about 5 - 10 % So no person can make claim to what I have yet not said

You made an absolute statement with regard to the elimination of all subjective and emotional biases. And I explained why you were wrong to
do this. An absolute statement cannot by definition be compromised so unless you deny it nothing you subsequently say makes zero difference

It is of course wonderful in principle but less so in practice

One reason WHY you can NOT seem to even be able to just look at HOW biases can be eliminated is the very reason or cause of WHY you can NOT be open. You one human being can only look at things from the brain. The brain can only see from the limited knowledge that has been fed in to
it already. Whereas I the collective of ALL looks at things from the truly open Mind. The Mind sees things from ALL perspectives. The Mind is also always open to ALL and Everything

You however are not I the collective of ALL. You are just ken. A human being with his own particular set of subjective and emotional biases the same as every other functioning human being. You cannot impose the Mind onto your mind. And that is why I reject your suggestion that human beings can free themselves from all subjective and emotional biases. For that is simply not true

[Hobbes' Choice]

The only thing you have shown is how much you do actually assume, without knowing what is true, right, and correct. ?

What is true right and correct IS your point of view.

Even a thing which is utterly true is SELECTED as relevant. That it is relevant IS your point of view.
When you bring truth to bear on whatever you say that IS your bias.

[ken]

Watching a baby is not going to rid human beings of their biases. So that is not a valid example

I NEVER said it would. If you read again I never said that so that assumption is wrong

You clearly suggested that human beings could become free of emotional and subjective bias simply by observing babies

I NEVER clearly suggested that by just simply WATCHING babies then that would happen. I said, if babies are watched AND listened to, AND thinking was done, more like babies do, then human beings COULD be free of emotional and subjective bias.


Two things here;
Firstly, read the exact words I use.
Secondly, what human beings COULD do does NOT necessarily mean they WILL do it.

I said, ", then they [the ones observing babies] will understand how it is very easy to be completely open and view things from a truly unbiased and unemotional perspective." Again just because some thing is understood that does not necessitate that it will then happen or will be followed. For example human beings understand how it is very easy to be completely honest. But obviously lies are frequently told. Always being completely honest by always telling the truth does not happen. To reiterate just because human beings will understand some thing then that does NOT mean that human beings will do it, or make it happen. Another example of this is IF, and when, I ever get to finish ALL of what I have to express and I do it properly then human beings will understand how it is very easy to create and live in a truly peaceful and harmonious world. But there is absolutely nothing at all whatsoever to necessitate that that kind of life will come into fruition. Human beings will continue to evolve with the ability to freely choose to do absolutely whatever they want and choose to do, obviously the choice can only be based on the knowledge that has already been gathered and obtained but human beings still have the freedom to choose. If human beings choose to create the world that they all truly want to live in, or choose to live in the world they have now, then obviously that is their choice alone. I give human beings the freedom to choose. I do NOT force human beings to do anything. I instruct and guide so that human beings will understand some things. If human beings choose to follow that understanding or not is up to them alone.

You however failed to realise that babies are not actually free from such bias themselves which invalidates your position

You may have not noticed, or may have forgotten, that I actually wrote, "A human being when born has no biases at all, except maybe the biases formed from the natural instinct to live." I provided examples of biases that babies have, therefore, I actually did NOT fail to realize that babies are not actually free from biases themselves, as you proposed I did. So, my position is still valid.

I have asked you before to provide examples for some things you propose, without any luck I must add, but I will try again. Will you provide some examples of biases where you think babies are not actually free from such, themselves?

I just made a general point about subjective and emotional biases that human beings have

why do you think you can tell what ALL human beings do

I can tell what all functioning human beings do where that feature is one common to all of them
One of those features is that all functioning human beings have subjective and emotional biases

HOW do you KNOW this? Have you observed each and every human being?

Your proposed solution to this is purely hypothetical

And just maybe my proposed solution may also be able to be proven as being correct. But until I say ALL of what I have to say or I
am questioned openly about the things that I have already said then how much of my proposed solution i have expressed already
might only be about 5 - 10 % So no person can make claim to what I have yet not said

You made an absolute statement with regard to the elimination of all subjective and emotional biases. And I explained why you were wrong to
do this. An absolute statement cannot by definition be compromised so unless you deny it nothing you subsequently say makes zero difference

IF you read my statement as I wrote it. I said the understanding of how to eliminate some thing will happen. I never said it will be eliminated. If you read what I have written previously you will also see that I have agreed with you in regards to human beings. But what I am suggesting in regards to when elimination of biases is when human beings evolved past just being human beings. Therefore my statement is still correct.

By the way absolutely everything is relative to the observer. A so called "absolute statement" may NOT even mean what it does to the reader, as it was proposed to mean from the writer. You do know that the definition and the meanings of statements can and do get lost in translation? So, I am NOT denying what I said. But I can back up what I said with proof and evidence so there are things that I subsequently say that will make lots of difference. However, if you believe wholeheartedly that no matter what I say will make zero difference, then that is what will happen, to and for you. The power of belief is so strong that not even proof and evidence can penetrate beliefs. Each and every atheist and theist is living proof of this fact. In order to provide an example of this, go and find any human being who believes in some thing, which you KNOW is not true, put the evidence in front of them and just observe what happens.

It is of course wonderful in principle but less so in practice

One reason WHY you can NOT seem to even be able to just look at HOW biases can be eliminated is the very reason or cause of WHY you can NOT be open. You one human being can only look at things from the brain. The brain can only see from the limited knowledge that has been fed in to
it already. Whereas I the collective of ALL looks at things from the truly open Mind. The Mind sees things from ALL perspectives. The Mind is also always open to ALL and Everything

You however are not I the collective of ALL. You are just ken. A human being with his own particular set of subjective and emotional biases the same as every other functioning human being. You cannot impose the Mind onto your mind. And that is why I reject your suggestion that human beings can free themselves from all subjective and emotional biases. For that is simply not true

If and when you learn and/or discover HOW to look truly objectively, then you will KNOW what the difference is between the word 'you' and the word 'I'. There is also a huge difference between the word 'i' and the word 'I'.

Looking objectively the word 'you' is, as you so rightly say, is not I the collective of ALL. Only ALL of 'you' IS I, which as I stated is the collective of ALL. Looking objectively when "You are just ken" is proposed is 100% right also. But I am NOT speaking from the perspective of ken, then name given to a particular set of subjective and emotional biases, if I were, then that would be the little i. There is so much needed to be learned and understood to understand HOW I, the collective of ALL, look from a truly open and objective viewpoint while i, the particular thoughts within one human body, look from a subjective and emotional viewpoint.

If the world Mind and mind are being used and it is being proposed that some thing can not happen with them, then I will question what does 'Mind' and 'mind' mean, to you? Until they are defined I have absolutely no idea what is really trying to be expressed here.

If you believe it is not true that human beings can free themselves from all subjective and emotional biases, then so be it. You can keep believing whatever you want to believe. But I will just ask WHY is it so important that you hold onto and maintain this belief? I do not want to hear, "Because it is true", I want you to inform us WHY you want to believe this to be true.

[ken]

The only thing you have shown is how much you do actually assume, without knowing what is true, right, and correct. ?

What is true right and correct IS your point of view.

Another human being putting what they, themselves, do onto ALL others. You may view things and see them as being true right and correct, but I do NOT do this. I express my views, the ones which i obviously think are right, but I do NOT know for sure if they are true, right, and/or correct. I express them for feedback, questioning, and/or for challenging. I do this from a completely open perspective so that I can learn more and become wiser.

Obviously you have NOT read what I have previously written, which is totally understandable, you were, and are, never expected to read ALL of what I write. But what I have written already is that throughout every thing that I write it is posed as only a view, which may be partly or fully right or wrong, correct or incorrect, and/or true or false. That means absolutely every thing I write is open to being corrected. Stipulating this ONCE saves Me having to do it on each and every occasion that I write some thing down.

Even a thing which is utterly true is SELECTED as relevant. That it is relevant IS your point of view.
When you bring truth to bear on whatever you say that IS your bias.

And that is your point of view, which may or may NOT be absolutely true, right, and/or correct.

The difference between 'you' and 'I' is what I like to do which you do not do. What I like to do, and have done already, is stipulate the differences between views, beliefs, and assumptions. Depending on how a statement is being proposed, as a belief or just a view for example, will then influence how things are being observed from both the listener and speaker as well as the reader and writer. Doing this shows how much truth is in the statement, Everything is relative to the observer.

If you want to believe and thus observe some thing or statement as being absolutely true, then that is fine. No one is making you do otherwise. Just be forewarned that whilst that belief is maintained, then openness is non-existent. And, openness is needed in order to learn more or become wiser.

Again, this all comes back to questioning everything. If there is openness, then things get questioned. But if there is beliefs, then nothing is questioned.

If 'you' want to choose to believe things, then that is fine. I, however, choose not to believe any thing, except in the ability of Self to do and create what I choose to do and create.

[Hobbes' Choice]

The only thing you have shown is how much you do actually assume, without knowing what is true, right, and correct. ?

What is true right and correct IS your point of view.

Another human being putting what they, themselves, do onto ALL others. You may view things and see them as being true right and correct, but I do NOT do this. I express my views, the ones which i obviously think are right, but I do NOT know for sure if they are true, right, and/or correct. I express them for feedback, questioning, and/or for challenging. I do this from a completely open perspective so that I can learn more and become wiser.

Obviously you have NOT read what I have previously written, which is totally understandable, you were, and are, never expected to read ALL of what I write. But what I have written already is that throughout every thing that I write it is posed as only a view, which may be partly or fully right or wrong, correct or incorrect, and/or true or false. That means absolutely every thing I write is open to being corrected. Stipulating this ONCE saves Me having to do it on each and every occasion that I write some thing down.

Even a thing which is utterly true is SELECTED as relevant. That it is relevant IS your point of view.
When you bring truth to bear on whatever you say that IS your bias.

And that is your point of view, which may or may NOT be absolutely true, right, and/or correct.

The difference between 'you' and 'I' is what I like to do which you do not do. What I like to do, and have done already, is stipulate the differences between views, beliefs, and assumptions. Depending on how a statement is being proposed, as a belief or just a view for example, will then influence how things are being observed from both the listener and speaker as well as the reader and writer. Doing this shows how much truth is in the statement, Everything is relative to the observer.

If you want to believe and thus observe some thing or statement as being absolutely true, then that is fine. No one is making you do otherwise. Just be forewarned that whilst that belief is maintained, then openness is non-existent. And, openness is needed in order to learn more or become wiser.

Again, this all comes back to questioning everything. If there is openness, then things get questioned. But if there is beliefs, then nothing is questioned.

If 'you' want to choose to believe things, then that is fine. I, however, choose not to believe any thing, except in the ability of Self to do and create what I choose to do and create.

I just don't think you are bright enough to bother trying to have a discussion with. You are too closed off in your delusions.

[ken]

What is true right and correct IS your point of view.

Another human being putting what they, themselves, do onto ALL others. You may view things and see them as being true right and correct, but I do NOT do this. I express my views, the ones which i obviously think are right, but I do NOT know for sure if they are true, right, and/or correct. I express them for feedback, questioning, and/or for challenging. I do this from a completely open perspective so that I can learn more and become wiser.

Obviously you have NOT read what I have previously written, which is totally understandable, you were, and are, never expected to read ALL of what I write. But what I have written already is that throughout every thing that I write it is posed as only a view, which may be partly or fully right or wrong, correct or incorrect, and/or true or false. That means absolutely every thing I write is open to being corrected. Stipulating this ONCE saves Me having to do it on each and every occasion that I write some thing down.

Even a thing which is utterly true is SELECTED as relevant. That it is relevant IS your point of view.
When you bring truth to bear on whatever you say that IS your bias.

And that is your point of view, which may or may NOT be absolutely true, right, and/or correct.

The difference between 'you' and 'I' is what I like to do which you do not do. What I like to do, and have done already, is stipulate the differences between views, beliefs, and assumptions. Depending on how a statement is being proposed, as a belief or just a view for example, will then influence how things are being observed from both the listener and speaker as well as the reader and writer. Doing this shows how much truth is in the statement, Everything is relative to the observer.

If you want to believe and thus observe some thing or statement as being absolutely true, then that is fine. No one is making you do otherwise. Just be forewarned that whilst that belief is maintained, then openness is non-existent. And, openness is needed in order to learn more or become wiser.

Again, this all comes back to questioning everything. If there is openness, then things get questioned. But if there is beliefs, then nothing is questioned.

If 'you' want to choose to believe things, then that is fine. I, however, choose not to believe any thing, except in the ability of Self to do and create what I choose to do and create.

I just don't think you are bright enough to bother trying to have a discussion with. You are too closed off in your delusions.

You can say whatever you like but without providing anything, then really you are not saying anything at all.

What are the supposed delusions that I supposedly have?

What am I supposedly closed off to?

You start replying to Me but when I question you and/or point out things that you say, THEN you decide that I am allegedly not bright enough to bother trying to have a discussion with. If I am not bright enough to be able to have a discussion with you, then can we all take from this then that you will NEVER bother trying to have a discussion with Me ever again?

See the difference between you and I. I question everything, whereas, you just say things trying to put others down in the hope that you might look smarter than Me to others.

I find it hilarious how if you disagree with another's point of view, then they somehow instantly become less smarter and less intelligent than you try to make out you are.

By the way you never really tried to have a discussion with Me. You just wrote four sentences, which you believe are wholeheartedly true, right, and correct

[surreptitious57]

I understand exactly what you are saying as I have said before. But my objection to it is that it cannot translate to reality as functioning human
beings have subjective and emotional biases that prevents them from seeing every thing from an absolutely open perspective. And this includes
even you ken who is proposing this. You have your own subjective and emotional biases. As a tool for reducing bias it is useful but reducing and
eliminating bias are however not the same. By virtue of being a functioning human being one shall have bias. As a functioning human being free
of bias cannot exist for that is simply impossible. Human beings think emotionally as well as logically and this is where their bias emanates from

[ken]

I understand exactly what you are saying as I have said before. But my objection to it is that it cannot translate to reality as functioning human
beings have subjective and emotional biases that prevents them from seeing every thing from an absolutely open perspective. And this includes
even you ken who is proposing this. You have your own subjective and emotional biases. As a tool for reducing bias it is useful but reducing and
eliminating bias are however not the same. By virtue of being a functioning human being one shall have bias. As a functioning human being free
of bias cannot exist for that is simply impossible. Human beings think emotionally as well as logically and this is where their bias emanates from

Yes I KNOW you BELIEVE wholeheartedly human beings can NOT be rid of their own subjective and emotional biases and to you this is impossible. SO, no matter what I say or present in front of you will sway you at all. Okay I understand that. But where is the proof for your objection? How do you know what the future holds? How even do you know that I have not been freed of these biases already? It is one thing to speak of and for one's self but to try to attempt to speak for and about another is a whole different story.

You may never believe that it is possible to reduce and eliminate biases, but maybe with your help here I will be able to show others how it is actually possible to rid one's self of subjective and emotional biases, even if you are not able to see it for yourself. By the way if I recall correctly I have already stated that I do not disagree with you that functioning human beings have their own subjective and emotional biases, but what I have also suggested is that by learning how it is possible to rid one's self of subjective and emotional biases first, and if and when that is actually achieved, then they are going past, or evolving beyond, being just another human being. Dare I say it, but when one rids them self of subjective and emotional biases then they are being, or becoming more like, God, or God-like. They have moved past being a functioning human being and evolving more towards a functioning higher organism. Human beings will, like every other species has and does, only be around for a certain amount of time before they evolve into some other thing.

But for now with your help let us concentrate on your claim that ken has his own subjective and emotional biases, as you propose i do. Since you claim i do you must also have some proof of this, so whereabouts and what exactly are those subjective and emotional biases? If you can provide a list of those biases, then together we can see them for what they really are, pull them apart, and see how much, if any, they really are subjective and/or emotional biases? If we do this, then I can also show how we can look at this from a totally objective perspective also, although I obviously know you believe that this is impossible, I will hopefully show others how it is really very easily and simply done. Then maybe they will be able to show you how it is actually possible also.

If you want to hold onto firmly and maintain that belief that it is not possible to see every thing from an absolutely open perspective, then you will have to say and show more then that it is impossible. So, lets start by you showing "ken's" supposed subjective and emotional biases. If they can be shown to actually be subjective and emotional biases, which can not be eliminated, and thus a more open perspective can not be shown nor seen, then that might lead to that belief that it is impossible to eliminate subjective and emotional biases. However, if the opposite can be shown, then the opposite is also true. That is it is possible to eliminate subjective and emotional biases. I say it is possible. You say it is impossible. I say I have no subjective and emotional biases. You say I do have subjective and emotional biases. I can not show you any, but you supposedly can. So put them out for all of us to see them, please.

[surreptitious57]

You provide me with one example of a functioning human being ridding themselves of their subjective
and emotional biases and I will see this as evidence it can happen. You appear to be only interested in
the possibility of it while I am interested in the actuality of it. Which is where we fundamentally differ

Every single opinion that you have expressed upon the forum is an example of you displaying subjective
or emotional bias. So the fact that you think such bias can be eliminated is ironically an example of bias

[Hobbes' Choice]

The simple fact that this conversation can happen between ken and surreptitious means that ken can't be right.

Knowledge cannot be the preserve of a single subject, but can only be calculated by the collective collaboration between subjects. Surreptitious allows for this whilst ken is blind to the simplicity of that truth and insists that the meanderings of his own mind are truthful regardless of the world unfolding around him.

ken is stuck in the solipsism of his embryonic mind, and the only thing that can change his mind is an abortion in to the world of complexity.

[Noax]

I understand exactly what you are saying as I have said before. But my objection to it is that it cannot translate to reality as functioning human beings have subjective and emotional biases that prevents them from seeing every thing from an absolutely open perspective. And this includes even you ken who is proposing this. You have your own subjective and emotional biases. As a tool for reducing bias it is useful but reducing and eliminating bias are however not the same. By virtue of being a functioning human being one shall have bias. As a functioning human being free of bias cannot exist for that is simply impossible. Human beings think emotionally as well as logically and this is where their bias emanates from

I have strangely come to the same conclusion, possibly by different path. I think I am sufficiently reduced in biases to realize I cannot be free of biases, and I don't want to be free of them. It is possible, but as you say, removing them is to remove your ability to function as a human. Perhaps this is the answer to the Fermi paradox. Get too advanced and you start believing the truth.
Anyway, rationally, I may know some biased belief I hold is false, and yet I hold on to the belief. Clearly the rational part of me is not in charge when it comes to core beliefs. We are evolved for fitness, not truth. I found it quite revealing to find hard examples of this conflict.

[ken]

You provide me with one example of a functioning human being ridding themselves of their subjective
and emotional biases and I will see this as evidence it can happen. You appear to be only interested in
the possibility of it while I am interested in the actuality of it. Which is where we fundamentally differ

The sad thing here though is that if you already believe ridding one's self of their subjective and emotional biases is not actually possible, then you obviously are NOT open to its possibility. No matter what is put in front of you, there is absolutely no evidence nor proof that is able to infiltrate a belief. You appear to have already made up a very biased opinion, view, and belief that ridding one's self of subjective and emotional biases is NOT possible. Therefore, you are NOT able to see any evidence contrary. It is just not possible to provide evidence contrary to a belief. A belief, by definition, is completely closed off to any contrary evidence and proof.

By the way what would it really matter if you could rid yourself of these things? Would it not be good if you could be far more, or even a completely, open being, or even just slightly more open than you are now, thus able to then learn more and anew?

Why is there, within you, this very strong fixation on wanting to so dearly hold onto this already formed biased view and perspective?

Why is even just the possibility of getting rid of these things to you so hard to even begin to fathom?

Anyway, how I was able to get rid of subjective and emotional biases was when I began questioning where did this view/opinion come from. I discovered that if that view/opinion came from only my personal experiences, then that view may not be true, right, and/or correct. I certainly had no perfect upbringing SO how could what I have experienced be so true, right, and/or correct? I discovered that if the view/opinion comes from ALL things, then it was far more likely to be true, right, and/or correct. I also discovered, though, that even if everything was in agreement on one thing that is was still far better to always remain OPEN, because only from being open is how we best learn and discover new and more things.

So, I guess the evidence you need to see if it can happen will be provided when you begin to question your own opinions, views, and/or beliefs.

What does make your view/belief that it is not possible to rid one's self of subjective and emotional biases so true, right, and/or correct?

Why and how were you able to gain knowledge that is so unquestionably true, right, and correct, while others, like Me, for example who have a different view, are obviously, to you, so false, wrong, and incorrect?

This, to Me, seems hard to fathom especially considering that I am only proposing that it may be possible, whereas you are stating as an indisputable fact and wholeheartedly that it is impossible, no matter what. By doing this I am being open while you are being closed.

By the way I am coming across as appearing to be only interested in its possibility because if I came across any stronger in its actuality, then that tends to drive the other person to defend their belief and thus position even stronger. But from all accounts it appears you will NEVER even consider anything other than what it is that you already believe is true, right, and correct here. It appears you are unable to question anything regarding this, let alone question everything.

Every single opinion that you have expressed upon the forum is an example of you displaying subjective
or emotional bias. So the fact that you think such bias can be eliminated is ironically an example of bias

Thank you for providing an example. Now we can look at it and discuss it. And what would be great and enlightening would be if you began questioning things within my example. This will show not just that you are open to my examples but also allow Me to provide further insight into how to rid biases very simply, quickly, and easily. If you really want to learn, or appear to be wanting to learn, how to rid yourself of subjective and emotional biases, then you will question everything till either you learn HOW to or you prove that it is an impossible thing to do.

What happens if every single "opinion" IS expressed as being either right or wrong or partly right or wrong? NONE of these opinions are being expressed as being true, right, and/or correct.

If every single opinion I have expressed is expressed as being just a view, which I obviously obtained from past experiences, and NOT some thing that is right, then that opinion/view is left open. Therefore, I am remaining open. There is a huge difference in expressing some thing as being true, right, and/or correct, from expressing some thing that is just a view I obtained from past experiences which MAY or MAY NOT be true, right, and/or correct.

Absolutely every single view I express throughout these forums is NOT expressed as being true, right, and/or correct. I have stated this already. Absolutely every single thing is expressed as being what this body has witness, observed, or viewed, from its past experiences. ALL of these opinions are OPEN. These opinions come from only one person. One person obviously can NOT KNOW FOR SURE what is true, right, and/or correct, SO absolutely every opinion is expressed as just a view I obviously obtained from past experiences, which all of are open.

To further remain OPEN, I neither believe nor disbelieve absolutely any view I have. Of course I obtained a view and keep obtaining views, to not do this may well be impossible. But for the very obvious reason that the absolute truthfulness or falseness of a view can NOT be made until a completely objective perspective has looked at it, and from this perspective it has been discussed, only then will it be decided how much truthfulness or falseness is within that view. But as I have previously stated even if absolutely Everything is in agreement on some thing be true or false, then the better thing to do is still NOT believe in that, so we can remain OPEN.

I agree wholeheartedly that a human being functions on a level of subjectivity and on a level emotion, however, they function on differing levels of those two things. Of course a human being expresses opinions that are derived subjectively and emotionally. Every person can really only express from a personal level, BUT, if any personal view is expressed as being just that, that is a just a view, then there is NO biases whatsoever. Because i, ken, observe things, which are obviously just views, from which opinions are formed that in itself does NOT mean that I then have biases towards anything whatsoever. I am able to separate what this body see, hears, feels, smells, and tastes, from what COULD actually be true, right, and/or correct. For example every thing this body experienced in childhood told it that we, human beings, need money to live. I could have then go on to believe that this is true, and acted accordingly. However, I learned that every thing that this body sees, hears, feels, smells, and tastes may NOT be true, right, and/or correct. I discovered that if I want to KNOW, for sure, what is true, right, and/or correct, then I have to always remain open, that is neither believe nor disbelieve what i personally experience, and look at things from every thing's perspective.

To think some thing is true is NOT to know some thing is true. If I express for example 'I think such bias can be eliminated', then this is NOT ironically an example of bias. It is an example of what I think is possible. I am NOT saying it is possible. I am expressing and saying exactly what I am expressing and saying and that is what I think, which obviously may or may not be true. If, however, I expressed that I know it is possible, then that is completely different. Expressing that way means I am NOT open to any other possibility. To express some thing as this is what I think is true, right, and/or correct means that I remain open to other possibilities. So, I can remain open, always.

Every single opinion that I have expressed upon the forum is an example of Me displaying subjective
or emotional views, which are not biased in any way, shape, nor form. But one reason why we are having differing opinions here is might be because we have a different interpretation of the word 'bias'. I see this word as meaning similar to if I express a view or an opinion, then I would be biased towards that view/opinion when I am looking at other things, which would mean that I would not be completely OPEN.

[ken]

The simple fact that this conversation can happen between ken and surreptitious means that ken can't be right.

Knowledge cannot be the preserve of a single subject, but can only be calculated by the collective collaboration between subjects. Surreptitious allows for this whilst ken is blind to the simplicity of that truth and insists that the meanderings of his own mind are truthful regardless of the world unfolding around him.

ken is stuck in the solipsism of his embryonic mind, and the only thing that can change his mind is an abortion in to the world of complexity.

So, I say what could be possible, whereas I am being told forever more it is impossible, and I can not be right.

How do you know what WILL be impossible forever more?

And, if you ever want to re-read what I have said about the knowledge that comes from one subject compared to the collective collaboration between ALL subjects, then you may just form a different view of what it is that I have really been saying.

[ken]

I understand exactly what you are saying as I have said before. But my objection to it is that it cannot translate to reality as functioning human beings have subjective and emotional biases that prevents them from seeing every thing from an absolutely open perspective. And this includes even you ken who is proposing this. You have your own subjective and emotional biases. As a tool for reducing bias it is useful but reducing and eliminating bias are however not the same. By virtue of being a functioning human being one shall have bias. As a functioning human being free of bias cannot exist for that is simply impossible. Human beings think emotionally as well as logically and this is where their bias emanates from

I have strangely come to the same conclusion, possibly by different path. I think I am sufficiently reduced in biases to realize I cannot be free of biases, and I don't want to be free of them. It is possible, but as you say, removing them is to remove your ability to function as a human.

The path that I was led down revealed that by the use of the very word of 'believing', then the biases will always remain. Remove the word 'believe/belief' and the views now become just exactly what they are, that is a view, which one could be biased towards or not. Every view comes from a past experience, finding out where each and every view came from exactly helps to discover how ALL views are formed, it also shows how wrong previously believed "right" views were and are.

You have used the magic words of "I don't want to be free of them" to reveal why you believe you can not be free of them. Human beings do not try to do/achieve what they do not want. And if you are not going to try to rid yourself of biases, then you obviously can NOT get rid of them. By the way not wanting to do some thing is completely and wholeheartedly different from not being able to do or achieve some thing. Just because a person does not want to do some thing this does not mean that thing is not possible to do or achieve.

It is very possible to easily remove biases and still function, (maybe this will be classed as being in a higher evolved state than a human being), but I would also say that it is probably impossible to function as a human being without having and coming to subjective and emotional views. To literally look from or see from a level that is not on a personal (subjective) level or from not on an emotional level would literally mean that is not functioning as a human being. A 'human being', by definition, is a human body with thoughts (subjective views) and emotions within it. But that does not infer that biases within these views can not be changed. To change a view so that it does not then affect the way one looks at other things, for example from a confirmation biases viewpoint, is possible and a very easy thing to do I say.

Perhaps this is the answer to the Fermi paradox. Get too advanced and you start believing the truth.

I have already explained that even IF ALL are in agreement of what a truth is it is still far better to NEVER believe in that truth.

If one just VIEWS some thing as being true, then they can remain open always, but, if one BELIEVES some thing is true, then they are NOT open.

To Me, to advance/evolve is to learn to stop believing (in) any thing.

Anyway, rationally, I may know some biased belief I hold is false, and yet I hold on to the belief.

Thank you, that is a very open and honest remark. Very refreshing.

Now that it is out here a few questions arise;
WHY do you think you hold on to that belief?

Why have the belief in the first place?

Why believe in it?

Why not just keep it as a view, which was obviously obtained, but its actual truthfulness could still remain open to change?

Would it severely affect anything if what was being believed to be true was not actually true?

Could you provide an example of a biased belief that you know is false and yet you still hold on to it, so that we could look into this better?

Clearly the rational part of me is not in charge when it comes to core beliefs. We are evolved for fitness, not truth. I found it quite revealing to find hard examples of this conflict.

[/quote]

I found it quite enlightening and awakening when I discovered how to be able to easily rid myself of ALL (core) beliefs.