Morality as Symmetry in Time

[Logik]

Are you afraid to provide the so called EVIDENCE? Or, is there another reason WHY you NOT show WHERE and WHEN this supposedly took place?

Idiot.

It is in this post. Click on it.

....

Yet when I say; WHAT it IS that is in agreement with and by EVERY one, then that is what IS thee Truth, I am usually told; But we will never be in agreement.

Because you still haven't been able to agree with Saturn on anything.

Some people actually BELIEVE that it is just TO HARD to get EVERY one to agree on any thing.

They don't know how. You don't know how either.

Do you really NEED to be told/informed through some outside influence that with just yes/no questions you can figure out what other people mean, and, did you also NEED some outside influence before you KNEW that so that you can then agree with them, if you want to. ALL the people I know of have worked that out, all on their own, BEFORE they have reached adulthood.

So if you have worked it out how come you are incapable of agreeing with anybody? Have you noticed how you insist that people should think more like you?

Personally, I am not a fan. If we are ever going to agree - you'll have to give up your way of thinking.

lol. You really can NOT see past maths, can you?

You really think you can

To UNDERSTAND the Universe that you exist in, maths will NOT suffice.

Oh, you have a better language then? Show us.

One again. COINS DO NOT PREDICT.

Human beings predict. Coins do NOT.

Stop lying. I showed you how coins predict!

I asked the coin: Is it going to rain tomorrow? It said "Yes".
Exactly the same thing www.accuweather.com tells me!

Can you SEE that it is YOU, who is ultimately making the prediction, and NOT the coin?

Can you see that you are unable to reason abstractly?

Perfect.

MORE evidence and MORE valid justification for my previous yes response.

SEE, I did NOT have to VALIDLY justify My 'yes' response BECAUSE you can, and did, just do it FOR Me.

You answered "Yes" to "Can humans reason?"

You are incapable of abstract reasoning.
You are human.

So you answered was wrong. Can humans reason?

Some can. Age can't.

And, as I have been saying inanimate objects do NOT predict. YOU do. Even here you just wrote that it is YOU who is 'implementing'.

By definition inanimate objects can NOT do any thing, on their own. What YOU say that can do, regarding predicting, it is in FACT YOU who is doing that, and NOT the inanimate object.

Lies. Here is coin that flips itself! https://justflipacoin.com/

Keep waiting. If you think "maths" is the answer to EVERY thing, then you are VERY SADLY MISTAKEN.

Also, are you NOT able to SEE and UNDERSTAND things, without maths?

I used to think I can. Exactly like you think you can. Until I realised I am wrong.

SEE maths can be used to manipulate things in a way to SHOW an illusion of what IS actually Real and True. As can be proven within some of those so called "theories" that you use.

That's why you have to get good at maths. So you don't fool yourself.

Lol. If that is what you BELIEVE, then it MUST be True, correct?

I don't know if it's true. It's just mathematics.

Here's some reading for you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning

Another crucial difference is that deductive certainty is impossible in non-axiomatic systems, such as reality, leaving inductive reasoning as the primary route to (probabilistic) knowledge of such systems

Read that out carefully. Probabilistic knowledge. If you understood probability theory, you would understand why coins predict just fine.

And I shall leave you with one final question: If humans can reason, but you can't - are you human?

[Age]

Are you afraid to provide the so called EVIDENCE? Or, is there another reason WHY you NOT show WHERE and WHEN this supposedly took place?

Idiot.

I am.

It is in this post. Click on it.


....

But what you discussed in that post is NOT what I was referring to.

I had written, even previously to this post; My 'yes' answer was based on reason, which I have already justified. Did you miss it?

You responded by saying; Yes. I did miss it. Can you link me to your justification?

To which I replied: Sure. It was in the sentence preceding the one where I asked; Did you miss it?

So, for that reason what I was referring to, and which my question was based on, was NOT in that post you linked to but in what I linked to.

Therefore, there is MORE valid justification for my 'yes' response, to your 'Can humans reason?' question.

Surely, this is sufficient enough valid justification, that is; for those that are capable of SEEING it.

Yet when I say; WHAT it IS that is in agreement with and by EVERY one, then that is what IS thee Truth, I am usually told; But we will never be in agreement.

Because you still haven't been able to agree with Saturn on anything.

How do you KNOW?

Is it because I am an idiot?

Some people actually BELIEVE that it is just TO HARD to get EVERY one to agree on any thing.

They don't know how. You don't know how either.

But I do KNOW how.

You just ASSUME I do NOT know how, and you also BELIEVE this to be absolutely true, right, and correct, am I correct?

Do you really NEED to be told/informed through some outside influence that with just yes/no questions you can figure out what other people mean, and, did you also NEED some outside influence before you KNEW that so that you can then agree with them, if you want to. ALL the people I know of have worked that out, all on their own, BEFORE they have reached adulthood.

So if you have worked it out how come you are incapable of agreeing with anybody?

WHY would you even consider making up a completely ridiculous ASSUMPTION as this one, let alone expressing in actual written words?

Have you noticed how you insist that people should think more like you?

I do NOT insist any one thinks more like Me.

You just made up this another ridiculous ASSUMPTION, and now unfortunately you BELIEVE this to be true.

Personally, I am not a fan. If we are ever going to agree - you'll have to give up your way of thinking.

If "we" are ever going to agree on WHAT exactly?

There are millions of things that "we" already agree on.

lol. You really can NOT see past maths, can you?

You really think you can

Yes.

To UNDERSTAND the Universe that you exist in, maths will NOT suffice.

Oh, you have a better language then? Show us.

Maybe you have NOT read the reason I am here in this forum. If you have NOT, then just let me know and I will inform you.

One again. COINS DO NOT PREDICT.

Human beings predict. Coins do NOT.

Stop lying. I showed you how coins predict!

I asked the coin: Is it going to rain tomorrow? It said "Yes".
Exactly the same thing www.accuweather.com tells me!

Lol

Perfect.

MORE evidence and MORE valid justification for my previous yes response.

SEE, I did NOT have to VALIDLY justify My 'yes' response BECAUSE you can, and did, just do it FOR Me.

You answered "Yes" to "Can humans reason?"

You are incapable of abstract reasoning.
You are human.

So you answered was wrong. Can humans reason?

Some can. Age can't.

Even more evidence and valid justification for my 'yes' response to the question; Can humans reason?

If I am correct you just inferred some humans can reason but "age" can not. Is this correct?

And, as I have been saying inanimate objects do NOT predict. YOU do. Even here you just wrote that it is YOU who is 'implementing'.

By definition inanimate objects can NOT do any thing, on their own. What YOU say that can do, regarding predicting, it is in FACT YOU who is doing that, and NOT the inanimate object.

Lies. Here is coin that flips itself! https://justflipacoin.com/

In case you unaware that "coin" has been created from human beings, and through a computer program and computer screen you can see that action.

If you are still unaware that "coin" is NOT predicting any thing at all. You, however, may be able to ask yes/no questions and GIVE the outcome to absolutely any thing you like. But again that is YOU that is GIVING some thing. The actual inanimate object is ONLY giving you what you WANT it to give you.

Keep waiting. If you think "maths" is the answer to EVERY thing, then you are VERY SADLY MISTAKEN.

Also, are you NOT able to SEE and UNDERSTAND things, without maths?

I used to think I can. Exactly like you think you can. Until I realised I am wrong.

Yes, I NOTICED you have been WRONG quite a few times already.

SEE maths can be used to manipulate things in a way to SHOW an illusion of what IS actually Real and True. As can be proven within some of those so called "theories" that you use.

That's why you have to get good at maths. So you don't fool yourself.

lol

Lol. If that is what you BELIEVE, then it MUST be True, correct?

I don't know if it's true. It's just mathematics.

Here's some reading for you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning

Another crucial difference is that deductive certainty is impossible in non-axiomatic systems, such as reality, leaving inductive reasoning as the primary route to (probabilistic) knowledge of such systems

Read that out carefully. Probabilistic knowledge. If you understood probability theory, you would understand why coins predict just fine.

You are providing even MORE valid justification that my 'yes' response is ACTUALLY True, Right, and Correct?

I have provided enough evidence already, but now you keep providing more and more evidence for Me.

Also, it is just another "theory", which can be falsified. Very simply and easily by the way.

And I shall leave you with one final question: If humans can reason, but you can't -

Are you suggesting that you, human beings, can reason?

are you human?

That all depends.

[Logik]

Are you suggesting that you, human beings, can reason?

Are you suggesting that you aren't a human being?
Are you suggesting that I am a human being?

How did you decide that?

Yes/no questions everywhere...

[Age]

Are you suggesting that you, human beings, can reason?

Are you suggesting that you aren't a human being?
Are you suggesting that I am a human being?

How did you decide that?

Yes/no questions everywhere...

So, now that I have validly justified my 'yes' response to your 'Can humans reason?' question, what is next?

[Logik]

So, now that I have validly justified my 'yes' response to your 'Can humans reason?' question, what is next?

Do you remember when you accused me of assigning meaning to each side of the coin?

You have arbitrarily decided what is "evidence" supporting your theory, and arbitrarily ignored evidence which contradicts it.
You have arbitrarily assigned "validity" to your justification

Is this evidence supporting the claim? Yes/No question.
My coin says "No".

Was your justification valid? Yes/No question.
My coin says "No'.

Welcome back to the hole.

[Age]

So, now that I have validly justified my 'yes' response to your 'Can humans reason?' question, what is next?

Do you remember when you accused me of assigning meaning to each side of the coin?

That would depend on what meaning you "assign" or "give" to each of these words here.

You have arbitrarily decided what is "evidence" supporting your theory, and arbitrarily ignored evidence which contradicts it.

But there was NO evidence that contradicted my valid justification of my yes response. None that I saw anyway.

See, to deduce that there had been any contrary evidence i would have had to reason some things out first. Now, if i had done that, then that would be ANOTHER valid justification for my yes response to your Can humans reason question. And, according to YOUR very tightly held onto BELIEF, which states that I can NOT validly justify my yes response, about the FACT that humans CAN reason, it would, according to YOUR OWN "logic" be an impossible thing for me to do. Therefore, there is absolutely NO reason whatsoever for me to SEE any supposed "contrary evidence" to My obviously valid justification that humans CAN reason.

Even YOU, the one called "logik", has even stated that some humans CAN reason. So, based on this FACT.

P1. Some humans can reason.
P2. The word 'some' means from one, up to but not including ALL, of any group of things.
P3. If some humans can reason, then humans can reason.

I, once again, deduced, through reason, that humans can reason. Therefore, MY 'yes' response to YOUR 'Can humans reason' question has been, once again, validly justified.

But, because I am always OPEN, I am always willing to LOOK AT any thing that is presented to me. If any one else reading this can see any supposed "contrary evidence" that I have obviously missed, then feel free to point it out and SHOW us WHERE it is, exactly. We would ALL like to SEE it.

Maybe the "contrary evidence" you speak of what at my argument that i presented earlier where you said that it was a circling argument thing. Is that what you are referring to?

You have arbitrarily assigned "validity" to your justification

Do you have any evidence that humans can NOT reason?

By the way, even IF you did have evidence, by your OWN admission you can NOT justify it anyway. So, if you can NOT justify your own position, evidence, and/or yes/no responses, then really is there any actual use in presenting any thing in the first place?

Is this evidence supporting the claim? Yes/No question.
My coin says "No".

Was your justification valid? Yes/No question.
My coin says "No'.

Welcome back to the hole.

What black hole?

The only black hole I could imagine and could reason out here, at the moment, would be the one that could be caused from YOU imagining that coins make predictions. Is that the black hole you are referring to?

[Logik]

But there was NO evidence

That much we agree on.

You arbitrarily said that some things are evidence, but you didn't bother to justify why you have decided what is and is not evidence.

Looks to me like you just flipped a coin.

P1. Some humans can reason.
P2. The word 'some' means from one, up to but not including ALL, of any group of things.
P3. If some humans can reason, then humans can reason.

You are using the same deductive method which you called WRONG 3 posts ago.
Now it's RIGHT all of a sudden?

I am starting to think you are just flipping a coin.

Do you have any evidence that humans can NOT reason?

I don't know what "reason" is to have evidence for OR against it.

What black hole?

The hole where you keep on making yes/no choices, but you can't justify them

To claim that something is evidence you need to justify your "Yes" answer to the question "Is X evidence for the hypothesis?"

[Age]

But there was NO evidence

That much we agree on.

But I did NOT agree: on that deceptively shortened version of the WHOLE sentence.

You arbitrarily said that some things are evidence, but you didn't bother to justify why you have decided what is and is not evidence.

That is because I do NOT need to.

P1. Some humans can reason.
P2. The word 'some' means from one, up to but not including ALL, of any group of things.
P3. If some humans can reason, then humans can reason.

You are using the same deductive method which you called WRONG 3 posts ago.
Now it's RIGHT all of a sudden?

It does NOT matter one bit if it is right and sound reasoning or wrong and unsound reasoning. It is still just MORE valid justification for my yes response.

You, however, will NEVER be able to SEE this because you are BLINDED by that BELIEF that you just do NOT want to let go of.

Also, you may never find out if I wrote that argument purposely the way that I did or not. I KNEW whatever way I write IT would still provide the exact same outcome that I wanted to SHOW.

I am starting to think you are just flipping a coin.

You THINK this because you once again made a WRONG ASSUMPTION, and then JUMPED straight to a WRONG CONCLUSION.

Do you have any evidence that humans can NOT reason?

I don't know what "reason" is to have evidence for OR against it.[/quote]

LOL we can SEE that.

You quite often just jump straight to the WRONG CONCLUSION, instead of using any reason in the process.

What black hole?

The hole where you can't justify why you've decided what is evidence and what is not evidence.

You said I could NOT validly justify my previous yes response. I have ALREADY validly justified that response. That is ALL I WANTED and NEEDED to do here.

You, however, and unfortunately for you, can NEVER do what I have done here because you can NEVER justify, nor even reason out, your own responses. By your OWN stance, because of that stupid BELIEF that you WANT to hold on to so tightly, you are totally unable to reason, and you will NEVER be able to justify any thing that you say or do.

[Logik]

That is because I do NOT need to.

Do you need to justify what is evidence?

Maybe you do. Maybe you don't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "No".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "No" and not with a "Yes"?

input.png

It does NOT matter one bit if it is right and sound reasoning or wrong and unsound reasoning. It is still just MORE valid justification for my yes response.

Is it valid justification for your "Yes" response?

Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

You, however, will NEVER be able to SEE this because you are BLINDED by that BELIEF that you just do NOT want to let go of.

Am I blinded by belief?

Maybe I am. Maybe I am not.That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

Also, you may never find out if I wrote that argument purposely the way that I did or not. I KNEW whatever way I write IT would still provide the exact same outcome that I wanted to SHOW.

Did it provide the exact same outcome that you wanted to show?

Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

You THINK this because you once again made a WRONG ASSUMPTION, and then JUMPED straight to a WRONG CONCLUSION.

Did I make a wrong assumption?
Did I jump to a wrong conclusion?

Maybe I did. Maybe I didn't. Those are yes/no questions!

You seem to have answered both with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

LOL we can SEE that.

Can you see that?

Maybe you can. Maybe you can't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

You quite often just jump straight to the WRONG CONCLUSION, instead of using any reason in the process.

Do I often jump straight to the wrong conclusion instead of using reason?

Maybe I do. Maybe I don't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

You said I could NOT validly justify my previous yes response. I have ALREADY validly justified that response. That is ALL I WANTED and NEEDED to do here.

Have you justified that response?

Maybe you have. Maybe you haven't. That is a yes/no question!

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

You, however, and unfortunately for you, can NEVER do what I have done here because you can NEVER justify, nor even reason out, your own responses.

Can I never do what you have done?

Maybe I can. Maybe I can't. That is a yes/no question!

You seem to have answered with a "No".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "No" and not with a "Yes"?

input.png

By your OWN stance, because of that stupid BELIEF that you WANT to hold on to so tightly, you are totally unable to reason, and you will NEVER be able to justify any thing that you say or do.

Can you justify anything you say or do?

Maybe you can. Maybe you can't. That's a yes/no question!

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

Would you like me to buy you a yes/no coin for Christmas?

[Age]

That is because I do NOT need to.

Do you need to justify what is evidence?

Maybe you do. Maybe you don't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "No".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "No" and not with a "Yes"?

It does NOT matter one bit if it is right and sound reasoning or wrong and unsound reasoning. It is still just MORE valid justification for my yes response.

Is it valid justification for your "Yes" response?

Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

You, however, will NEVER be able to SEE this because you are BLINDED by that BELIEF that you just do NOT want to let go of.

Am I blinded by belief?

Maybe I am. Maybe I am not.That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

Also, you may never find out if I wrote that argument purposely the way that I did or not. I KNEW whatever way I write IT would still provide the exact same outcome that I wanted to SHOW.

Did it provide the exact same outcome that you wanted to show?

Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

You THINK this because you once again made a WRONG ASSUMPTION, and then JUMPED straight to a WRONG CONCLUSION.

Did I make a wrong assumption?
Did I jump to a wrong conclusion?

Maybe I did. Maybe I didn't. Those are yes/no questions!

You seem to have answered both with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

LOL we can SEE that.

Can you see that?

Maybe you can. Maybe you can't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

You quite often just jump straight to the WRONG CONCLUSION, instead of using any reason in the process.

Do I often jump straight to the wrong conclusion instead of using reason?

Maybe I do. Maybe I don't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

You said I could NOT validly justify my previous yes response. I have ALREADY validly justified that response. That is ALL I WANTED and NEEDED to do here.

Have you justified that response?

Maybe you have. Maybe you haven't. That is a yes/no question!

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

You, however, and unfortunately for you, can NEVER do what I have done here because you can NEVER justify, nor even reason out, your own responses.

Can I never do what you have done?

Maybe I can. Maybe I can't. That is a yes/no question!

You seem to have answered with a "No".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "No" and not with a "Yes"?

By your OWN stance, because of that stupid BELIEF that you WANT to hold on to so tightly, you are totally unable to reason, and you will NEVER be able to justify any thing that you say or do.

Can you justify anything you say or do?

Maybe you can. Maybe you can't. That's a yes/no question!

You seem to have answered with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?





Would you like me to buy you a yes/no coin for Christmas?

Looks like could be symptoms of insanity creeping in even further, to me.

[Logik]

Looks like could be symptoms of insanity creeping in even further, to me.

Are there symptoms of insanity creeping in?

Maybe there are. Maybe there aren't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?

input.png

[Logik]

That is how much of decision theory you take for granted when you run your mouth.

You have absolutely no clue what goes on in your own head and you probably still "don't see the problem".

Might as well be flipping a coin.

[Age]

That is how much of decision theory you take for granted when you run your mouth.

You have absolutely no clue what goes on in your own head and you probably still "don't see the problem".

Might as well be flipping a coin.

I do NOT see a problem because there is NO problem here for me.

I validly JUSTIFIED what I set out to do, so there is NO problem, and nothing else more for me to do here.

If, however, you still have problems that YOU can NOT work out and solve, then so be it.

[Logik]

I do NOT see a problem because there is NO problem here for me.

Is there a problem for you?

Maybe there is. Maybe there isn't. It's another yes/no question.

I validly JUSTIFIED what I set out to do, so there is NO problem, and nothing else more for me to do here.

Did you validly justify what you set out to do?

Maybe you did. Maybe you didn't. Yes/no question again!

So you justified a yes/no question with by making a statement which requires you to answer another yes/no question.
Which you then justified with yet another yes/no question.

The infinite regress is so obvious that you can't see it.

Quick! Stick your head in the sand! Maybe it will pass.

Or perhaps you will recognise that equivocation and truisms are not knowledge?

[Age]

Looks like could be symptoms of insanity creeping in even further, to me.

Are there symptoms of insanity creeping in?

Maybe there are. Maybe there aren't. That's a yes/no question.

You seem to have answered it with a "Yes".

Here is a handy hint for YOU. If you want to find the Truth, then YOU need to start with honesty. The Truth is I did NOT answer this question here with a "Yes".

Can you justify why you've answered it with a "Yes" and not with a "No"?
input.png

This is moot because it is just another example of just another one of your WRONG assumptions.

I have already PROVEN that I can justify why I answer with a yes OR with a no. In case you are unaware, the REASON why I answer with a yes or with a no is because I WANT to. There (validly) JUSTIFIED. Very simple really.

This is just like absolutely EVERY thing you do is because you WANT to, also.