Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 2

[Immanuel Can]

So I'm not saying that Non-dualism fails to live up to the standards of some other religion. I'm saying it can't stand up to its own standards.

Reality is Unknowable full stop IC

Then what are we discussing?

For you view cannot be "reality." You've said it's "unknowable, full stop."

It's impossible, therefore, that you can make a claim to know it.

[Dontaskme]

Then what are we discussing?

For you view cannot be "reality." You've said it's "unknowable, full stop."

It's impossible, therefore, that you can make a claim to know it.

We are discussing the idea there is a character that goes by the name 'Immanuel Can' that believes in a God, and claims the belief can be known.

Is that correct? or is it false, please clarify.

And then we can proceed with the discussion.

[Immanuel Can]

Then what are we discussing?

For you view cannot be "reality." You've said it's "unknowable, full stop."

It's impossible, therefore, that you can make a claim to know it.

We are discussing the idea there is a character that goes by the name 'Immanuel Can' that believes in a God, and claims the belief can be known.

I don't think we are.

I think I know it's true I exist, and you are taking it for granted it is true I exist, even though at the same time you insist nothing is really true.

And I can't make any good sense out of that.

[Dontaskme]

Then what are we discussing?

For you view cannot be "reality." You've said it's "unknowable, full stop."

It's impossible, therefore, that you can make a claim to know it.

We are discussing the idea there is a character that goes by the name 'Immanuel Can' that believes in a God, and claims the belief can be known.

I don't think we are.

I think I know it's true I exist, and you are taking it for granted it is true I exist, even though at the same time you insist nothing is really true.

And I can't make any good sense out of that.

IC ...there is the sense of being ...that is known.

But this known being has never witnessed / SEEN it’s own birth has it?


Thanks for staying with this discussion ok..I appreciate it.

[Immanuel Can]

We are discussing the idea there is a character that goes by the name 'Immanuel Can' that believes in a God, and claims the belief can be known.

I don't think we are.

I think I know it's true I exist, and you are taking it for granted it is true I exist, even though at the same time you insist nothing is really true.

And I can't make any good sense out of that.

IC ...there is the sense of being ...that is known.

"There is..."? What do you mean?

Do you mean that you have a sense of your own being, or I have a sense of my being, even though you don't know if I exist, but keep talking to me as if you believe I exist?

[Dontaskme]

I don't think we are.

I think I know it's true I exist, and you are taking it for granted it is true I exist, even though at the same time you insist nothing is really true.

And I can't make any good sense out of that.

IC ...there is the sense of being ...that is known.

"There is..."? What do you mean?

Do you mean that you have a sense of your own being, or I have a sense of my being, even though you don't know if I exist, but keep talking to me as if you believe I exist?

there’s a sense of ones own being ...so it’s assumed that there are others who also know the same sense of being.

I’ve already confirmed the sense of being to be known.

But has this sense of being ever witnessed it’s own birth? Can this “owned being” watch it’s own being be born? Or watch it’s own conception being conceived?


.

.

[Immanuel Can]

IC ...there is the sense of being ...that is known.

"There is..."? What do you mean?

Do you mean that you have a sense of your own being, or I have a sense of my being, even though you don't know if I exist, but keep talking to me as if you believe I exist?

there’s a sense of ones own being ...so it’s assumed that there are others who also know the same sense of being.

Again, "there's"?

Where is it? In me? In you? In both? Who's having this "sense"? You don't say.

Here's what's obvious. You believe you exist. You believe I exist. You believe you and I share a reality.

I know, because you keep talking to me about what's real. And so long as you do, you believe in all three.

This is the way you act, even if you say something quite different. So until your actions line up with what you say, why should I believe what you only say but never do?

[Dontaskme]

"There is..."? What do you mean?

Do you mean that you have a sense of your own being, or I have a sense of my being, even though you don't know if I exist, but keep talking to me as if you believe I exist?

there’s a sense of ones own being ...so it’s assumed that there are others who also know the same sense of being.

Again, "there's"?

Where is it? In me? In you? In both? Who's having this "sense"? You don't say.

Here's what's obvious. You believe you exist. You believe I exist. You believe you and I share a reality.

I know, because you keep talking to me about what's real. And so long as you do, you believe in all three.

This is the way you act, even if you say something quite different. So until your actions line up with what you say, why should I believe what you only say but never do?

IC...This one here, the sense of being known as the character Dontaskme ...has not witnessed my own birth. Here, there’s just a sense of being which is known, even though this knowing has never witnessed this sense of knowing being birthed. In other words, this knowing being was not present at it’s own conception.

Now all I’m asking you there known as IC...is has IC witnessed himself being born? That’s all that is being asked.

[Immanuel Can]

there’s a sense of ones own being ...so it’s assumed that there are others who also know the same sense of being.

Again, "there's"?

Where is it? In me? In you? In both? Who's having this "sense"? You don't say.

Here's what's obvious. You believe you exist. You believe I exist. You believe you and I share a reality.

I know, because you keep talking to me about what's real. And so long as you do, you believe in all three.

This is the way you act, even if you say something quite different. So until your actions line up with what you say, why should I believe what you only say but never do?

IC...This one here, the sense of being known as the character Dontaskme ...has not witnessed my own birth.

So?

You were there, of course...that you have no memory of it does not imply it did not happen.

But seriously, DAM, it doesn't remotely matter, either way: what's your birth got to do with it? You're here now: and a "you" is talking to a "me" about the nature of the truth about this "reality." So however you got here, you still obviously believe in you, me and reality.

When you no longer believe there's a "you" or a "me," or a "reality" we can talk about, you'll stop talking to me about reality. Until you do, it's clear that you don't believe that these things are actually problematic. You believe in all three.

[Dontaskme]

Again, "there's"?

Where is it? In me? In you? In both? Who's having this "sense"? You don't say.

Here's what's obvious. You believe you exist. You believe I exist. You believe you and I share a reality.

I know, because you keep talking to me about what's real. And so long as you do, you believe in all three.

This is the way you act, even if you say something quite different. So until your actions line up with what you say, why should I believe what you only say but never do?

IC...This one here, the sense of being known as the character Dontaskme ...has not witnessed my own birth.

So?

You were there, of course...that you have no memory of it does not imply it did not happen.

But seriously, DAM, it doesn't remotely matter, either way: what's your birth got to do with it? You're here now: and a "you" is talking to a "me" about the nature of the truth about this "reality." So however you got here, you still obviously believe in you, me and reality.

When you no longer believe there's a "you" or a "me," or a "reality" we can talk about, you'll stop talking to me about reality. Until you do, it's clear that you don't believe that these things are actually problematic. You believe in all three.

If I had no memory present to witness the birth of my own conception ...then who’s the one that is here now remembering there was no memory present to witness my own conception?


Are you saying that we cannot know anything until we remember it?
Who is the believer that believes it is here now?...are you saying it is the memory who believes?

[Immanuel Can]

If I had no memory present to witness the birth of my own conception ...then who’s the one that is here now remembering there was no memory present to witness my own conception?

That would be you.

And you're still talking to me.

And you're talking as if "birth" were real, so you're talking about the nature of reality.

You, me and reality: you believe in them.

[Dontaskme]

If I had no memory present to witness the birth of my own conception ...then who’s the one that is here now remembering there was no memory present to witness my own conception?

That would be you.

And you're still talking to me.

And you're talking as if "birth" were real, so you're talking about the nature of reality.

You, me and reality: you believe in them.

But this YOU cannot know this you exists until there is a memory present to inform this you is present now, so that means the memory must also be here now as the you is being known now.


So if the memory is here now, why wasn’t the memory present at the birth of my conception ?

How can I know I am the knower of reality of my being now ..even though I know now that I had no knowledge of my conception?

[Immanuel Can]

If I had no memory present to witness the birth of my own conception ...then who’s the one that is here now remembering there was no memory present to witness my own conception?

That would be you.

And you're still talking to me.

And you're talking as if "birth" were real, so you're talking about the nature of reality.

You, me and reality: you believe in them.

But this YOU cannot know this you exists until there is a memory present to inform this you is present now, so that means the memory must also be here now as the you is being known now.

Well, you don't know what cognitions I'm having...or even if I'm having any.

What you know is that you believe in a you, a me and a reality. You don't actually believe "all is one."

So if the memory is here now, why wasn’t the memory present at the birth of my conception ?

Nobody's is.

At your "conception," you were a zygote. When you were a newborn, you had no frame of reference or existing cateogories into which memories could be fit...so you could retain very little. Everything was totally new. Everything was loud, wonderful, inarticulable, and utterly confusing for the first few months.

What do you expect to remember, when you had no frame of reference built yet?

Memory occurs within existing categories. If I say to you, "Remember when we went to the beach?" you might have a memory. But it's only because you already understood each of the words in a category. "Remember...action word, bring to recollection." "Beach" a sandy place. "Went," past tense of "go," also a verb, and so on. You have the categories to make sense of the situation, and to consult your memory bank to find the reference to the appropriate event.

But you didn't have any of that as a baby. Not even language.

How can I know I am the knower of reality of my being now ..even though I know now that I had no knowledge of my conception?

Why would you need to know that night when your mom and dad parked the Cadillac convertible at Makeout Point and drank a little too much, and well...because THAT was your "conception." You weren't there. You were a zygote in your mom's ovaries and a twinkle in your dad's eye that hadn't even gotten together yet. How would you ever expect to remember your "conception"?

Or did you mean "birth"?

But you didn't stay that way, did you? You grew, developed categories, and began to use them to store memories. And sometime when you were a toddler, perhaps, you began to keep long-term ones. But your brain was going to continue to develop...and eventually to deteriorate as well. Yet you were still "you." You existed. And the memories were your memories, and nobody else's. For nobody else ever saw through your eyes.

And nobody ever will. Do you doubt, then, that you exist? And what about all the stuff your memories are formed of? I mean, the beach, the group that was there, the sun, the sand...all delusions, you suppose?

[Dontaskme]

That would be you.

And you're still talking to me.

And you're talking as if "birth" were real, so you're talking about the nature of reality.

You, me and reality: you believe in them.

But this YOU cannot know this you exists until there is a memory present to inform this you is present now, so that means the memory must also be here now as the you is being known now.

Well, you don't know what cognitions I'm having...or even if I'm having any.

What you know is that you believe in a you, a me and a reality. You don't actually believe "all is one."

So if the memory is here now, why wasn’t the memory present at the birth of my conception ?

Nobody's is.

At your "conception," you were a zygote. When you were a newborn, you had no frame of reference or existing cateogories into which memories could be fit...so you could retain very little. Everything was totally new. Everything was loud, wonderful, inarticulable, and utterly confusing for the first few months.

What do you expect to remember, when you had no frame of reference built yet?

Memory occurs within existing categories. If I say to you, "Remember when we went to the beach?" you might have a memory. But it's only because you already understood each of the words in a category. "Remember...action word, bring to recollection." "Beach" a sandy place. "Went," past tense of "go," also a verb, and so on. You have the categories to make sense of the situation, and to consult your memory bank to find the reference to the appropriate event.

But you didn't have any of that as a baby. Not even language.

How can I know I am the knower of reality of my being now ..even though I know now that I had no knowledge of my conception?

Why would you need to know that night when your mom and dad parked the Cadillac convertible at Makeout Point and drank a little too much, and well...because THAT was your "conception." You weren't there. You were a zygote in your mom's ovaries and a twinkle in your dad's eye that hadn't even gotten together yet. How would you ever expect to remember your "conception"?

Or did you mean "birth"?

But you didn't stay that way, did you? You grew, developed categories, and began to use them to store memories. And sometime when you were a toddler, perhaps, you began to keep long-term ones. But your brain was going to continue to develop...and eventually to deteriorate as well. Yet you were still "you." You existed. And the memories were your memories, and nobody else's. For nobody else ever saw through your eyes.

And nobody ever will. Do you doubt, then, that you exist? And what about all the stuff your memories are formed of? I mean, the beach, the group that was there, the sun, the sand...all delusions, you suppose?

IC...you’ve informed me nobody else ever saw through my eyes...and yet you’ve just informed me of some experiences that form and shape who and what I am.....so how can you know or see my being....when there is nobody else looking through my eyes?
Here there is the sense of being. You are. I Am...but this you / I am cannot say who or what you are/ I am

If I am only made up from a recollection of memories of the past, then I must be dead...though I live.

Life is a dream dreamt by no one.


.

[henry quirk]

you’ve just informed me of some experiences that form and shape who and what I am.....so how can you know or see my being....when there is nobody else looking through my eyes?

cuz, like Mannie, you're a human being...sure, you're a unique person, but you have the same kind of parts as any other human...you apprehend information like a human does, you process it and incorporate it like a human does, so it's no great shakes on Mannie's part to understand, generally, what informed you