Father Christ Mess

[Lacewing]

If you are right, I'll keep the, "limits and failures," of my thinking, which have never failed me in achieving and enjoying my life.

You can think whatever you want as it applies to yourself. But your projections onto me have been incorrect.

In my experience, all those who reject the real world of immediate perception and experience, living in some Alice-In-Wonderland fictional world of their imaginations are never truly happy with their own life...

Perhaps. But why do you apply that to me? Just because I may speak of something you don't understand or agree with, you can only project onto me from your simple library of black and white images?

If my views are a fault, I'll take them over your virtues.

Who cares? If you can't handle being told that you're wrong when you're projecting falseness onto other people, then it is you who are living in a fictional world of your imagination.

[RCSaunders]

Who cares?

Well, I certainly don't. But if you don't care, why do you keep asking me questions?

I'm not telling anyone else what to believe or do, only explaining what I believe and do for anyone who is interested.

[Lacewing]

Many people have the same experience you and Dontaskme have. It is a lovely, peaceful, paradise beyond all temporal life and existence, a transcendent paradise of painless ecstatic joy. But alas, it is meaningless and pointless, and it only lasts until they wake up or the drugs wear off.

How can you possibly know the experience and awareness of another? And how can you be so arrogant as to think you do -- or to think that your experience/awareness reveals all valid potential?

He doesn't know the awareness or experience of others, he can only project his own insecure fearful phobias.

Seems to be the case. History is full of people thinking they know everything about life and other people. It's absurd. That's why we are where we are: people projecting their limitations and falseness onto others and everything. Perhaps they are served in doing so, or maybe they simply don't know how much more there can be -- but we can see the convoluted 'reality' that such thinking has created for everyone to contend with. And it's challenging to evolve it.

Everyone who is of knowledge will project their world view

Yes, we all do it. Some being more righteous or extreme than others. When anyone presumes that other beings are somehow separated from some ultimate truth, while the beholder/imaginer deems itself to be so ultimately 'knowing', how can that be anything but obviously absurd? It's like projections flickering around within a cloud.

There's no point in arguing the beliefs of others

Well, I think there can be. It depends on the people involved. That's how we expand our thinking. And it can be very entertaining. It doesn't matter if agreement of a certain view is reached. Value comes perhaps from expanding each person's view/understanding of capability and potential.

[RCSaunders]

These are the kind of questions you have to ask?

And, this is a statement, with a question mark at the end.

Is English not your first language? That is a question. It's a common English rhetorical device that places of the emphasis on the subject of the question identified by the demonstrative pronoun, "these," by placing it first in the sentence referring to the phrase, "the kind of question you have to ask," which is its antecedent. For your second-grade reading comprehension the sentence can be reordered, "Are these the kind of questions you have to ask?"

It is very difficult to have a conversation with someone in English who refuses to learn the language.

So, in 'your world', you can say and claim whatever you like, but believe you do not have to back ANY thing up. Which kind of defeats the whole purpose of philosophical discussions, in most people's views.

Where did you ever get an absurd idea like that. I will not accept anything as true for which there is not irrefutable evidence I can my self observe and examine or rationally deduce from such evidence. Everything I believe must be proved. It is absolutely unnecessary, however, for me to prove it to anyone else. Truth is not determined by how many people agree with something, but by the facts of observable reality.

The purpose of discussions of any kind between honest rational individuals is like any other kind of transaction, an exchange of ideas offered for the evaluation of others to accept or reject as each voluntarily decides the value of those ideas to themselves. The purpose of conversation is not to change others or to make them believe what you would like them to believe. That is not conversation, that is evangelism, promoting some agenda or ideology, like a con man or politician. It does not belong in polite conversation.

[Age]

These are the kind of questions you have to ask?

And, this is a statement, with a question mark at the end.

Is English not your first language?

Now this sentence IS a question, (with a question mark at the end of).

That is a question.

This all depends on what the 'that' word here refers to, exactly.

If that 'that' word refers to the previous sentence, then YES OF COURSE 'that' is a question. BUT, if that 'that' word refers to the previous quoted sentence, then OBVIOUSLY 'that' is NOT a question.

In case you are UNAWARE just adding a question mark to the end of a sentence does NOT make that sentence a question. As EVIDENCED and PROVEN MANY times in your writings.

It's a common English rhetorical device that places of the emphasis on the subject of the question identified by the demonstrative pronoun, "these," by placing it first in the sentence referring to the phrase, "the kind of question you have to ask," which is its antecedent.

Your ATTEMPT to 'try to' "justify" what you have done is NOT WORKING.

You were OBVIOUSLY 'trying to' make a statement, and NOT asking a CLARIFYING QUESTION. Which, by the way, your ASSUMED STATEMENT was OBVIOUSLY completely and utterly Wrong, anyway.

For your second-grade reading comprehension the sentence can be reordered, "Are these the kind of questions you have to ask?"

Now, HERE we have A QUESTION.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN, there is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE.

It is great you POINTED OUT, for me, what I was ALLUDING TO. So, THANK YOU.

Now that we KNOW you KNOW the DIFFERENCE, we wait to SEE how you write your sentences from now. That is; if you REALLY are asking a question from a MORE OPEN perspective, or if you will continue to write sentences, with question marks at the end, REVEALING what you BELIEVE is true, right, or correct.

Once, and if, you learn and understand HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK, then you also will be able to SEE, MUCH MORE CLEARLY, the BELIEFS held within human bodies, and then you will also be to SEE, FAR MORE CLEARLY, WHY people are NOT able to distinguish between thee ACTUAL Truth from just 'that' what they BELIEVE is true.

It is very difficult to have a conversation with someone in English who refuses to learn the language.

LOL
LOL
LOL "who refuses to learn the language".

The ABSURD ASSUMPTIONS and CLAIMS made because of one's DISTORTED BELIEFS can be so CLEARLY SEEN here is "BLINDING", as some would say.

So, in 'your world', you can say and claim whatever you like, but believe you do not have to back ANY thing up. Which kind of defeats the whole purpose of philosophical discussions, in most people's views.

Where did you ever get an absurd idea like that. I will not accept anything as true for which there is not irrefutable evidence I can my self observe and examine or rationally deduce from such evidence.

I have NEVER thought ANY thing like this. So, WHY would you even ASSUME such a RIDICULOUS thing as this, let alone SHARE IT with "others"? Some are now wondering, WHERE did you ever get the absurd idea as that?

Everything I believe must be proved.

"proved" to you, ALONE. And, you base your "proofs" on your OWN thinking, which is OBVIOUSLY NOT absolutely true, right, and correct.

You, also, BELIEVE you can go into a philosophy forum, make claims, and then do NOT HAVE TO do absolutely ANY thing to back up and support those claims, correct?

If no, then what IS correct?

It is absolutely unnecessary, however, for me to prove it to anyone else.

OF COURSE 'backing up and supporting your claims' is "absolutely unnecessary" for yours, and "others", continued existence, BUT, as I have ALREADY POINTED OUT, in most people's views, 'backing up and supporting one's claims' in philosophical discussion is VERY necessary. This is because these people SEE that is one of the main prerequisite of discussing 'philosophically'.

If you STILL can NOT understand this FACT, and you have any further interest, then just let me know if you want any thing CLARIFIED here.

Truth is not determined by how many people agree with something, but by the facts of observable reality.

Besides this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL WHATSOEVER to do with what I was ACTUALLY saying and talking about, if you would like to further discuss YOUR CLAIM here, then I am more than willing to. Again, just let me know.

The purpose of discussions of any kind between honest rational individuals is like any other kind of transaction, an exchange of ideas offered for the evaluation of others to accept or reject as each voluntarily decides the value of those ideas to themselves.

AND, the BEST WAY I found to 'evaluate', and accept or reject "another's" views or claims, is to just challenge them by asking them CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. And, if they can NOT 'back up and support' their views and claims, then that is great evidence AND proof to REJECT their views or claims.

By the way, you are PROVING to reject your claims, because you BELIEVE you do NOT HAVE TO 'back up and support' those claims, EVEN IN philosophical forums.

If you can not, or will not, even 'back up and support' your claims, then I do NOT see ANY reason to accept your claims. Especially considering that just about all of the ones that I challenge and question you on, are to me ALREADY PROVED Wrong, False, or Incorrect.

The purpose of conversation is not to change others or to make them believe what you would like them to believe. That is not conversation, that is evangelism, promoting some agenda or ideology, like a con man or politician. It does not belong in polite conversation.

And, just about EVERY thing you have said in the reply has just been a DEFLECTION from what I was ACTUALLY talking about, and saying.

But DEFLECTION away from what you have CLAIMED, but can NOT 'back up and support', is a big part of your conversation tactics.

[Age]

Who cares?

Well, I certainly don't. But if you don't care, why do you keep asking me questions?

I'm not telling anyone else what to believe or do, only explaining what I believe and do for anyone who is interested.

Have you found ANY one who really cares what you believe is true?

If yes, then who cares/cared?

Also, you would gain FAR MORE 'interest' if you could, and would, 'back up and support' what you BELIEVE and CLAIM is true.

But considering you can not, and will not, then you will find that just about NO one is interested in YOUR BELIEFS, and CLAIMS.

[Age]

Many people have the same experience you and Dontaskme have. It is a lovely, peaceful, paradise beyond all temporal life and existence, a transcendent paradise of painless ecstatic joy. But alas, it is meaningless and pointless, and it only lasts until they wake up or the drugs wear off.

How can you possibly know the experience and awareness of another? And how can you be so arrogant as to think you do -- or to think that your experience/awareness reveals all valid potential?

He doesn't know the awareness or experience of others, he can only project his own insecure fearful phobias.

Seems to be the case. History is full of people thinking they know everything about life and other people. It's absurd.

What is Truly ABSURD is CLAIMING that it is wrong to 'project falseness onto other people' BUT THEN do the EXACT SAME thing "oneself".

Claiming, "history is FULL of people thinking they KNOW EVERY thing about life and other people", is OBVIOUSLY a 'projection of Falseness onto "other" people.

And, when this gets POINTED OUT, and they can not handle being told that it is ABSURD to say, "it is wrong when projecting falseness onto other people", but to do the EXACT SAME thing, then, as they say, then it is "them" who is probably living in a fictional world of their OWN imagination.

Could the one who CLAIMED, "history is FULL of people thinking they KNOW EVERY thing about life and other people", ACTUALLY name, accurately, just one person who thinks they KNOW EVERY thing about life and other people?

If they claim they could, then will they?

If no, then it could be claimed, accurately, that it is ACTUALLY 'them' who is, literally, the one ACTUALLY projecting Falseness onto "other" people.

That's why we are where we are: people projecting their limitations and falseness onto others and everything.

But, within this forum, "lacewing" is one of the biggest offenders of doing this EXACT SAME thing.

Perhaps they are served in doing so, or maybe they simply don't know how much more there can be -- but we can see the convoluted 'reality' that such thinking has created for everyone to contend with. And it's challenging to evolve it.

If only they KNEW.

Everyone who is of knowledge will project their world view

Yes, we all do it.

Great acknowledgement.

But WHY say, "it is the wrong thing to do", when you continually keep doing it "yourself"?

Some being more righteous or extreme than others.

And the ones who are "more righteous" are the ones who continually TELL "others" that, "what you are doing is wrong".

And what is Truly "extreme" is TELLING "others" that, "what you are doing is wrong", BUT do the EXACT SAME thing "them self".

When anyone presumes that other beings are somehow separated from some ultimate truth, while the beholder/imaginer deems itself to be so ultimately 'knowing', how can that be anything but obviously absurd?

What is Truly ABSURD is IMAGINING and BELIEVING that there is ANY human being who 'presumes' this.

'Presuming' there are human beings who 'presume' that "other beings are somehow separated from thee ULTIMATE Truth", is an ABSURD PRESUMPTION in and of itself. There is, after all, absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER to back up nor support that PRESUMPTION. In fact, the OPPOSITE is far more likely to be thee ACTUAL Truth.

It's like projections flickering around within a cloud.

If you say so. But, let us NOT FORGET how often you actually make Wrong 'projections' "yourself".

There's no point in arguing the beliefs of others

Well, I think there can be. It depends on the people involved. That's how we expand our thinking. And it can be very entertaining. It doesn't matter if agreement of a certain view is reached. Value comes perhaps from expanding each person's view/understanding of capability and potential.

But how can 'we' get the one known as "lacewing" to OVERRIDE their OWN, fixed, BELIEFS and EXPAND their thinking/view/understanding of capability and potential?

If "lacewing" answered this Honestly and OPENLY, then we would HAVE thee ANSWER of HOW to OPEN UP EVERY "other" adult human being.

[RCSaunders]

And, this is a statement, with a question mark at the end.

Is English not your first language?

Now this sentence IS a question, (with a question mark at the end of).

That is a question.

This all depends on what the 'that' word here refers to, exactly.

If that 'that' word refers to the previous sentence, then YES OF COURSE 'that' is a question. BUT, if that 'that' word refers to the previous quoted sentence, then OBVIOUSLY 'that' is NOT a question.

In case you are UNAWARE just adding a question mark to the end of a sentence does NOT make that sentence a question. As EVIDENCED and PROVEN MANY times in your writings.

It's a common English rhetorical device that places of the emphasis on the subject of the question identified by the demonstrative pronoun, "these," by placing it first in the sentence referring to the phrase, "the kind of question you have to ask," which is its antecedent.

Your ATTEMPT to 'try to' "justify" what you have done is NOT WORKING.

You were OBVIOUSLY 'trying to' make a statement, and NOT asking a CLARIFYING QUESTION. Which, by the way, your ASSUMED STATEMENT was OBVIOUSLY completely and utterly Wrong, anyway.

For your second-grade reading comprehension the sentence can be reordered, "Are these the kind of questions you have to ask?"

Now, HERE we have A QUESTION.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN, there is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE.

It is great you POINTED OUT, for me, what I was ALLUDING TO. So, THANK YOU.

Now that we KNOW you KNOW the DIFFERENCE, we wait to SEE how you write your sentences from now. That is; if you REALLY are asking a question from a MORE OPEN perspective, or if you will continue to write sentences, with question marks at the end, REVEALING what you BELIEVE is true, right, or correct.

Once, and if, you learn and understand HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK, then you also will be able to SEE, MUCH MORE CLEARLY, the BELIEFS held within human bodies, and then you will also be to SEE, FAR MORE CLEARLY, WHY people are NOT able to distinguish between thee ACTUAL Truth from just 'that' what they BELIEVE is true.

It is very difficult to have a conversation with someone in English who refuses to learn the language.

LOL
LOL
LOL "who refuses to learn the language".

The ABSURD ASSUMPTIONS and CLAIMS made because of one's DISTORTED BELIEFS can be so CLEARLY SEEN here is "BLINDING", as some would say.

So, in 'your world', you can say and claim whatever you like, but believe you do not have to back ANY thing up. Which kind of defeats the whole purpose of philosophical discussions, in most people's views.

Where did you ever get an absurd idea like that. I will not accept anything as true for which there is not irrefutable evidence I can my self observe and examine or rationally deduce from such evidence.

I have NEVER thought ANY thing like this. So, WHY would you even ASSUME such a RIDICULOUS thing as this, let alone SHARE IT with "others"? Some are now wondering, WHERE did you ever get the absurd idea as that?

Everything I believe must be proved.

"proved" to you, ALONE. And, you base your "proofs" on your OWN thinking, which is OBVIOUSLY NOT absolutely true, right, and correct.

You, also, BELIEVE you can go into a philosophy forum, make claims, and then do NOT HAVE TO do absolutely ANY thing to back up and support those claims, correct?

If no, then what IS correct?

It is absolutely unnecessary, however, for me to prove it to anyone else.

OF COURSE 'backing up and supporting your claims' is "absolutely unnecessary" for yours, and "others", continued existence, BUT, as I have ALREADY POINTED OUT, in most people's views, 'backing up and supporting one's claims' in philosophical discussion is VERY necessary. This is because these people SEE that is one of the main prerequisite of discussing 'philosophically'.

If you STILL can NOT understand this FACT, and you have any further interest, then just let me know if you want any thing CLARIFIED here.

Truth is not determined by how many people agree with something, but by the facts of observable reality.

Besides this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL WHATSOEVER to do with what I was ACTUALLY saying and talking about, if you would like to further discuss YOUR CLAIM here, then I am more than willing to. Again, just let me know.

The purpose of discussions of any kind between honest rational individuals is like any other kind of transaction, an exchange of ideas offered for the evaluation of others to accept or reject as each voluntarily decides the value of those ideas to themselves.

AND, the BEST WAY I found to 'evaluate', and accept or reject "another's" views or claims, is to just challenge them by asking them CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. And, if they can NOT 'back up and support' their views and claims, then that is great evidence AND proof to REJECT their views or claims.

By the way, you are PROVING to reject your claims, because you BELIEVE you do NOT HAVE TO 'back up and support' those claims, EVEN IN philosophical forums.

If you can not, or will not, even 'back up and support' your claims, then I do NOT see ANY reason to accept your claims. Especially considering that just about all of the ones that I challenge and question you on, are to me ALREADY PROVED Wrong, False, or Incorrect.

The purpose of conversation is not to change others or to make them believe what you would like them to believe. That is not conversation, that is evangelism, promoting some agenda or ideology, like a con man or politician. It does not belong in polite conversation.

And, just about EVERY thing you have said in the reply has just been a DEFLECTION from what I was ACTUALLY talking about, and saying.

But DEFLECTION away from what you have CLAIMED, but can NOT 'back up and support', is a big part of your conversation tactics.

Thanks for the comment.

[RCSaunders]

Who cares?

Well, I certainly don't. But if you don't care, why do you keep asking me questions?

I'm not telling anyone else what to believe or do, only explaining what I believe and do for anyone who is interested.

Have you found ANY one who really cares what you believe is true?

If yes, then who cares/cared?

Also, you would gain FAR MORE 'interest' if you could, and would, 'back up and support' what you BELIEVE and CLAIM is true.

But considering you can not, and will not, then you will find that just about NO one is interested in YOUR BELIEFS, and CLAIMS.

You are quite right. In general, I have discovered, 99% of the human race not only have no interest in knowing the truth, but actually despises it. The remaining 1% are still a lot of people, however, thoughj you are very unlikely to ever know or recognize. Neither they, nor I, need the agreement or approval of others to know the truth and live by it.

[Age]

Well, I certainly don't. But if you don't care, why do you keep asking me questions?

I'm not telling anyone else what to believe or do, only explaining what I believe and do for anyone who is interested.

Have you found ANY one who really cares what you believe is true?

If yes, then who cares/cared?

Also, you would gain FAR MORE 'interest' if you could, and would, 'back up and support' what you BELIEVE and CLAIM is true.

But considering you can not, and will not, then you will find that just about NO one is interested in YOUR BELIEFS, and CLAIMS.

You are quite right. In general, I have discovered, 99% of the human race not only have no interest in knowing the truth, but actually despises it.

So, who is the 1%, which you claim know the truth, and are you one in that 1%?

If yes, then what 'truth' are you talking about and referring to here?

The remaining 1% are still a lot of people, however, thoughj you are very unlikely tol ever know or recognize. Neither they, nor I, need the agreement or approval of others to know the truth and live by it.

But, according to your "logic", absolutely ANY one can claim to know, and live by, "the truth", and 'that truth' is thee actual truth, which, by the way, they do not have to even divulge, nor prove, to ANY one "else".

This, by the way, completely CONTRADICTS your CLAIM that 99% of the human race, (as if you could or would EVER know), not only have no interest in knowing "the truth", but actually despise "the truth".

Besides the FACT that this is an IMPOSSIBILITY for you to ever be able to know, it CONTRADICTS what you CLAIMED was "true" previously.

All you have really done, SHOWN, and REVEALED here is that you can make ANY claim at all that you like and do NOT have to make ANY attempt to back up and support your claim.

[Dontaskme]

There's no point in arguing the beliefs of others

Well, I think there can be. It depends on the people involved. That's how we expand our thinking. And it can be very entertaining. It doesn't matter if agreement of a certain view is reached. Value comes perhaps from expanding each person's view/understanding of capability and potential.

We can expand our conscious intelligence by intuitively hearing what we already know, by listening to ourselves in the form of imagined other.

The real truth about ''TRUTH'' is that it does not demand ''Proof'' ... ... If it did, then it wouldn't be Truth.
''Truth'' doesn't NEED or require proof.

Expanding awareness can be seen to be the direct and irrefutable sense of 'Otherness' which means, one is simply aware they are aware. And in knowing this to be true, is how the creation of ''otherness'' is formed, namely YOU, or I

It seems all so obvious that awareness has evloved to become self-reflective, and can know there is no boundary between every other living conscious sentient being. There's simply no boundary there, except imagined. We know this because everything you know is appearing within your own consciousness, nothing is outside of it.
The 'imagined other' imagined to be outside of you is actually a projection of you. In other words, you create me, and I create you. The external world is the mirror through which I appear to exist.

There is only one Truth as the character known as Age would say, and he's right of course, because other than the ONE that needs no proof, all else is pure imagination.

Sorry for the meta ramblings... it's as though my thoughts just want to literally take off, every time I start thinking about philosophy.




.

[Age]

There's no point in arguing the beliefs of others

Well, I think there can be. It depends on the people involved. That's how we expand our thinking. And it can be very entertaining. It doesn't matter if agreement of a certain view is reached. Value comes perhaps from expanding each person's view/understanding of capability and potential.

We can expand our conscious intelligence by intuitively hearing what we already know, by listening to ourselves in the form of imagined other.

This is an exceptionally good way of putting 'It'.

Thee Knowing, already exists with-in. 'It' is just not yet consciously KNOWN. Thee Knowing, sits there, deep down unconsciously, just waiting to be uncovered. Or, revealed, in other words.

As this, as of yet unconscious Knowing gradually 'comes to be KNOWN', through the human evolution process, with each revelation, grasp of inspiration or enlightenment, can come with it that 'aha' experience, which comes because 'we already KNEW', and had always ALREADY KNEW. We have just been covering up thee Knowing, or Truth, with, as some might say, ' our own "noise" '. ALL of our own Wrong, False, and Incorrect 'thinking' covers up and keeps down thee 'Knowing', within.

Literally, 'thinking' conceals 'knowing', and keeps thee Truth hidden.

The real truth about ''TRUTH'' is that it does not demand ''Proof'' ... ... If it did, then it wouldn't be Truth.
''Truth'' doesn't NEED or require proof.

Very True.

Truth, actually, and literally, speaks for Itself.

Expanding awareness can be seen to be the direct and irrefutable sense of 'Otherness' which means, one is simply aware they are aware. And in knowing this to be true, is how the creation of ''otherness'' is formed, namely YOU, or I.

There is an 'I', so This exists. Thee (One and ONLY 'I') is just Awareness (Consciousness or Knowing) Itself. The 'i', however, (which is just the individual older human beings, or 'ego' as it is sometimes called) confuses 'itself' as being a separated thing, and when the 'i' starts thinking that it is better or knows more than ANY "other", then that 'ego', literally, gets to big for itself, and starts BELIEVING that 'it' is an, or even thee, 'I'. (This can be CLEARLY SEEN and PROVEN True throughout a lot of human history writings).

It seems all so obvious that awareness has evloved to become self-reflective, and can know there is no boundary between every other living conscious sentient being.

This actually, is one of those ALREADY Known Truths, within. EVERY human being is born KNOWING this, again unconsciously of course. HOWEVER, during childhood children, especially in the latter stages of evolution, in the days of when this was being written, were continually TOLD to 'think' that they are separated, individual 'things'. So, although 'you', personally, may have overcome this Wrong "teaching" and have discovered/uncovered more of thee Truth, which upon reflection is TOTALLY OBVIOUS, there are MANY, upon MANY human beings, in the days when this is being written where that Truth is still NOT YET OBVIOUS. Thee Knowing, which has been SHOWN and REVEALED to some, like 'you', "dontaskme" has NOT been UNCOVERED and REVEALED to ALL, YET.

ALL 'knowledge', (right and wrong, true and false, correct and correct) is learned, throughout human interactions. Thee True, Right, and Correct knowledge, however, although is stored and KEPT DEEP WITHIN, (the very fabric of our dna or the 'life' within itself), is NOT consciously KNOWN at birth. This Knowledge although IS controlling and manipulating EACH and EVERY living body, it is ONLY through thee evolutionary process HOW 'It' 'comes to be consciously KNOWN'. EXACTLY like how it "takes time" for Life, Itself, to KNOW Thy or It Self.

There's simply no boundary there, except imagined. We know this because everything you know is appearing within your own consciousness, nothing is outside of it.

Although the first sentence here may be 100% irrefutably True, the next sentence will NOT make sense to the peoples, in the days when this is written, because they still do NOT YET KNOW, for sure, what the 'we' is, the 'you' is, what 'consciousness' is, nor what 'your own consciousness refers to, and thus is.

The 'imagined other' imagined to be outside of you is actually a projection of you.

The word 'you', itself, implies "other". Of which there is OBVIOUSLY NOT one. There can be, and is, however, an 'I'. This word, when used, in relation to there being 'NO other' is NOT self-contradictory, like the word 'you' IS.

In other words, you create me, and I create you. The external world is the mirror through which I appear to exist.

Although this may well be 100% absolutely and irrefutably True. 'you' are NOT going to succeed in getting "others" to UNDERSTAND 'it', with the choice of words that 'you' are using here.

To be Honest, neither have i.

This is just a process, which 'we' can doing NOTHING but live, and learn, through, and from.

There is only one Truth as the character known as Age would say, and he's right of course, because other than the ONE that needs no proof, all else is pure imagination.

Sorry for the meta ramblings... it's as though my thoughts just want to literally take off, every time I start thinking about philosophy.




.

The reason WHY 'we' ALL start 'rambling', with our OWN 'ramblings' is because DEEP within EVERY one of 'us' thee One and ONLY 'I' exists - KNOWING what thee ACTUAL Truth IS, and which is READY to REVEAL 'It' ALL. That KNOWING within 'drives/controls' 'us', but 'we', individual mistake the drive to SHARE thee Truth, with wanting to share our OWN personal truths. Which can be, and at a lot of times is, what causes us to only SPEAK, and NOT LISTEN.

'we' ALL have a drive, and a NEED to be heard, and LISTENED to. If we did NOT, then we ALL would die at birth, young childhood. So, this drive to be HEARD, and LISTENED TO, is VERY INSTINCTUAL. 'we', individually, and sadly, grow up to WANTING to be HEARD, for just about all of the wrong reasons.

'we' have ALL, also, been brought up HEARING and LEARNING the wrong way of expressing things. So, as we get older we, naturally, just express what 'we' have LEARNED and been TOLD. No matter how Wrong, False, or Incorrect they are, and were. 'we' have been TOLD and TAUGHT the wrong meanings/definitions for some words, and, the wrong way to express some things. Unlearning these definitions, and, this way of expressing, just takes some time, and effort, so that we do NOT teach 'what is wrong in Life' to all of the following generations.

[RCSaunders]

But, according to your "logic", absolutely ANY one can claim to know, and live by, "the truth", and 'that truth' ...

That's right.

... is thee actual truth, which, by the way, they do not have to even divulge, nor prove, to ANY one "else".

Reality determines whether what they believe and live by is the truth or not. What anyone else believes or agrees to is irrelevant.

This, by the way, completely CONTRADICTS your CLAIM that 99% of the human race, (as if you could or would EVER know), not only have no interest in knowing "the truth", but actually despise "the truth".

You do seem to have a problem with English. "Can," does not mean, "will."

Everyone has their own mind and is required by their nature to use it to learn all they possibly can, to think as well as they possibly can, and to choose how to work and produce what their they life requires. The ability and requirement to consciously learn, think, and choose to work are provided by their nature. They all can learn, think, and be productive valuable individuals if they choose to.

Most (99%) will choose to live in defiance of the requirement of their nature, learning as little as they can get away with, accepting the teaching of others rather then thinking for themselves, and refusing to choose using their abilities to work and produce all that lives require to succeed.

[Age]

But, according to your "logic", absolutely ANY one can claim to know, and live by, "the truth", and 'that truth' ...

That's right.

... is thee actual truth, which, by the way, they do not have to even divulge, nor prove, to ANY one "else".

Reality determines whether what they believe and live by is the truth or not.

And what is 'reality' based upon, exactly, to you?

What anyone else believes or agrees to is irrelevant.

Besides this having absolutely NOTHING to do with ANY thing that I have said here, it is clearly just another DISTRACTION and DEFLECTION from the fact that, to you, EVERY one can claim to know the truth, and claim that 'that truth' is thee actual truth and NOT HAVE TO back up and support their claims.

This, by the way, completely CONTRADICTS your CLAIM that 99% of the human race, (as if you could or would EVER know), not only have no interest in knowing "the truth", but actually despise "the truth".

You do seem to have a problem with English. "Can," does not mean, "will."

You appear to have an issue with your sight. I NEVER used the word "Can" in that quote.

And, if your response here was in reference to somewhere else where I have written the word "Can", then best you direct us to that place. So we can take a LOOK AT 'that' and SEE if I EVER used the word "Can" in reference to meaning "will".

Because what I think will be found I NEVER meant it that way, and this is just ANOTHER one of your DISTRACTING and DEFLECTING tactics.

Everyone has their own mind

LOL If you say so, but what does the word 'mind' mean or refer to, to you.

and is required by their nature to use it to learn all they possibly can, to think as well as they possibly can, and to choose how to work and produce what their they life requires.

LOOK, 'you', "rcsaunders" are a GREAT EXAMPLE of NOT doing ANY of this "yourself".

The ability and requirement to consciously learn, think, and choose to work are provided by their nature. They all can learn, think, and be productive valuable individuals if they choose to.

Most (99%) will choose to live in defiance of the requirement of their nature, learning as little as they can get away with, accepting the teaching of others rather then thinking for themselves, and refusing to choose using their abilities to work and produce all that lives require to succeed.

And this NOT choosing to live one's NATURAL life, and just copying and following "others", is WHY 'you', "rcsaunders" have FAILED completely to succeed in learning what you could have, in your time.

[RCSaunders]

But, according to your "logic", absolutely ANY one can claim to know, and live by, "the truth", and 'that truth' ...

That's right.

... is thee actual truth, which, by the way, they do not have to even divulge, nor prove, to ANY one "else".

Reality determines whether what they believe and live by is the truth or not.

And what is 'reality' based upon, exactly, to you?

What anyone else believes or agrees to is irrelevant.

Besides this having absolutely NOTHING to do with ANY thing that I have said here, it is clearly just another DISTRACTION and DEFLECTION from the fact that, to you, EVERY one can claim to know the truth, and claim that 'that truth' is thee actual truth and NOT HAVE TO back up and support their claims.

This, by the way, completely CONTRADICTS your CLAIM that 99% of the human race, (as if you could or would EVER know), not only have no interest in knowing "the truth", but actually despise "the truth".

You do seem to have a problem with English. "Can," does not mean, "will."

You appear to have an issue with your sight. I NEVER used the word "Can" in that quote.

And, if your response here was in reference to somewhere else where I have written the word "Can", then best you direct us to that place. So we can take a LOOK AT 'that' and SEE if I EVER used the word "Can" in reference to meaning "will".

Because what I think will be found I NEVER meant it that way, and this is just ANOTHER one of your DISTRACTING and DEFLECTING tactics.

Everyone has their own mind

LOL If you say so, but what does the word 'mind' mean or refer to, to you.

and is required by their nature to use it to learn all they possibly can, to think as well as they possibly can, and to choose how to work and produce what their they life requires.

LOOK, 'you', "rcsaunders" are a GREAT EXAMPLE of NOT doing ANY of this "yourself".

The ability and requirement to consciously learn, think, and choose to work are provided by their nature. They all can learn, think, and be productive valuable individuals if they choose to.

Most (99%) will choose to live in defiance of the requirement of their nature, learning as little as they can get away with, accepting the teaching of others rather then thinking for themselves, and refusing to choose using their abilities to work and produce all that lives require to succeed.

And this NOT choosing to live one's NATURAL life, and just copying and following "others", is WHY 'you', "rcsaunders" have FAILED completely to succeed in learning what you could have, in your time.

Thanks for the comments. Have a nice day.