Age has finally shared something about himself

[Gary Childress]

He might be a child or he might be an adult who thinks he is a child. I still haven't figured that part out. Do you think perhaps he is all things that he wants to be and no things that he doesn't want to be? That would be my guess.

Well, what he "wants to be" seems to be 15.

Well, we all have to start somewhere. I'm just worried that he maybe thinks he has "eternity" to grow up. Either he does or he needs to get on the ball and get moving. Time could be running out.

[LuckyR]

He might be a child or he might be an adult who thinks he is a child. I still haven't figured that part out. Do you think perhaps he is all things that he wants to be and no things that he doesn't want to be? That would be my guess.

Well, what he "wants to be" seems to be 15.

Well, we all have to start somewhere. I'm just worried that he maybe thinks he has "eternity" to grow up. Either he does or he needs to get on the ball and get moving. Time could be running out.

I used to find his failure to master the Caps key to be somewhere between odd and mildly annoying, but now it is a useful way to scroll much faster than I can skim.

[Age]

Given that you've written over 10,000 posts, it occurred to me you might have written a book about philosophy topics.

I was in the process of writing a book but did not want ANY 'thing' in it to be Inaccurate, I was also finding just how simply and easily relatively 'new messages or ideas' can be all to quickly misinterpreted and/or misunderstood, so so I decided to come to a philosophy forum, first, to have my views gauged, and critiqued. See, I thought 'philosophy' and "philosophers" were about continually looking for, finding, and coming to answers, and solutions, which could NOT be refuted, through logically reasoned Truly OPEN and Honest discussions. Although, to me, 'this' STILL IS what 'philosophy' IS and what True "philosophers" DO, I quickly FOUND that what my view is here IS VERY, VERY DIFFERENT from "others" views about 'philosophy', and what "philosophers" do.

I very quickly discovered if one can CHANGE 'the views' of a so-called "philosopher", then that one can CHANGE 'the views' of absolutely ANY one "else". So, I WAIT TO SEE if 'the view' of one in this forum CAN be CHANGED, and if so, then I WILL USE 'that process' in the book that I am yet to start writing again.

Or, that there are books or articles that describe your philosophical beliefs.

I have only One belief. The term or phrase 'philosophical belief/s' is an oxymoron to me.

There are, however, countless books and articles, which all contain 'ideas', 'views', and 'conclusions' in them that describe directly 'my views', from what I come, to observe.

But getting people to LOOK and SEE PAST their OWN 'perspectives' of those same 'things', so that 'they' CAN LOOK and SEE WHERE, EXACTLY, I AM, literally, COMING FROM is actually talking longer than I had first expected.

Thus, ANOTHER example of WHY it is ALWAYS BETTER TO NEVER ASSUME ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing', FIRST.

Now, if ANY one is Truly INTERESTED and CURIOS as to coming to learn and understand, EXACTLY, HOW and WHAT IN books and articles FIT IN PERFECTLY with 'my views', and WHY some of 'my views' ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM 'the views' "others" HAVE on the EXACT SAME 'wording' in books and articles, then I am MORE than WILLING TO SHARE.

If one is WAITING FOR me to START 'this' here, then let us look AT the first words in the bible, 'In the beginning'. Now, to a great number of people, these words are IMPLIED to mean or refer to, some beginning or start of the WHOLE Universe, Itself, and this view, or belief, had become so strong among that even so-called "scientists" then "themselves" started 'theorizing' and 'assuming' that the Universe, Itself, ALSO had a start or beginning, and so 'these people', then started MAKING UP 'stories' ABOUT HOW the Universe ACTUALLY BEGUN. To which the 'stories' became SO STRONG that some started BELIEVING that the Universe MUST OF BEGUN, and then following on from these STRONGLY HELD BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS these "scientists" started 'seeing' 'evidence' IN some of the 'observations' they were making.

Just like how some people started ASSUMING and/or BELIEVING that the earth is flat, and/or the earth is at the center of the Universe. FROM those ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS they then STARTED 'seeing' what they WERE ASSUMING and BELIEVING. They would ALSO CLAIM that they HAD 'evidence' FROM the 'observations' that they were making, and taking.

The words, 'In the beginning', to me anyway, have absolutely NOTHING AT ALL to do with some so-called 'start' NOR 'beginning' of the WHOLE Universe FROM SOME 'thing' OTHER NOR OUTSIDE OF the Universe, Itself.

The words, 'In the beginning', just refers to 'what IS HAPPENING NOW' IS ALWAYS creating or causing what APPEARS to OCCUR 'next', but what IS, ESSENTIALLY, just the CONTINUAL 'NOW'.

And 'now', if ANY one would like to learn, understand, and KNOW what OTHER words MEAN, or REFER TO, to me, which, by the way, APPEARS TO FIT INTO One Truly CRYSTAL CLEAR Picture of ALL-THERE-IS, but which I have YET TO get VERIFIED, then by all means let 'us' PROCEED.

But if ANY one wants to TELL me their views', and wants to EXPRESS 'those views' as being True, Right, or Correct, then I will just ASK, FIRST, 'Can you guarantee that 'those views' are ABSOLUTELY IRREFUTABLY True, Right, or Correct?

And, if NOT, then WHY even HOLD ONTO 'them' and BOTHER WITH 'them'?

viewtopic.php?p=664494#p664494

BUT, I HAVE SPOKE and WRITTEN ABOUT 'this' BEFORE, in this forum. BUT, OBVIOUSLY, 'this' does NOT MEAN that 'you', "gary childress", HAD SEEN and/or READ 'it' PREVIOUSLY.

The topic title here STILL REMAINS, OBVIOUSLY, False, Wrong, AND Incorrect. But what this has DONE and SHOWN here FOR 'us' IS HOW 'these people' BACK THEN would ONLY LOOK AT and SEE 'the world' SOLELY FROM 'their OWN, personal, 'past experiences', a GREAT DEAL of the time. Which EXPLAINS WHY 'they' TOOK SO LONG TO CATCH UP and SEE 'things' for how 'they' REALLY ARE.

[Age]

The "continual now" is a major improvement over an actual beginning, but it's still asymmetric so it still doesn't make much sense.

TO 'you', but 'it' MAKES PERFECT SENSE to the 'Everything'.

Nice try though.

Some might imply that by these three words of 'yours' "atla" that 'you' think or BELIEVE that 'you' ALREADY KNOW what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY. Is 'this' what 'you' ARE INFERRING here by these three words "atla"?

If no, then what EXACTLY are 'you' INFERRING here?

Why use words from the Bible anyway?

BECAUSE to be ABLE TO SEE the ACTUAL Truth of ALL 'things', or TOTALITY, then one HAS TO LOOK AT as MUCH as CAN.

SEE, WHEN 'you' CAN ALSO SEE Truly Objectively ALSO, then what BECOMES VERY APPARENT, VERY QUICKLY, is that 'science literature' backs up and supports 'scriptures' AND 'scriptures' help to EXPLAIN 'science' AS WELL.

The TWO go 'hand-in-hand' as some might say, and do NOT OPPOSE "each other" AT ALL.

[Age]

The "continual now" is a major improvement over an actual beginning, but it's still asymmetric so it still doesn't make much sense. Nice try though.

Why use words from the Bible anyway?

Because the Bible was also written by human beings.

THANK 'you', "gary childress".

'This' was a MUCH SIMPLER and EASIER explanation than the one I gave, and one I wish I just USED.

Those human beings lived a very precarious existence in their day and therefore knew the worst of what suffering and pain can become. The ones who did something right and ended up being old enough to write with a perspective of experience, likely are the authors of the Bible.

[Age]

The "continual now" is a major improvement over an actual beginning, but it's still asymmetric so it still doesn't make much sense. Nice try though.

Why use words from the Bible anyway?

Because the Bible was also written by human beings. Those human beings lived a very precarious existence in their day and therefore knew the worst of what suffering and pain can become. The ones who did something right and ended up being old enough to write with a perspective of experience, likely are the authors of the Bible.

And what makes you think that that makes them any good at solving the mistery of time?

But there IS NO mystery of 'time', AT ALL.

Although 'this' has NOT ALWAYS been 'the case', to some.

[Age]

And what makes you think that that makes them any good at solving the mistery of time?

I don't know if they could solve all the issues we now have. Obviously, they are not here to do so, therefore I can't really say one way or the other, but having allowed the Israelites to survive the test of time, seems to me like a good reason to think there are ideas in the book that are worthy of inspection and consideration. The same goes for Buddhism, Hinduism, and how evermany other religions as far as I'm concerned.

On many issues I'd say you would be right, but I think every major philosophy and religion got time wrong. Not one of them could come up with a logical picture of time.

And this is just because 'you', adult human beings, look at, view, and thus end up SEEING 'things', FROM the Wrong perspective. That is; 'you', adults, look AT and VIEW 'things' FROM 'your' 'past experiences', and thus FROM 'your' ALREADY OBTAINED and GAINED 'perspectives', ASSUMPTIONS and/or BELIEFS, ONLY, and then 'PRETENDING' to QUESTION 'things'.

Instead of JUST BEING Truly OPEN, ALWAYS, AND THEN using 'past experiences' to OBTAIN and GAIN 'VERIFICATION/S'.

Which, WHEN the latter is done, THEN THE 'logical picture' of 'time' COMES-ABOUT almost immediately. EXACTLY THE SAME WITH ALL the OTHER UNANSWERED MEANINGFUL QUESTIONS in 'Life', and ALL of those perceived, MYSTERIES OF 'Life'.

[Atla]

Some might imply that by these three words of 'yours' "atla" that 'you' think or BELIEVE that 'you' ALREADY KNOW what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY. Is 'this' what 'you' ARE INFERRING here by these three words "atla"?

If no, then what EXACTLY are 'you' INFERRING here?

We can only guess the "ACTUAL Truth", but your basic take on the "continual now" is still assymetric and therefore illogical. So it was a nice try from you and your small brain, but probably not good enough.
But maybe you're lucky and the "ACTUAL Truth" doesn't have to be logical.

[Age]

Some might imply that by these three words of 'yours' "atla" that 'you' think or BELIEVE that 'you' ALREADY KNOW what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY. Is 'this' what 'you' ARE INFERRING here by these three words "atla"?

If no, then what EXACTLY are 'you' INFERRING here?

We can only guess the "ACTUAL Truth", but your basic take on the "continual now" is still assymetric and therefore illogical.

1. In other words 'you' do NOT KNOW how the 'ACTUAL Truth' IS ASCERTAINED.

2. WHY is 'my take' on the 'NOW', SUPPOSEDLY, 'assymetric'? And, WHY does 'your' NON CLARIFIED ASSUMPTION, and/or CONCLUSION ABOUT 'my take' here being ALLEGEDLY 'assymetric' make 'it' ILLOGICAL.

So it was a nice try from you and your small brain, but probably not good enough.
But maybe you're lucky and the "ACTUAL Truth" doesn't have to be logical.

What are you ON ABOUT here? Just SAYING or CLAIMING, ' 'it' IS 'assymetric', therefore illogical ', is NOT EXPLAINING absolutely ANY 'thing' AT ALL.

1. EXPLAIN WHY 'you' PRESUME 'your' NON CLARIFIED 'take' ON what I SAID and WROTE here MEANS what I SAID, and WROTE, IS, allegedly and supposedly, 'assymetric'. THEN, AFTER 'you' HAVE DONE 'this',

2. EXPLAIN WHY 'your take' therefore MEANS 'your PRESUMPTION' of what I ACTUALLY MEANT IS 'illogical'.

Also, had 'you' EVER CONSIDERED JUST SEEKING OUT and ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION OF WHAT I ACTUALLY MEAN, FIRST, BEFORE 'you' BEGIN JUMPING TO MAKING ASSUMPTIONS and CONCLUSIONS ABOUT what I am SAYING and MEANING here?

What I think WILL BE FOUND WILL BE what 'you' ARE ASSUMING, and CONCLUDING, here will NOT BE MUCH AT ALL like what I AM ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING.

But, nice 'try' from 'you' anyway "atla".

One COULD, (if 'they' were so SMALL BRAINED, as some, LAUGHABLY, SAY and CLAIM), that ' 'your take' here is still assymetric, and therefore illogical '. BUT, to do ANY such 'thing' would be a Truly LUDICROUS and RIDICULOUS CLAIM TO MAKE, especially considering WHEN ASKED TO CLARIFY one then did what 'you' 'TRIED TO' do here, which was TO 'try to' DEFLECT.

[Atla]

1. In other words 'you' do NOT KNOW how the 'ACTUAL Truth' IS ASCERTAINED.

Neither do you, you're just lying about it always.

[Age]

Now, if there IS absolutely ANY 'thing' I SAY or WRITE here ANYWHERE in this forum that IS so-called 'assymetric', THEN just POINT 'this' OUT, and then EXPLAIN WHY.

What is Wrong WITH 'you', human beings, here?

Is there REALLY absolutely ANY 'thing' HARD or COMPLEX ABOUT just POINTING OUT and HIGHLIGHTING the ACTUAL 'part' of what "another" SAYS or WRITES here, which one thinks or BELIEVES IS NOT RIGHT in ANY WAY, and THEN just EXPLAINING the reason/s WHY?

If there IS, then, AGAIN, EXPLAIN the reason/s WHY.

[Atla]

Now, if there IS absolutely ANY 'thing' I SAY or WRITE here ANYWHERE in this forum that IS so-called 'assymetric', THEN just POINT 'this' OUT, and then EXPLAIN WHY.

What is Wrong WITH 'you', human beings, here?

Is there REALLY absolutely ANY 'thing' HARD or COMPLEX ABOUT just POINTING OUT and HIGHLIGHTING the ACTUAL 'part' of what "another" SAYS or WRITES here, which one thinks or BELIEVES IS NOT RIGHT in ANY WAY, and THEN just EXPLAINING the reason/s WHY?

If there IS, then, AGAIN, EXPLAIN the reason/s WHY.

You had your chance to be treated like an adult, completely misused it, now stop whining.

[Age]

1. In other words 'you' do NOT KNOW how the 'ACTUAL Truth' IS ASCERTAINED.

Neither do you, you're just lying about it always.

This, 'you're just lying', line and EXCUSE is what 'you' have ENDED UP RESORTING TO "atla" on just about EVERY occasion when 'you' have 'TRIED' SO HARD to DISCREDIT MY WORDS.

BUT, 'you' have NEVER EVER ACTUALLY EXPLAINED WHY 'my words' ARE False, Wrong, NOR Incorrect.

Also, even 'your' so-called "logic" is just PURE ILLOGICAL and IRRATIONAL.

FOR me to CLAIM that 'you', "atla", do NOT KNOW how the 'ACTUAL Truth' IS ASCERTAINED, NEVER EVER MEANS that I AM SAYING, NOR CLAIMING, that I DO KNOW. Now, for me to be LYING I would FIRST HAVE TO SAY SOME 'thing' that COULD BE A LIE. In the QUOTED PART OF 'my words' I have NOT SAID absolutely ANY 'thing', which COULD BE A LIE. Unless, OF COURSE, 'you' are 'TRYING TO' INFER that 'you' DO ACTUALLY KNOW HOW to ASCERTAIN the 'ACTUAL Truth' OF 'things'. IS 'this' what 'you' ARE CLAIMING that 'I' AM LYING ABOUT here "atla"?

If no, then 'your' ATTEMPT AT DECEPTION IS FAILING 'you' AGAIN.

[Atla]

This, 'you're just lying', line and EXCUSE is what 'you' have ENDED UP RESORTING TO "atla" on just about EVERY occasion when 'you' have 'TRIED' SO HARD to DISCREDIT MY WORDS.

It's not an excuse, but the truth. I don't "end up resorting to it", I simply point out that you are truly a disgusting pathological liar and your entire forum participation is based on it.

[Age]

Now, if there IS absolutely ANY 'thing' I SAY or WRITE here ANYWHERE in this forum that IS so-called 'assymetric', THEN just POINT 'this' OUT, and then EXPLAIN WHY.

What is Wrong WITH 'you', human beings, here?

Is there REALLY absolutely ANY 'thing' HARD or COMPLEX ABOUT just POINTING OUT and HIGHLIGHTING the ACTUAL 'part' of what "another" SAYS or WRITES here, which one thinks or BELIEVES IS NOT RIGHT in ANY WAY, and THEN just EXPLAINING the reason/s WHY?

If there IS, then, AGAIN, EXPLAIN the reason/s WHY.

You had your chance to be treated like an adult, completely misused it, now stop whining.

LOL ONCE AGAIN, the one known here as "atla" JUST DISAGREES WITH what I SAID and CLAIMED, and ALSO COULD NOT even BELIEVE that what I SAID, and CLAIMED, COULD even be true, let alone BE thee ACTUAL Truth OF 'things'. So, what 'it' DOES is SAYS and CLAIMS 'things' like:

'your basic take on the "continual now" is still assymetric and therefore illogical.'

Which, OBVIOUSLY, IS NOT REALLY SAYING NOR PROVING ANY 'thing' AT ALL.

This one Truly does NOT YET appear to KNOW that, ESPECIALLY IN A PHILOSOPHY FORUM, if one wants to CLAIM that what "another" SAYS or CLAIMS is ILLOGICAL, THEN it is UP TO 'that one' TO SHOW what PART EXACTLY IS, SUPPOSEDLY, ILLOGICAL, and then EXPLAIN the REASON/S WHY.

Otherwise, PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSIONS could just go along the lines of, 'your take is assymetric and therefore illogical'. With BOTH in the discussion ACCUSING "each other" of the EXACT SAME 'thing'.

Which is even MORE ABSURD the MORE one LOOKS AT and SEE what "atla" CONTINUALLY DOES in THIS FORUM.

Now, 'you' WATCH and OBSERVE the Truly IRRATIONAL words, and ACCUSATIONS, which WILL SURELY FOLLOW, under the name and label "atla".