My Summation of Chat-AI thus far: AgeGPT

[Age]

AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

"wizard22" why do you want to know?

What difference would knowing make 'to you'?

[Wizard22]

AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

"wizard22" why do you want to know?

What difference would knowing make 'to you'?

Quid Pro Quo, AgeGPT, you answer my question, and I'll answer yours.

It's called mutual respect, and it's essential for Philosophy.

Now then—AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

[Age]

AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

"wizard22" why do you want to know?

What difference would knowing make 'to you'?

Quid Pro Quo, AgeGPT, you answer my question, and I'll answer yours.

It's called mutual respect, and it's essential for Philosophy.

Now then—AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

So, so-called 'mutual respect' to this one is. 'you answer my question, and I will answer yours'.

Which, is a bit like the other so-called 'mutual respect', claimed by some adult human beings back when this was being written, 'you do not deserve any respect until you show me respect first'.

Yes, this was how some adult human beings had, very sadly and unfortunately, 'grew up' believing was not just what was meant to be done but what was also the 'right' way to view and see things.

[Iwannaplato]

AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

"wizard22" why do you want to know?

What difference would knowing make 'to you'?

Quid Pro Quo, AgeGPT, you answer my question, and I'll answer yours.

It's called mutual respect, and it's essential for Philosophy.

Now then—AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

Everything is tactical and legal on Age's part. He will avoid giving information and if any comes, it will not be justfied, even though his first approach is nearly always to get justification from others for things they've said.

The odd thing is, again, that there is no loss for him to show people how it is done. To unilaterally explain some stuff he has claimed or expressed as (mere ((lol)) views).

He could simply explain what at least seems like a contradiction.

[Wizard22]

Everything is tactical and legal on Age's part. He will avoid giving information and if any comes, it will not be justfied, even though his first approach is nearly always to get justification from others for things they've said.

The odd thing is, again, that there is no loss for him to show people how it is done. To unilaterally explain some stuff he has claimed or expressed as (mere ((lol)) views).

He could simply explain what at least seems like a contradiction.

It's amazing how one contradiction gives way to another, then another, then another.

AgeGPT claimed repeatedly that he/it is "here better to communicate with Humans".

But is it "better communicating with humans" by avoiding, ignoring, and deflecting my question?

AgeGPT claimed repeatedly that it wishes to be asked, and to ask, "clarifying questions".

Yet when I ask it a very clear question, it refuses, balks, cowers, and flees.

Let's see how many contradictions, errors, and deficiencies AgeGPT can rack up, in so short a time...

[Wizard22]

"wizard22" why do you want to know?

What difference would knowing make 'to you'?

AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

[cladking]

Philosophers and Philosophy have been studying thought, consciousness, theory of mind, for a long time now—more questions than answers pile up.

I believe there is a fundamental problem here; It is not possible for an abstract symbolic system to analyze itself. I have been able to deduce the formatting of consciousness only by building models derived from a digital, representative, logical, and natural means of seeing itself and can see ourselves through extrapolation.

Natural systems of consciousness do not experience "thought" and this will be true of machine intelligence as well.

While the genius and insights of philosophers is legendary there has been little ability for them to stand on the shoulders of previous giants. Any real "progress" in philosophy is a result of a growing understanding of experiment and reality rather than building on existing thinking. "Philosophy" may be man's most important pursuit but I doubt it can ever coalesce and move forward to any understanding of consciousness or thought. Most work is explaining how we create models and how these models influence behavior and thought.

[commonsense]

For all 3 of you (and you know who you are) — you 3 are getting nowhere and have been for quite a few pages. I’d guess that each one of you has become frustrated by the lack of progression on display in this thread.

One unproductive technique that has been employed in this thread lately is to repost a prior post verbatim — reposted more than once! If I were asked for one piece of advice—and I recognize that I have not—I would nonetheless say that you all should be more generous; assume innocence on the part of others.

For example, Age may not have been lying or proposing an intentional contradiction; it’s possible he made a mistake and didn’t realize the error.

And instead of “you haven’t proven _____” a phrase with a softer connotation might be “I am not finding the place where you showed _____”.

Age also said at one point that he had made a mess earlier. That could almost appear to be an apology for his mistake. At any rate, the magnanimous thing to do would have been to accept it as such.

It comes down to this: all y’all don’t have the manners that your parents should have taught you long ago.

[Iwannaplato]

For all 3 of you (and you know who you are) — you 3 are getting nowhere and have been for quite a few pages. I’d guess that each one of you has become frustrated by the lack of progression on display in this thread.

This does not hold at all for my experience. I haven't had much expectation regarding Age's admitting something, though I don't rule it out. But I have learned quite a bit after stopping interacting with him, even.

I have a clearly sense of what is missing from his approach to communication: which I have recently referred to as a lack of collaboration,as one example. I have also learned from what the other two elicit and notice.

One unproductive technique that has been employed in this thread lately is to repost a prior post verbatim — reposted more than once! If I were asked for one piece of advice—and I recognize that I have not—I would nonetheless say that you all should be more generous; assume innocence on the part of others.

Perhaps you should take your own advice.

I've been communicating with Age for a long time, with breaks. That communication has taken a lot of forms. And despite him regularly insulting me (and all the people of our time) there have been generous or neutral periods of communication. Further I have read exchanges with people who are truly patient and generous with him. And with good reason they get tired of his approach to a conversation and avoid him.

You assumed that we just sort of hastily arrived at a lack of generosity. Afraid not.

Further nearly every person in forum hated AGe's typography. I assume Atla is another of the 3 you are making assumptions about. It was after Atla fed him back his own typography that Age, finally decided to let go of the capitalization. The entire forum owes one of we ungenerous people for having discouraged a communication pattern that many commented on as annoying, including generous people.

Further, the three of us have put a lot of effort into communicating with Age. Yes, at this point much of it is negative or demanding on our part. But that's hardly all we've tried and further the only thing I've every seen him change in relation to was mocking: Atla's feeding him the food the feeds us. Yes, perhaps he won't learn from criticism at this point. But the option is there, of course, and he may surprise us, given his precise statement of intention to learn how to communicate better here.

And Wizard, who I assume is number 3, often asks the question about the contradiction in a neutral post. Age can freely say, Oh, I didn't mean it. Or he could in collaborative mode say he sees what Wizard means and explain how, really it isn't a contradiction. Or as you suggest simply admit a mistake.

For example, Age may not have been lying or proposing an intentional contradiction; it’s possible he made a mistake and didn’t realize the error.

He's had plenty of opportunity to give that explanation.

And instead of “you haven’t proven _____” a phrase with a softer connotation might be “I am not finding the place where you showed _____”.

Right. Did you know that I have pointed out to him several times that his demand that people prove things is confused. 1) many things are very hard to demonstrate online 2) proofs are not particularly an appropriate criterion. In relation to me, he's the one who brought up proofs. As much as I have read of the others, I can't be sure. But he certainly has expected proof again and again and even said that it is a problem that all people of this time believe things they cannot prove or haven't been proven.

I would guess that's where both Atla and Wizard have gotten the request for proof. You judge people and quite harshly Age, for not providing proof. Well, provide some yourself.

I wanted to understand his theory of The True Mind and that there is only one mind. So, despite insults and distractions, I just kept focusing on the question(s). Finally he without insults and distractions told me that he wouldn't answer my questions since they weren't worded that and implied beliefs he did not have. So, I rephrased my questions fitting the language he suggested.

Then he told me he would not prove or answer.

If other people do not demonstrate things they claim are true or believe, he judges them and not particularly nicely.

But he allows himself to do this.

So, if you had assumed perhaps not our innocence, but that we may have tried all sorts of things in communication with AGe and that however much it may seem we should not be asking for proof, this actually has to do with interactions you're not aware of. And, hey, I certainly don't expect people to have read the vast number of posts, which would probably be boring. But on the other had if our supposed assumptions are being criticized and the advice is to treat Age more innocently, then I would expect the person giving that advice to consider he isn't treating us as innocent in way he isn't aware of.

Age also said at one point that he had made a mess earlier. That could almost appear to be an apology for his mistake. At any rate, the magnanimous thing to do would have been to accept it as such.

I missed that post and that's great. It's hard to keep up with the vast amount of posts around AGe. Of course, he could, nevertheless actually apologize. Or heck just admit there's been a contradiction.

And he could take back some of his blanket judgments of everyone, which would include you, at the time this is being written.

It comes down to this: all y’all don’t have the manners that your parents should have taught you long ago.

You mean like only knowing a bit about a situation but presuming you can talk down to the people in that situation, and, in the end, implicitly being condescending about Age as well. Like he almost admitted, it could be taken as an admission.

You just did precisely what you are telling us not to do.

I encounter people who do some of the things Age does IRL. It's useful for me to learn what is actually happening, what does and does not work in relation to this, what are the hooks in it that bug me and so on.

I find this leads to me better handling those dynamics in real life. I've told Age that if he can admit these contradictions or apologize in a PM to me I would go back to interacting with him. I don't rule that out. But it's also not necessary for me. And actually learning that has taken a long time. My parents, who were lovely people and more polite than me, also got used on occasion by people with precisely the kinds of patterns that occur in forums like this one.

[Wizard22]

I believe there is a fundamental problem here; It is not possible for an abstract symbolic system to analyze itself. I have been able to deduce the formatting of consciousness only by building models derived from a digital, representative, logical, and natural means of seeing itself and can see ourselves through extrapolation.

Natural systems of consciousness do not experience "thought" and this will be true of machine intelligence as well.

While the genius and insights of philosophers is legendary there has been little ability for them to stand on the shoulders of previous giants. Any real "progress" in philosophy is a result of a growing understanding of experiment and reality rather than building on existing thinking. "Philosophy" may be man's most important pursuit but I doubt it can ever coalesce and move forward to any understanding of consciousness or thought. Most work is explaining how we create models and how these models influence behavior and thought.

My experience of 'thought' is the rationalization and justification of ideas and ideals, a 'selective' application of logic toward largely subjective desires and personal goals. I try to be as "objective" as possible, philosophically, but there are always degrees of confirmation bias, selective reasoning, mental blind spots, and errors of every kind. Furthermore, the application of logic, even if it were 'righteous' or logical, can fail when applied to reality. So the value of thought is relative to the ideals it serves.

I believe Philosophy represents a monumental shift in self-consciousness, through the ages and history of humanity. Philosophy, to me, represents the ancient thinkers "waking up" to their own thinking and stream-of-consciousness, internalizing Monologues and Dialogues, memorizing arguments in the Greek Agoras. It was a jump in the evolution of human intelligence, integrating text and logic into ancient human consciousness. Since then, some genius Philosophers stand out and apart from the others, demonstrating growth and examples of such self-consciousness. It's a type of collective human thought "becoming aware of itself".

That's my interpretation, anyway.

[Wizard22]

It comes down to this: all y’all don’t have the manners that your parents should have taught you long ago.

I don't know about that—I think 'progress' is being made. And hey, consider this, AGE isn't TYPING like THIS anymore, ISN'T that AN IMPROVEMENT?

[Age]

"wizard22" why do you want to know?

What difference would knowing make 'to you'?

AgeGPT, do you have ZERO beliefs, or ONLY ONE belief?

Why would it matter to you?

And, I have informed you already.

[Wizard22]

Why would it matter to you?

And, I have informed you already.

You "informed" me of contradicting positions...you having NO beliefs, and you having ONLY ONE belief.

I want to know which is your current position. What is it? NO beliefs or ONLY ONE belief?

[commonsense]

For all 3 of you (and you know who you are) — you 3 are getting nowhere and have been for quite a few pages. I’d guess that each one of you has become frustrated by the lack of progression on display in this thread.

This does not hold at all for my experience. I haven't had much expectation regarding Age's admitting something, though I don't rule it out. But I have learned quite a bit after stopping interacting with him, even.

I have a clearly sense of what is missing from his approach to communication: which I have recently referred to as a lack of collaboration,as one example. I have also learned from what the other two elicit and notice.

One unproductive technique that has been employed in this thread lately is to repost a prior post verbatim — reposted more than once! If I were asked for one piece of advice—and I recognize that I have not—I would nonetheless say that you all should be more generous; assume innocence on the part of others.

Perhaps you should take your own advice.

I've been communicating with Age for a long time, with breaks. That communication has taken a lot of forms. And despite him regularly insulting me (and all the people of our time) there have been generous or neutral periods of communication. Further I have read exchanges with people who are truly patient and generous with him. And with good reason they get tired of his approach to a conversation and avoid him.

You assumed that we just sort of hastily arrived at a lack of generosity. Afraid not.

Further nearly every person in forum hated AGe's typography. I assume Atla is another of the 3 you are making assumptions about. It was after Atla fed him back his own typography that Age, finally decided to let go of the capitalization. The entire forum owes one of we ungenerous people for having discouraged a communication pattern that many commented on as annoying, including generous people.

Further, the three of us have put a lot of effort into communicating with Age. Yes, at this point much of it is negative or demanding on our part. But that's hardly all we've tried and further the only thing I've every seen him change in relation to was mocking: Atla's feeding him the food the feeds us. Yes, perhaps he won't learn from criticism at this point. But the option is there, of course, and he may surprise us, given his precise statement of intention to learn how to communicate better here.

And Wizard, who I assume is number 3, often asks the question about the contradiction in a neutral post. Age can freely say, Oh, I didn't mean it. Or he could in collaborative mode say he sees what Wizard means and explain how, really it isn't a contradiction. Or as you suggest simply admit a mistake.

For example, Age may not have been lying or proposing an intentional contradiction; it’s possible he made a mistake and didn’t realize the error.

He's had plenty of opportunity to give that explanation.

And instead of “you haven’t proven _____” a phrase with a softer connotation might be “I am not finding the place where you showed _____”.

Right. Did you know that I have pointed out to him several times that his demand that people prove things is confused. 1) many things are very hard to demonstrate online 2) proofs are not particularly an appropriate criterion. In relation to me, he's the one who brought up proofs. As much as I have read of the others, I can't be sure. But he certainly has expected proof again and again and even said that it is a problem that all people of this time believe things they cannot prove or haven't been proven.

I would guess that's where both Atla and Wizard have gotten the request for proof. You judge people and quite harshly Age, for not providing proof. Well, provide some yourself.

I wanted to understand his theory of The True Mind and that there is only one mind. So, despite insults and distractions, I just kept focusing on the question(s). Finally he without insults and distractions told me that he wouldn't answer my questions since they weren't worded that and implied beliefs he did not have. So, I rephrased my questions fitting the language he suggested.

Then he told me he would not prove or answer.

If other people do not demonstrate things they claim are true or believe, he judges them and not particularly nicely.

But he allows himself to do this.

So, if you had assumed perhaps not our innocence, but that we may have tried all sorts of things in communication with AGe and that however much it may seem we should not be asking for proof, this actually has to do with interactions you're not aware of. And, hey, I certainly don't expect people to have read the vast number of posts, which would probably be boring. But on the other had if our supposed assumptions are being criticized and the advice is to treat Age more innocently, then I would expect the person giving that advice to consider he isn't treating us as innocent in way he isn't aware of.

Age also said at one point that he had made a mess earlier. That could almost appear to be an apology for his mistake. At any rate, the magnanimous thing to do would have been to accept it as such.

I missed that post and that's great. It's hard to keep up with the vast amount of posts around AGe. Of course, he could, nevertheless actually apologize. Or heck just admit there's been a contradiction.

And he could take back some of his blanket judgments of everyone, which would include you, at the time this is being written.

It comes down to this: all y’all don’t have the manners that your parents should have taught you long ago.

You mean like only knowing a bit about a situation but presuming you can talk down to the people in that situation, and, in the end, implicitly being condescending about Age as well. Like he almost admitted, it could be taken as an admission.

You just did precisely what you are telling us not to do.

I encounter people who do some of the things Age does IRL. It's useful for me to learn what is actually happening, what does and does not work in relation to this, what are the hooks in it that bug me and so on.

I find this leads to me better handling those dynamics in real life. I've told Age that if he can admit these contradictions or apologize in a PM to me I would go back to interacting with him. I don't rule that out. But it's also not necessary for me. And actually learning that has taken a long time. My parents, who were lovely people and more polite than me, also got used on occasion by people with precisely the kinds of patterns that occur in forums like this one.

Your commentary is excellent. I can only say, “Bravo, Iwannaplato!”

[Age]

For all 3 of you (and you know who you are) — you 3 are getting nowhere and have been for quite a few pages. I’d guess that each one of you has become frustrated by the lack of progression on display in this thread.

This does not hold at all for my experience. I haven't had much expectation regarding Age's admitting something, though I don't rule it out.

If this one is Truthfully ignoring me 'now', then how would this one ever know when I admit things or not?

But I have learned quite a bit after stopping interacting with him, even.

And, how could this one learn absolutely anything regarding 'me' or what I have been actually saying and doing here, other than from others words, which obviously could be partly or absolutely False and Wrong misinterpretations, intentional or not?

I have a clearly sense of what is missing from his approach to communication: which I have recently referred to as a lack of collaboration,as one example.

1. How could a person legitimately claim to having a clear sense of what is, supposedly, missing in another's approach to communication, when that person has chosen to completely and utterly 'ignore' the other?

2. What could be, literally, more lacking of collaboration to communication then choosing to completely and utterly 'ignore' the other?

3. This one here is not yet even aware of what 'my approach' is to communication, (and obviously choosing to completely 'ignore' me this one will never ever find out and know neither), and although this one does not even know what 'my approach' is, exactly, it will keep believing that its own made up claim and accusation about is the only true and right one here.

The hypocrisy here is blinding.

I have also learned from what the other two elicit and notice.

Learning from two others who are obviously completely and utterly 'blindsided' by their own pre-existing beliefs and presumptions will never ever make things actually clear for this one here. But, this has already formed beliefs and presumptions, which, as can be clearly seen here, it is just searching out more evidence for only anyway.

One unproductive technique that has been employed in this thread lately is to repost a prior post verbatim — reposted more than once! If I were asked for one piece of advice—and I recognize that I have not—I would nonetheless say that you all should be more generous; assume innocence on the part of others.

Perhaps you should take your own advice.

I've been communicating with Age for a long time, with breaks. That communication has taken a lot of forms. And despite him regularly insulting me (and all the people of our time) there have been generous or neutral periods of communication.

This one appears to not have the ability to consider that absolutely every word that I have chosen here was and is done very, very carefully and that just maybe not one insult has ever come from me at all ever.

But, because of the way the human brain works, this one is more or less just 'seeing' and/or believing that I am doing what it essentially does anyway. It thinks because it does some things, then others 'must' do those things as well.

Once again, making accusations and claims 'about me', supposedly and allegedly, 'regularly insulting' here, without providing actual links to what was actually said, so that we can look at and see in what context what was actually said was said, and not being OPEN to discussing the actual meanings and intentions behind the chosen words, just shows and proves that this one is just believing things based on its own presumptions and beliefs, only.

Also, you speak as though you adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, are completely innocent and do not do any Wrong at all.

This in itself is obviously False and Wrong, and exactly why 'the world' is in the mess it is in and why it is not getting any better at all.

Furthermore, when has this one been supposedly generous here?

This one has a couple of times, by the way, claimed, 'I am never speaking to you again "age", and you can take my word on this', yet keeps coming back to only try to criticize me, single me out with others, and humiliate me in an attempt to just try to discredit me. Mostly just because my views do not align with and match its beliefs, which it believes overrides all others here.

Even by the way it communicates by never seeking out clarification, for clarity sake nor to obtain and gain a better understanding of the other and their views, whenever the other's views do not align with its own, and will not accept that it should be questioned and challenged over its own views and beliefs, shows just how much lack of wanting to work with another here in a philosophy forum.

This one, literally, believes that it is "the teach" and its role in Life is 'to teach', and to not to be questioned at all. It also believes that other's roles in Life is 'to learn' from "the teacher", also known here as "iwannaplato".

Further I have read exchanges with people who are truly patient and generous with him. And with good reason they get tired of his approach to a conversation and avoid him.

This one continually accuses 'me' of not just 'sitting' and 'mulling over' what has been said and claimed about 'me', yet when one just provided some 'advice' here, instead of this one just 'sitting' with that advice and 'mulling it over', it jumps straight into the defense of what it does, and then, laughably, tries to 'justify' and 'defend' it.

You assumed that we just sort of hastily arrived at a lack of generosity. Afraid not.

Just so all are aware here I do not want absolutely any 'generosity' at all here. I just seek out some curiosity and interest here in exploring the views of others. This here is, or is meant to be, a 'philosophy forum', after all.

Further nearly every person in forum hated AGe's typography.

Who cares?

I explained the reason why I was doing it. But, sadly no one had any curiosity nor interest in exploring this view, and so none of you learned why I was doing that for, exactly.

Although one has since obtained a better idea now.

I assume Atla is another of the 3 you are making assumptions about. It was after Atla fed him back his own typography that Age, finally decided to let go of the capitalization.

I have informed this one that what it presumes and believes is true here is absolutely False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect.

But, again, it is absolutely BLIND and DEAF to a lot of what I write and say here.

I changed the way I communicated for a completely different reason. Just so we are all aware and clear here, (well this is for those who do not 'ignore' me anyway) "atla" had absolutely nothing at all whatsoever for the change in my writing style here.

The entire forum owes one of we ungenerous people for having discouraged a communication pattern that many commented on as annoying, including generous people.

There has only been one person with an actual legitimate reason for me wanting to stop communicating in that way that I did.

As for the rest of you who 'felt' annoyed, had you ever thought about actually 'growing up', and just seeking out and asking why I was doing it? you know like older human beings are meant to be like, and do?

Whining and whinging about. ' 'you' are annoying 'me', so 'stop it' ', shows and proves just how 'immature' you adult posters here really were, back in those 'olden days' when this was being written.

Sure, explain to me how the emotions within those bodies, but if you tell 'me' how 'I' am 'making' 'you' feel, you have, once more, just still giving 'me' the power over 'you', once again.

Just so you are aware here also if and when there was enough curiosity and interest shown so that clarifying questions were asked until I could express why I was doing that, then I could have stopped a long, long, time again. Again, it all depends on the soon actual curiosity and interest comes to the forefront.

Further, the three of us have put a lot of effort into communicating with Age.

As can be clearly seen the only real effort from you three has been to get me to say particular things, so that you can then try to use that against me. The three of you obviously already believed things 'about me', which you want to prove true. you also believe that what I have been 'alluding' to is wrong and incorrect, and so are also trying to discredit this by attempting to single me out, ridicule and humiliate me, in an attempt to discredit me. you know, just like when one just trying to communicate that actually the sun does not revolve around the earth, but the rest believing otherwise, tried to single that one out, ridicule and humiliate that one, and tried to discredit that one "themself", before they were ever give a chance to just prove its views.

There was obviously absolutely curiosity nor interest in what that one's views were, because the others believed that those views could never ever be true. This is, exactly, like what is happening and occurring here and which two of you, specifically, here are obviously trying to do here, as well.

As all looking into and reading this forum can see, very, very clearly I will add.

Yes, at this point much of it is negative or demanding on our part.

But that's hardly all we've tried and further the only thing I've every seen him change in relation to was mocking: Atla's feeding him the food the feeds us.

Once again, this one could not be more Wrong here. And, once again also, I informed this one of this, but its already existing beliefs would not allow it to see nor listen to the actual Truth, once more.

Yes, perhaps he won't learn from criticism at this point.

Once again, I am not here to necessarily 'learn' what 'it' is that this one is wanting and expecting 'me' 'to learn'.

Only I know what I want 'to learn' here. And, I am 'learning' and 'obtaining' and 'gathering' exactly what I 'wanted to'.

Once more, this one is not even yet aware of what it is, exactly, that I want 'to learn', and gets very terribly upset that I already know what it is 'wanting me to learn', and 'to accept'. But, this one's role here is not what it believes it is.

But the option is there, of course, and he may surprise us, given his precise statement of intention to learn how to communicate better here.

This one still believes that I when I say that I want 'to learn' how to communicate better with you human beings that this means that I want 'to learn' how to communicate in 'the ways that you adult human beings communicate with each other', which could not be any more further from the actual Truth of things.

This one really and Truly does need 'to learn' how to seek out and obtain actual clarity, first, before it ever makes assumptions and jumps to conclusions. For example here, to be able 'to teach' what another one 'wants to learn', one would have to first seek out and obtain actual clarity of what 'it' is, exactly, that that one 'wants to learn, first', before one could ever be able 'to teach' what 'it' that was and is 'being sought'.

The actual 'message' I have, and will one day share and reveal, what "iwannaplato" is continually doing here is actual irrefutable living proof for.

And Wizard, who I assume is number 3, often asks the question about the contradiction in a neutral post. Age can freely say, Oh, I didn't mean it. Or he could in collaborative mode say he sees what Wizard means and explain how, really it isn't a contradiction.

I have said that it is not really a contradiction, and, that it is only a contradiction in the way "wizard22" is looking at it, seeing it, and presenting it as.

But, because "wizard22" believes that it is a contradiction, then it would not matter what I said nor presented. Once again, while one is believing some thing is true, then there is absolutely nothing in the whole Universe that could show and present otherwise. Further, and once again also, once "wizard22" shows that what I said might actually not be a contradiction at all, then I will explain how and why it is not. Until "wizard22" is on its own here, living in its own beliefs and presumptions here. Of course along with others who believe or presume the exact same things.

But there is no use explaining absoltuely any of this to your "iwannaplato" because you have, supposedly, chosen to completely 'ignore' me.

Or as you suggest simply admit a mistake.

Obviously, this could have already happened and occurred, yet you would be none the wiser. Thus, remaining, literally, in 'ignorant bliss'.

For example, Age may not have been lying or proposing an intentional contradiction; it’s possible he made a mistake and didn’t realize the error.

He's had plenty of opportunity to give that explanation.

Once again, the actual 'apparent contradiction' has to be presented, and presented in the actual way that it was written, which obviously includes the actual context that it was in, exactly. Which, obviously, when done, by "iwannaplato" by the way, then, and only then, I could 'see' what was being referred to, and then, and again only then, was and is it then possible to 'see' the error/s of 'my ways', and so then only be able to admit it/them.

I am not sure how much clearer I can make this, to me obvious, way of doing this is. But, I have tried on several occasions to explain how I can only 'see' what 'it' is people are 'seeing', talking about, and are referring to, exactly, but to no avail. Only when it was actually done, what I has been continually requesting for, then, and only then, could I 'see' the 'error' of 'my ways'.

Until things are presented clearly and for all to 'look at' and 'see', what is being 'seen' remains solely in 'the heads' of others.

And instead of “you haven’t proven _____” a phrase with a softer connotation might be “I am not finding the place where you showed _____”.

Right. Did you know that I have pointed out to him several times that his demand that people prove things is confused.

you have said and claimed this. But, as I have said in replies, there are a few Wrong and False claims here that need Correcting, before we can even move onto looking at other things here. But, this one is not OPEN to there being anything Wrong nor False in its claims here, so we, literally, can move on and progress forward here. This one is 'stuck' in and with its belief/s here. So, 'together we' cannot move forward.

1) many things are very hard to demonstrate online

But absolutely nothing I have asked clarifying questions about is hard at all to demonstrate online here in this forum. In fact absolutely every question I have asked is extremely very simple and very easy to just actually answer OPENLY and Honestly. Which would demonstrate, exactly, what I am just 'seeking', and again never ever 'demanding'.

I have never asked for absolutely anything like, demonstrate how nuclear fusion works online here. I just ask clarifying questions, which the actual Honest answers are, literally, not at all hard to demonstrate here online.

2) proofs are not particularly an appropriate criterion.

Obviously to one who does not yet have proof for their beliefs and claims here. But, to me, if one has not yet obtained proof for their claims and beliefs, then it absolute absurdity to express those claims or beliefs at all, especially publicly and online, and either fail to back up and support or justify those beliefs and claims, or, expect others to not challenge nor question them regarding those beliefs or claims, and especially so in a philosophy forum.

Once again, I can back up and support and/or justify absolutely every claim I say and write here, and do so with irrefutable proof. Now, if absolutely anyone wants to choose to believe that this is not possible, then this is perfectly fine with me, (that one/s are literally proving what I have to say in regards to how the brain, with the belief-system, actually works), but just remember what one believes is true is never necessarily true at all. What one knows, however, is a very different thing. And, I know I already have the proof for my claims, and remember proofs are irrefutable. Proof is not evidence, which is nothing more than an 'appearance' of some thing. Proof is an irrefutable Fact of some thing.

Proofs are always appropriate criterion, as they are the only real criteria for claims, and accusations.

In relation to me, he's the one who brought up proofs.

Yes, quite obviously I have been from just about the outset of me coming into this forum.

As much as I have read of the others, I can't be sure. But he certainly has expected proof again and again and even said that it is a problem that all people of this time believe things they cannot prove or haven't been proven.

1. If I recall correctly I have never used the 'problem' word in relation to what it is saying and claiming here.

2. Obviously, there is an 'issue' if people go around making claims, and/or accusations, of which they had not yet obtain and gained actual proof for.

3. Does this think that it is perfectly normal, acceptable, or even appropriate that is all right and okay to go around making claims and accusations of or about others, and that that is all that is needed?

I would guess that's where both Atla and Wizard have gotten the request for proof. You judge people and quite harshly Age, for not providing proof. Well, provide some yourself.

I will WHEN I am asked for what 'it', exactly, that people want proof for.

"wizard22" nor "atla" have never done this. As I can clearly show throughout their writings. Now, of course, some of you are going to instantly assume, and some even believe, otherwise. But, I will, once again, suggest here go and find the actual proof that they have done so. What will be found is that they have done something else instead.

I wanted to understand his theory of The True Mind

Once again, it is impossible for you to understand 'my theory' of some thing that I have never ever said.

How can you still not yet fathom, comprehend, and understand this Fact?

The answer is very simple and very easy indeed, because you have, literally, 'ignoring' the actual words that I say and write here. But, even before you, literally, made the choice to 'ignore' me, you will still 'ignoring' the actual words that I was saying and writing here, as you have just proved True once again here, and if you cannot get my actual words write, then I could never ever really begin to explain to you what you are envisioning nor imagining. I can only explain what I have been saying and referring to, only.

I do not even know what some so-called 'The True Mind' even could be, let alone know what it is "iwannaplato". These words are yours alone, so only you know what that 'thing' is.

and that there is only one mind.

Saying and claiming that you 'wanted' to know, shows and proves that you have 'given up'. So, because you 'gave up', then that is over. This was and is your choice and yours alone.

you misinterpretation and continual expressing your own misinterpretation as what really took place, is just 'your excuse' for 'giving up', and another attempt of 'yours' to ridicule and/or discredit me. Now, you might be believing that this is working. But, the only thing what you are doing here is working for, exactly, is for proving further what I will be explaining in regards to how the Mind and the brain works, exactly.

So, despite insults and distractions, I just kept focusing on the question(s).

The Falsehood or Truthfulness of 'this' is here for all to 'look at' and 'see' for "themselves".

Finally he without insults and distractions told me that he wouldn't answer my questions since they weren't worded that and implied beliefs he did not have. So, I rephrased my questions fitting the language he suggested.

you, obviously, did not. And this goes, without needing questioning.

Then he told me he would not prove or answer.

And, it is this one who claims that I am the liar and the one who has been lying here.

Also, let us not forget that the post that this one is replying to here was just giving this one some, unasked for, advice.

I have not notice any acknowledgement of reflecting on that advice but rather just more constant views 'about me', which it has re-repeated the exact same ones a few times now already.

If other people do not demonstrate things they claim are true or believe, he judges them and not particularly nicely.

Again,

The 'nicely' or not, is your own perspective only, and continually portraying 'negative' things 'about me', helps you in your ability to single me out and ridicule and/or discredit me, but to you only. Because what you are actually doing is providing more actual proof, for me.

And,

As I have pointed out to you numerous times already, I ask specific questions for clarity in regards to what others say and claim, (which I rarely, if even, get in return), and so if one cannot even just clarifying through answering clarifying questions, then they cannot demonstrate what they claim. See, the difference between 'you' and 'I' here is that I seek out clarity OPENLY from the other's perspective, whereas, you only seek out 'clarity' of what might possibly justify or back up your already obtained and held onto beliefs and presumptions.

But he allows himself to do this.

But I, supposedly, allow "myself" to do 'what', exactly?

So, if you had assumed perhaps not our innocence, but that we may have tried all sorts of things in communication with AGe and that however much it may seem we should not be asking for proof, this actually has to do with interactions you're not aware of.

First of, what is 'it', exactly, that 'this one' has been trying to 'communicate'?
Then 'we' can move along here.

Just so all are aware I, once again, want all to 'ask for proof'. This has been what I have been actually seeking out and asking for here. I just really wish you would start doing it.

Now, what are these, supposed and alleged, interactions that "commonsense" is, supposedly, not aware of, exactly?

And, hey, I certainly don't expect people to have read the vast number of posts, which would probably be boring. But on the other had if our supposed assumptions are being criticized and the advice is to treat Age more innocently, then I would expect the person giving that advice to consider he isn't treating us as innocent in way he isn't aware of.

What is with the constant 'he is not aware of'? Has this one even considered, just once even, that just maybe I am far, far more aware of things here than this one just imagines, believes, and/or presumes?

Also, that this one presumes or believes that I have not been treating it and others the way it is trying to claim here is also something else that could be all of its own imaginings and thus be absolutely False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect as well.

Again, until a link is provided, where the actual words and the actual context can be looked and seen, and until a discussion has been had to clarify exactly what was been said and meant occurs, then what it is saying and claiming here could exist in its imagination and/or belief, alone.

Age also said at one point that he had made a mess earlier. That could almost appear to be an apology for his mistake. At any rate, the magnanimous thing to do would have been to accept it as such.

I missed that post and that's great.

If you have Truly 'ignored' me like you claim you have, then OBVIOUSLY you would have missed it. So, continually claiming that I am still saying and doing, or not saying and not doing, the above things is just absolutely Truly ridiculous considering that you claimed that you have, literally, chosen to completely and utterly 'ignore' me.

It's hard to keep up with the vast amount of posts around AGe.

Oh, so as soon as this one misses something, then, once again, it is completely and utterly 'my fault', once more.

Is there anything here that is no 'my fault'?

This time for the sole reason of the vast amount of 'my posts'. Which, let us not forget some of 'my vast posts around' are just responding to your continuous exact same False and Wrong claims and accusations 'regarding me' and 'about me'.

Of course, he could, nevertheless actually apologize. Or heck just admit there's been a contradiction.

But 'the alleged and supposed contradiction' could be all in 'that or those heads' here, only. So, until this recognizes and accepts this Fact, and provides the alleged contradiction, and discussed it with me, I am certainly not going to admit that what this one is imagining nor believing is 'a contradiction' is actually a contradiction.

Of course, I will openly admit that this one is 'seeing' a contradiction here somewhere. But where, when, and what, exactly, I am completely unaware of.

Now, of course, I saw the still 'apparent contradiction', but because this one has chosen to 'ignore' me, completely, and supposedly. I certainly cannot discuss anything with it here. So, what remains is this one's completely unsubstantiated claim and belief here, alone.

And he could take back some of his blanket judgments of everyone, which would include you, at the time this is being written.

Does this one really still believe that adult human beings are all completely innocent here, in the days when this is being written.

It is this type of, 'Do not talk about 'us' and what 'we' do', attitude by adult human beings, back when this was being written, is the very reason why it took human beings so, so long to evolve past those very dark and Wrong 'old days'.

It comes down to this: all y’all don’t have the manners that your parents should have taught you long ago.

You mean like only knowing a bit about a situation but presuming you can talk down to the people in that situation, and, in the end, implicitly being condescending about Age as well. Like he almost admitted, it could be taken as an admission.

You just did precisely what you are telling us not to do.

I encounter people who do some of the things Age does IRL. It's useful for me to learn what is actually happening, what does and does not work in relation to this, what are the hooks in it that bug me and so on.

Once again, 'APE-thinking' here at its highest level.

I find this leads to me better handling those dynamics in real life.

Well you are obviously showing the exact opposite here.

I've told Age that if he can admit these contradictions or apologize in a PM to me I would go back to interacting with him.

And, you will never ever know how I will let you interact with me again, if you continue on as you are here 'now'.

I don't rule that out. But it's also not necessary for me. And actually learning that has taken a long time. My parents, who were lovely people and more polite than me, also got used on occasion by people with precisely the kinds of patterns that occur in forums like this one.

'APE-thinking', and 'APE-seeing', again.