CAN WE CONSIDER THIS FORUM AS A GLOBAL VILLAGE?

[Age]

I'm not sure what you're advocating here: that everybody just have a virtual group hug?

Like the virtual beer, it will be virtual...and equally deficient in substance.

Wow! That's about as cynical as it gets. So what's got you so cynical?

It's reality.

Lol So now "Immanuel can" is claiming that it, itself, knows what is reality, and that others do not know what is reality.

Right now, you're not drinking beer. You're not having a hug. You're not having a global village. You're imagining a closeness that is an illusion. There's nobody in the room with you, presumably...you're typing into a computer, not singing "I'd like to teach the world to sing..." with a group of hippies in the '60s.

And that's the big difference between things that are virtual and those that are real.

And what is real, well to "immanuel can" anyway, is that 'we can never live in peace', which obviously gives it every 'excuse' to just keep disagreeing, bickering, and/or fighting with others. As it has clearly been showing here how it loves to misbehave, lie, and deceive.

[Age]

I can still feel some degree of connection with people over the Internet.

What one can "feel" and what is real are two very different questions, of course.

And, even what one thinks, sees, or believes is true can be very, very, different from what is actually True and Real, as you keep showing and proving here "immanuel can"

What you can get attached to is merely a style of writing. About all the people here, you have no idea of body, of face, of inflection, of voice, of history, of relationship, of social activity...most of what makes us human. It is enough for us if people share with us good conversation and good ideas. There's no more actually to be had on this site, because it has no mode in which to transmit anything more.

[attofishpi]

We of the village get a local vote...just saying, we could shoot him and put him in a ditch somewhere - then we would never have to hear again how irrefutably wrong we are always...all of the time.

[BuzzCap7]

.
.
What is the meaning behind this?
.
.

Save 011.JPG

.
.
When you "think", you are using external learned lessons (lessons that are "good" or "bad") that are manipulated, analyzed, and gives you some type of result. On the thinking level, the results are or can be faulty. You are manipulating information.

When you listen (or better put) feel for an answer deep inside of you, then you are more in touch with "reality".

Remember my friends, the deeper you is closer to and more in touch with the collective. Therein lies the greatest of all realities.

Note:
For every person (almost) that walks the face of this earth, has their own reality. But when we all are in touch with the deeper self, the deeper you, therein we are all connected. The collective.

[Age]

We of the village get a local vote...just saying, we could shoot him and put him in a ditch somewhere - then we would never have to hear again how irrefutably wrong we are always...all of the time.

As was always going to come out here in this thread, this so-called 'village' will only ever consist of those who "attofishpi" accepts, and wants.

Also, your claim here could not be further from the actual Truth, of things, or 'could not be further Wrong' if one prefers.

[Age]

.
.
What is the meaning behind this?
.
.
Save 011.JPG
.
.

What this means is is just that 'thinking' differs from 'knowing', and that 'knowing' always aligns, perfectly, with Reality, Itself, whereas 'thinking' never necessarily has to.

When you "think", you are using external learned lessons (lessons that are "good" or "bad") that are manipulated, analyzed, and gives you some type of result. On the thinking level, the results are or can be faulty. You are manipulating information.

When you listen (or better put) feel for an answer deep inside of you, then you are more in touch with "reality".

Remember my friends, the deeper you is closer to and more in touch with the collective. Therein lies the greatest of all realities.

Note:
For every person (almost) that walks the face of this earth, has their own reality. But when we all are in touch with the deeper self, the deeper you, therein we are all connected. The collective.

If you would like to share any of your own so-called 'personal realities', then I could show how you also can work out how to find those that actually align with what is actually True, Right, and/or Real, or with Reality, Itself, from those that you just think or believe do.

you are on the 'Right path' also here in regards to the connection and/or the collective

[BuzzCap7]

Well put age. Well put. I wish there was a way to "Like" a post.

Good show!

Mark

[Age]

Well put age. Well put. I wish there was a way to "Like" a post.

Good show!

Mark

Either some thing is True or False, Right or Wrong, Accurate or Inaccurate, and/or Correct or Incorrect. 'Liking' some thing, or not, is just another 'personal preference', which again may not necessarily align with 'Reality', Itself, anyway.

If I have written absolutely ANY thing here that is either False, Wrong, Inaccurate, or Incorrect, then I much prefer to be informed of 'what' is actually, exactly, True, Right, Accurate, or Correct and much more importantly be informed of 'why' 'my words' 'that way'. 'Liking', or 'disliking' is just more superficiality, which does not help anyone to learn nor 'grow' at all. Well to me anyway.

[FlashDangerpants]

If I have written absolutely ANY thing here that is either False, Wrong, Inaccurate, or Incorrect, then I much prefer to be informed of 'what' is actually, exactly, True, Right, Accurate, or Correct

You have overcorrected. Yesterday you only did two of the same thing so today you have overshot and done four of the same thing. Just go back to your three of the same thing formula.

[Age]

If I have written absolutely ANY thing here that is either False, Wrong, Inaccurate, or Incorrect, then I much prefer to be informed of 'what' is actually, exactly, True, Right, Accurate, or Correct

You have overcorrected. Yesterday you only did two of the same thing so today you have overshot and done four of the same thing. Just go back to your three of the same thing formula.

If you, still, do not yet 'know' the actual difference between those four words, then I am not sure that you ever will.

Also, you seem to have a very skewed perception of what 'the same thing' is, exactly.

Why do you suppose there are those four 'different' words existing, if as you believe they refer to 'the exact same thing'?

[FlashDangerpants]

If I have written absolutely ANY thing here that is either False, Wrong, Inaccurate, or Incorrect, then I much prefer to be informed of 'what' is actually, exactly, True, Right, Accurate, or Correct

You have overcorrected. Yesterday you only did two of the same thing so today you have overshot and done four of the same thing. Just go back to your three of the same thing formula.

If you, still, do not yet 'know' the actual difference between those four words, then I am not sure that you ever will.

Also, you seem to have a very skewed perception of what 'the same thing' is, exactly.

Why do you suppose there are those four 'different' words existing, if as you believe they refer to 'the exact same thing'?

Show me where I wrote "exact" please.

[Age]

You have overcorrected. Yesterday you only did two of the same thing so today you have overshot and done four of the same thing. Just go back to your three of the same thing formula.

If you, still, do not yet 'know' the actual difference between those four words, then I am not sure that you ever will.

Also, you seem to have a very skewed perception of what 'the same thing' is, exactly.

Why do you suppose there are those four 'different' words existing, if as you believe they refer to 'the exact same thing'?

Show me where I wrote "exact" please.

Obviously you did not. But why would that matter now anyway?

Unless, of course, to you there is 'a difference' between 'the same thing', and, 'the, exact, same thing.

And, if there is, then hopefully you are now realising why I use 'different words', which may have 'similar meanings' but obviously which do not contain 'the, exact, same meanings'.

[FlashDangerpants]

If you, still, do not yet 'know' the actual difference between those four words, then I am not sure that you ever will.

Also, you seem to have a very skewed perception of what 'the same thing' is, exactly.

Why do you suppose there are those four 'different' words existing, if as you believe they refer to 'the exact same thing'?

Show me where I wrote "exact" please.

Obviously you did not. But why would that matter now anyway?

Unless, of course, to you there is 'a difference' between 'the same thing', and, 'the, exact, same thing.

And, if there is, then hopefully you are now realising why I use 'different words', which may have 'similar meanings' but obviously which do not contain 'the, exact, same meanings'.

What if I was referring to "the same basic thing" instead of "the same exact thing"?

I don't actually care why you say the same general thing three times over in your autistic ritual. I just noted that you suddenly switched up the number of the same sort of things you say.

[Age]

Show me where I wrote "exact" please.

Obviously you did not. But why would that matter now anyway?

Unless, of course, to you there is 'a difference' between 'the same thing', and, 'the, exact, same thing'.

And, if there is, then hopefully you are now realising why I use 'different words', which may have 'similar meanings', at first glance, but obviously which do not have 'the, exact, same meanings'.

What if I was referring to "the same basic thing" instead of "the same exact thing"?

Well, if you were, and you were not using the specific words that you actually meant, then, obviously, what you say or write could be misinterpreted, or misunderstood.

Now, if you were more specific, and used the actual words, which you actually meant, that have very specific and different definitions and meanings, like I do, then you would not have to now be asking, 'What if I meant some thing else?'

I don't actually care why you say the same general thing three times over in your autistic ritual.

But I am, obviously, not saying the, exact, same thing, any number of times, over. Although, and just as obviously, you may well read and see things differently here.

And, if you thought that there was some so-called 'three times over' ritual, this is further proof of 'confirmation bias' at play here.

I just noted that you suddenly switched up the number of the same sort of things you say.

Obviously, if you think it is only 'now' that I have just 'suddenly switched', then you really have not been following here.

[FlashDangerpants]

I just noted that you suddenly switched up the number of the same sort of things you say.

Obviously, if you think it is only 'now' that I have just 'suddenly switched', then you really have not been following here.

I was just taking the piss out of your habit for writing a thing, then repeating it in synonym form twice. Saying it again, in duplicate but with trivial variation. Replicating doubly, with mild alteration. That you have no sense of humour about this (or anything else) doesn't make me less inclined to mock you, sorry.

Of course I wouldn't notice if you've been changing the number of repetitions up regularly. I hardly ever bother reading your posts. They are humourless and uninformative and I don't care for them very much.