Is Driving Fossil-Fuelled Cars Immoral?

[Age]

Same gut reaction on my part. I think you are missing the forest for the trees.

And, going on every past example of when I have sought out to gain clarification into your accusations and claims 'about me', when I ask you here if you will clarify, exactly, what 'it' is that you think I am missing here, then you will not, correct?

I think it would be good if you sat down with someone IRL showed them some of the interactions you have here at PN and got some feedback.

LOL If only you knew "iwannaplato". If only you knew.

Just above here claiming that you have already started a response with, 'This one ...', you still could not be more Wrong and more Inaccurate. And, you sitting there and laughing 'at me' about what I have said and written here just shows and proves how much you are missing here and need help in comprehending and understanding here.

Just maybe you should take your own advice, and find someone to go through our interactions with you, in person, so that they can show and point out to you what you have been missing and where you are Wrong, here. Or, do you, still, believe that it is only 'me' who is wrong and missing things here, and who needs feedback here, only?

If you do this (not merely have done this) great.
In such a situation the other person can see body language, hear voice tone and there is no delay in formulating responses - or at least it is minimized.

If you, still really, cannot recognize and see that you did not do what you claim and believe that you have here, then you need more than another person to help you.

[Iwannaplato]

LOL If only you knew "iwannaplato". If only you knew.

Just above here claiming that you have already started a response with, 'This one ...', you still could not be more Wrong and more Inaccurate. And, you sitting there and laughing 'at me' about what I have said and written here just shows and proves how much you are missing here and need help in comprehending and understanding here.

You're confused about what was fun for me and where your main problem is.

Just maybe you should take your own advice, and find someone to go through our interactions with you, in person, so that they can show and point out to you what you have been missing and where you are Wrong, here. Or, do you, still, believe that it is only 'me' who is wrong and missing things here, and who needs feedback here, only?

I am constantly in interaction with people IRL where I get feedback on my professional and private behavior, interactions and assertions. This has included dialogue about the interactions here. This includes my work role, which entails ongoing complicated interactions with people, including a broad range of communication issues. The discussiosn with others, includes those I am directly communicating with and also peers).

If private life I have a role that while focused on a different area of life also require a broad range of types of communication and of my own choice I regularly ask for feedback.

And then there's family/friendship where this type of communication and checking in with others is a regular feature.

During these various situations I deal with criticism, suggestions, observations that with some regularlity point of my blind spots, mistakes, areas of improvement, etc. I appreciate and learn from these facets of the interactions. And, I specifically ask for it.

Important to me is the live interaction where body language, voice tone, etc. can be experienced by others.

My impression is that you are vastly more isolated IRL than I am. If however you are getting this kind of feedback, both from chosen friends and then from others you know less well and or have professional contacts with rather than friendships, great.

Do you have such interactions regularly? Ones you respect?

If you, still really, cannot recognize and see that you did not do what you claim and believe that you have here, then you need more than another person to help you.

You are clearly living in the past on this issue.
You're missing the forest.

Or you can remain, like the proverbial monkey with his hand around something in the jar, thinking the most important thing is 'having' that object, even if it means he's stuck walking around holding a big jar and is easily captured.

I was not absolutely wrong when I said I was anticipating....etc.

It's hard to let go of that, isn't it?

You'll try to focus anywhere but there'.

If you want a jar around your now useless hand, keep it up.

[Age]

LOL If only you knew "iwannaplato". If only you knew.

Just above here claiming that you have already started a response with, 'This one ...', you still could not be more Wrong and more Inaccurate. And, you sitting there and laughing 'at me' about what I have said and written here just shows and proves how much you are missing here and need help in comprehending and understanding here.

You're confused about what was fun for me and where your main problem is.

Why have you made this assumption, and jumped to this conclusion?

Just maybe you should take your own advice, and find someone to go through our interactions with you, in person, so that they can show and point out to you what you have been missing and where you are Wrong, here. Or, do you, still, believe that it is only 'me' who is wrong and missing things here, and who needs feedback here, only?

I am constantly in interaction with people IRL where I get feedback on my professional and private behavior, interactions and assertions.

Okay, but have you asked anyone if you, or anyone else, had started a response with the words, 'This one ...', above here?

If you do, then you will be informed that contrary to your claim and belief that in fact no one has.

And, you can keep believing that this has occurred, but you will be very, very sadly mistaken and Wrong.

This has included dialogue about the interactions here. This includes my work role, which entails ongoing complicated interactions with people, including a broad range of communication issues.

Why are they 'complicated', for you?

The discussiosn with others, includes those I am directly communicating with and also peers).

If private life I have a role that while focused on a different area of life also require a broad range of types of communication and of my own choice I regularly ask for feedback.

And then there's family/friendship where this type of communication and checking in with others is a regular feature.

Okay, have you had any feedback about where you have been Wrong here, or in regards to you continual missing and misinterpretation of things here?

During these various situations I deal with criticism, suggestions, observations that with some regularlity point of my blind spots, mistakes, areas of improvement, etc.

Okay, but it is a shame that you do not admit to these things on this forum. Well not when I point them out to you here.

I appreciate and learn from these facets of the interactions. And, I specifically ask for it.

Well you certainly do not specifically ask for 'it' here.

Important to me is the live interaction where body language, voice tone, etc. can be experienced by others.

Okay. So, does this imply that the interaction that you have here in this forum is not important, or less important?

My impression is that you are vastly more isolated IRL than I am.

Okay. But you do agree with and accept that 'your impression' here could be False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect, correct?

Or, do you not agree with and accept this?

If however you are getting this kind of feedback, both from chosen friends and then from others you know less well and or have professional contacts with rather than friendships, great.

Do you have such interactions regularly?

'Such' is a fairly vague term, especially considering what you have alleged here, or is it not to you?

Ones you respect?

'Respect' is also a word that could be very relative.

If you, still really, cannot recognize and see that you did not do what you claim and believe that you have here, then you need more than another person to help you.

You are clearly living in the past on this issue.

you are, still, very persistent in not admitting when you are Wrong here.

You're missing the forest.

you are continually believing that it is 'me' who is missing the so-called 'forest' here, when from my perspective it is you who is missing not just the 'big Picture' here but also just about all of the 'little ones' as well.

Or you can remain, like the proverbial monkey with his hand around something in the jar, thinking the most important thing is 'having' that object, even if it means he's stuck walking around holding a big jar and is easily captured.

Look, you just said and claimed some thing happened and occurred above here. I just pointed out that it did not. Why you cannot admit this, and why you try so desperately to try and deflect away you can keep doing for as long as you like. But, each time you miss these little things, you are missing the much bigger and whole Picture here.

I was not absolutely wrong when I said I was anticipating....etc.

I never said you were.

This is just another prime example of when and where you are missing the 'little things', which leads you to missing the much 'big things' here.

It's hard to let go of that, isn't it?

It is, supposedly, hard to let go of 'what', exactly?

You'll try to focus anywhere but there'.

But, the 'there' that you are talking about here is absolutely nothing I have even thought, let alone said and wrote any thing about here.

Once again, "iwannaplato" you are letting your preexisting beliefs and presumptions get in the way of what the actual Truth is here.

If you want a jar around your now useless hand, keep it up.

If you only knew "iwannaplato". If you only knew.

[Iwannaplato]

Okay, but have you asked anyone if you, or anyone else, had started a response with the words, 'This one ...', above here?

Oh, they'd probably point out that in one instance I wrote that phrase and didn't use a capital T. Is this what they monkey is hanging onto in the jar? But they would also not that you did what you chide others for doing: you took a single perspective on the word 'anticipating'. Then that you couldn't admit this. Further that you presented your incorrect conclusion to me in absolutist terms - with the word 'absolutely.' You accuse Atla for using absolutist terms when he does not. I can only hope you note your error and habit of doing what you accused him of.

If you do, then you will be informed that contrary to your claim and belief that in fact no one has.

Oh, I did in a later post. Again, incorrect. And also irrelevant to your incorrect claim about what I was supposedly absolutely Wrong about.

And, you can keep believing that this has occurred, but you will be very, very sadly mistaken and Wrong.

You really think I would be sad about that?

You are missing the forest for the trees.

This has included dialogue about the interactions here. This includes my work role, which entails ongoing complicated interactions with people, including a broad range of communication issues.

Why are they 'complicated', for you?

They're not just complicated for me, not that you said that. Most human face to face interactions are complicated, but these entailing dealing with pedagogical, psychological and practical goals, interactions and processes.

Okay, have you had any feedback about where you have been Wrong here, or in regards to you continual missing and misinterpretation of things here?

Oh, certainly where I've made mistakes.

Okay, but it is a shame that you do not admit to these things on this forum. Well not when I point them out to you here.

Ah, you've amended you earlier judgment that this never happens period. Good for you.

I appreciate and learn from these facets of the interactions. And, I specifically ask for it.

Well you certainly do not specifically ask for 'it' here.

With you, no. The judgments you have and the focus you have make that uninteresting for me.

Important to me is the live interaction where body language, voice tone, etc. can be experienced by others.

Okay. So, does this imply that the interaction that you have here in this forum is not important, or less important?

I would generally prioritize live interactions over this kind.

My impression is that you are vastly more isolated IRL than I am.

Okay. But you do agree with and accept that 'your impression' here could be False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect, correct?

Or, do you not agree with and accept this?

I have already answered this kind of question many times and responded about my posts in general, my assertions in general. If you don't believe my final assertions on this issue, I can't see any value in repeating what I have stated many times. If you don't remember, there's little point in telling you now.

If however you are getting this kind of feedback, both from chosen friends and then from others you know less well and or have professional contacts with rather than friendships, great.

Do you have such interactions regularly?

'Such' is a fairly vague term, especially considering what you have alleged here, or is it not to you?

'Such' refers back to the type of interactions I mentioned I had regularly.

Do you have regular face to face time with humans, where you get feedback on your communication and how you are relating to other people?

[Age]

Okay, but have you asked anyone if you, or anyone else, had started a response with the words, 'This one ...', above here?

Oh, they'd probably point out that in one instance I wrote that phrase and didn't use a capital T. Is this what they monkey is hanging onto in the jar?

Why would you even assume something like that? That is not what I have being talking about and referring to here.

What you are missing here is far more obvious than that.

But they would also not that you did what you chide others for doing: you took a single perspective on the word 'anticipating'.

Once again, instead of just focusing on what and where you were actually Wrong, so that you can try to get out of admitting where you were Wrong, you, once more, try to deflect away here. And, once again, by going back over some thing that has already been 'looked at', and 'discussed'.

Then that you couldn't admit this.

So, I said and wrote,
'I never meant that you were not absolutely correct in your description of your attitude.'

And,

'In case you were unaware I meant that what you were anticipating had not, yet, occurred.'

Which, literally, means that I took that single perspective on the word 'anticipating'.

How much more could I 'admit', and what more could I add to 'admit', to me taking that single perspective on the word 'anticipating'?

you really do seem to miss so much of what I actually say, write, and mean here "iwannaplato"?

Will you put in words how, exactly, you would satisfy you in me 'admitting' that I took that single perspective on the word 'anticipation'?

Further that you presented your incorrect conclusion to me in absolutist terms - with the word 'absolutely.'

So what?

you use the word 'absolutely' in regards to "your" own 'self' and what you do in 'absolutist terms'. Are you here now trying to suggest that it is okay or all right for you to do this, but it is not okay and not all right for me to do this, as well?

Also, and obviously, as for there being an 'incorrect conclusion' or not, this has not yet been 'concluded' as 'we' have not 'looked at, and into' this, yet, and have not discussed this, yet. So, the only one here who has come up with it being an 'incorrect conclusion' is you alone. Which, obviously, you are absolutely free to do so, but we have already gone into, and concluded, that your own personal views, beliefs, and opinions of things can be very, very Wrong.

You accuse Atla for using absolutist terms when he does not.

Okay, and you and "atla" accuse me of doing things when I do not.

So, does this make 'us' 'even'? Or, is there something else 'at play' here?

I can only hope you note your error and habit of doing what you accused him of.

And, 'we' can also 'hope' that you note your errors, and habit of doing what you accuse me and others of, as well. But, what would be the real reason for 'us' to just 'hope' for this, also?

Also, are you trying to imply that "atla" has never ever used 'absolutist terms' here in this forum and/or that "atla" has never ever used 'absolutist terms' when I have accused "atla" of doing so?

If yes, then are you absolutely sure of this?

If you do, then you will be informed that contrary to your claim and belief that in fact no one has.

Oh, I did in a later post. Again, incorrect.

That you, obviously, DID NOT in any later post, is the prime example I am pointing out here 'about you' "iwannaplato". Which is; you continue to miss so many things that I say, mean, and, literally, point out here, in this forum.

I suggest you 'go back' here, in this thread, re-read what the, actual, words say here, and then 'come back', to me here.

If you, still, want to say and claim that 'you did', then I, seriously, suggest that you seek out 'the help', which you advised me to get.

For what I am saying and claiming here cannot be refuted. As some of the very words that back up, support, and prove me True and Right here, once again, come 'from you', "yourself", "iwannaplato". Which, obviously as they are in written form here, you, literally, cannot 'take back'.

And also irrelevant to your incorrect claim about what I was supposedly absolutely Wrong about.

Allow 'us' to see if you can show 'the readers' here what 'that' was, exactly?

If you do not even 'try', then why not?

Are you afraid and scared of some thing? Or, is there something else 'at play' here?

And, you can keep believing that this has occurred, but you will be very, very sadly mistaken and Wrong.

You really think I would be sad about that?

If you are mistaken here, which you are, and you will not be 'sadly mistaken', then what will 'you' be, exactly, then?

You are missing the forest for the trees.

Which is a very easy and simple thing for you to say and claim. But, 'we' are yet to see one example of if this is even remotely true here.

I could keep saying and claiming that 'you are missing the forest for the trees', "iwannaplato", also. But, just saying so does not make it so.

And, remember that it has been 'I' who has being saying and claiming here that you adult human beings here, when this is being written, do not yet know how to uncover, find, see, comprehend, and understand the actual Truth of things, yet. Which could also mean that it is, literally, 'you' who have been missing' 'the forest', which is; 'the One and only actual irrefutable Truths', of things, for 'the trees', which are; your own individual, or grouped, 'believed and presumed truths', of things.

Just maybe, "iwannaplato", it has actually been 'you' who has been 'missing' some/a lot of things here, after all.

This has included dialogue about the interactions here. This includes my work role, which entails ongoing complicated interactions with people, including a broad range of communication issues.

Why are they 'complicated', for you?

They're not just complicated for me, not that you said that. Most human face to face interactions are complicated, but these entailing dealing with pedagogical, psychological and practical goals, interactions and processes.

Okay, why then are most of your so-called human face to face interactions complicated to you human beings, in the days when this is being written?

Obviously, once you find out why these interactions are, or could be, 'complicated' to and for you human beings, then you will have the knowledge of how to make those interactions between you being less complicated and more simple.

Like how they, really, can be, and are, that is; once you, also, have obtained and gained 'the know-how'.

Okay, have you had any feedback about where you have been Wrong here, or in regards to you continual missing and misinterpretation of things here?

Oh, certainly where I've made mistakes.

Okay. It is great to hear that you are getting the help that you, obviously, needed, from them.

Okay, but it is a shame that you do not admit to these things on this forum. Well not when I point them out to you here.

Ah, you've amended you earlier judgment that this never happens period. Good for you.

So, are you 'now' admitting that you have not admitted to the Wrong that you have done and have claimed here, when I have pointed them out to you here?

Also, are you absolutely sure that I made 'the judgment' that you have never done this before?

I appreciate and learn from these facets of the interactions. And, I specifically ask for it.

Well you certainly do not specifically ask for 'it' here.

With you, no.

And why is this?

Do you have some preconceived view of judgment of and/or about me, here?

The judgments you have and the focus you have make that uninteresting for me.

Yet, you have spent as much time as you have responding to 'my judgments'.

Why do you find 'my judgments' and 'my focus' here, supposedly, 'uninteresting'?

Important to me is the live interaction where body language, voice tone, etc. can be experienced by others.

Okay. So, does this imply that the interaction that you have here in this forum is not important, or less important?

I would generally prioritize live interactions over this kind.

So, why then do you spend as much time as you do here, in what you might call 'non-live interactions'?

Are your, so-called, 'live interactions' not as 'interesting' or not as 'frequent' as you would really like? Or, is there something else going on here or 'at play' here?

My impression is that you are vastly more isolated IRL than I am.

Okay. But you do agree with and accept that 'your impression' here could be False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect, correct?

Or, do you not agree with and accept this?

I have already answered this kind of question many times and responded about my posts in general, my assertions in general. If you don't believe my final assertions on this issue, I can't see any value in repeating what I have stated many times. If you don't remember, there's little point in telling you now.

So, even "iwannaplato" agrees, and accepts, that it could be, or actually is, "iwannaplato" who is the one here who is, indeed and really, vastly more isolated, in so-called 'real life' here.

Which would explain 'the way' that it communicates and responds here.

If however you are getting this kind of feedback, both from chosen friends and then from others you know less well and or have professional contacts with rather than friendships, great.

Do you have such interactions regularly?

'Such' is a fairly vague term, especially considering what you have alleged here, or is it not to you?

'Such' refers back to the type of interactions I mentioned I had regularly. [/quote]

This was very, very obvious. Like most of what you say and write here. But, obviously again, you have missed what I was, actually, pointing out and meaning here.

Do you have such interactions with others outside of this forum as commonly as you do here, within this forum?

Do you have regular face to face time with humans, where you get feedback on your communication and how you are relating to other people?

'Regular', relative to who and/or what, exactly?

In case you are, still, unaware, is it an actual possibility to know who and what the 'regular' word is relative to, exactly?

Do you have 'regular' so-called 'face-to-face' 'time', with 'humans', "iwannaplato"?

If yes, then what is 'regular', to you? Not that you would even answer and clarify this question, right?

For surely, if you did, you know that you would only, once more, contradict "yourself", as well as be inconsistent.

And, if you want to believe that you would not, then go ahead and answer the clarifying question, "yourself".

Once more, 'we' keep 'seeing' that these people, back then when this was being written, had not yet recognized and noticed just how much power and control the words that they were using had over them.

Thus why 'the stories' in 'religious texts' were written 'in code', to be used and 'shown' at a 'later date'.

Oh, and as for what my view is on if driving fossil-fueled cars is immoral or not, then this can be 'clearly seen' in the posts that I have already written, and shared, here. Although, 'the way' I speak and write here may, still, be 'in code', in which only some, in the days when this is being written, could 'decipher', and 'see'. However, which is blatantly plainly obvious to 'us', who have learned how to 'look at' and 'see' things, that is; both 'the trees', and, 'the forest', 'crystal clearly'.

[Iwannaplato]

Do you have regular face to face time with humans, where you get feedback on your communication and how you are relating to other people?

'Regular', relative to who and/or what, exactly?

I meant in relation to time. A few times a week, say. Or even more regularly as part of work or some other perhaps near every day social/other activity. If you are unsure if about whether the frequency of your meeting with other people constitutes what I might consider regular, feel free to describe how often you meet friends, colleagues, others who do give you feedback on your communication and interpersonal approach.

Do you have 'regular' so-called 'face-to-face' 'time', with 'humans', "iwannaplato"?

I already described this, so I don't know why you're asking.
viewtopic.php?p=715926#p715926
I used the word constant, which implies even more than regular contact and interaction with people in the ways I described. It is every day with family and communication issues are a daily part of discussions. At work it is pretty much every workday, given my work. There is daily feedback about communication and interpersonal interactions and regarding mine (and that of others). In my private life outside family it is once or twice a week. This is regular in the sense that it is not the exception in my life. I know it is coming each week, partly scheduled, partly not.

Tell you what: it seems like you want to be evasive. I suspect it is because you do not have much face to face contact with people and further get very little feedback from humans about your interpersonal communication and behavior and would rather not admit it - or lie about it.

Please PM me if you'd want to describe how much you actually meet with people who can and do give feedback to you about your communication and how you relate to others.

I am, also, specifically, interested in whether you ever get feedback about the following....
Hyperfocus
Myopic focus
Perseveration
Alienation - which need not be consider negative by the alienated person.

And then in logic around:
Fallacy of composition - In this case, it can be related to the fallacy of denying the antecedent, where someone assumes that because a specific argument for a conclusion is flawed, the conclusion itself must be false.
Argument from Fallacy - if someone's argument has, according to you, a fallacious step or an error, then this according to you proves their conclusion false and/or your conclusion correct.
Argumentum ex Silentio - silence about something has only one motivation and beyond that actually proves what you are asserting.
Confirmation Bias - especially related to interpreting the motivations of the behavior of others. If they don't do what you want/expect then you interpret their motivations in a convenient way, when other possibilities exist.

The latter logical issues could of course be handled here, but because of the patterns I mentioned in the first group (starting with hyperfocus), I find the discussion useless, and then also evasive on your part.

This one has never taken the offer to have a private discussion, but you never know.

[Iwannaplato]

Do you have regular face to face time with humans, where you get feedback on your communication and how you are relating to other people?

'Regular', relative to who and/or what, exactly?

I meant in relation to time. That it is not a exception, but comes at similarly spaced intervals. That it's part of an average week, for example, that a few times a week, you meet people where you get the kind of feedback I mentioned. But I'm happy to change the format of the question. How often do you meet people who give you feedback about your communication. Please PM me, if you want to answer this question. I am suggesting the move to PMs for reasons I give below.

Do you have 'regular' so-called 'face-to-face' 'time', with 'humans', "iwannaplato"?

I already described this, so I don't know why you're asking.
viewtopic.php?p=715926#p715926
I used the word constant, which implies even more than regular contact and interaction with people in the ways I described. It is every day with family and communication issues are a daily part of discussions. At work it is pretty much every workday, given my work. There is daily feedback about communication and interpersonal interactions and regarding mine (and that of others). In my private life outside family it is once or twice a week. This is regular in the sense that it is not the exception in my life. I know it is coming each week, partly scheduled, partly not.

Tell you what: it seems like you want to be evasive. I suspect it is because you do not have much face to face contact with people and further get very little feedback from humans about your interpersonal communication and behavior and would rather not admit it - or lie about it. I am used to people actually making an effort to meet me half way in an interaction. If they are unsure of what I mean, they might say 'do you mean __________?', for example. In other words they don't continuously throw more questions, the answers to which will lead to more questions. I prefer an interaction where there is shared responsibility. I would guess if you had regular discussions where you got feedback from people, this would come up. Unless you communicate in a more collaborative fashion in person.

Please PM me if you'd want to describe how much you actually meet with people who can and do give feedback to you about your communication and how you relate to others. If somehow this seems like an impossible task and you need to ask more clarifying questions, then, obviously, you need not bother.

Should you decide to PM me....

I am, also, specifically, interested in whether you ever get feedback about the following....
Hyperfocus
Myopic focus
Perseveration
Alienation - which need not be consider negative by the alienated person.

And then in logic around:
Fallacy of composition - In this case, it can be related to the fallacy of denying the antecedent, where someone assumes that because a specific argument for a conclusion is flawed, the conclusion itself must be false.
Argument from Fallacy - if someone's argument has, according to you, a fallacious step or an error, then this according to you proves their conclusion false and/or your conclusion correct.
Argumentum ex Silentio - silence about something has only one motivation and beyond that actually proves what you are asserting.
Confirmation Bias - especially related to interpreting the motivations of the behavior of others. If they don't do what you want/expect then you interpret their motivations in a convenient way, when other possibilities exist.

The latter logical issues could of course be handled here, but because of the patterns I mentioned in the first group (starting with hyperfocus), I find the discussion useless, and then also evasive on your part.

And then if you get feedback around referring to people at the time this is being written, there is only one mind, calling people it and other idiosyncracies of yours I've reacted to.

This one has never taken the offer to have a private discussion, but you never know. I have experienced that private contact can be more positive than public in some instances. This line of interaction with Age ends for me here. If this one decides to use a PM, I'll certainly see where that format goes.

[Gary Childress]

I think if a person drives an "economy car" that gets decent fuel mileage and doesn't leave an inordinate carbon footprint, and doesn't make a lot of unnecessary trips, then they are being more or less ethical. People have to get around. Driving an unnecessarily large car that isn't as fuel efficient is probably worse on the scale, though people who perform work that requires them to utilize large vehicles can't really help it. It seems like it probably comes down to preventing inordinate wastefulness.

[LuckyR]

'We' will wait, to see.


Which is what is, consciously, Truly illogical, and Totally barbaric, to some.

Let 'us' not forget that burning so-called "witches" and/or watching human beings getting eating alive by lions was also some thing 'done for fun', by human beings, in days long gone. Just like the so-called 'hunting', and killing of animals was 'done for fun', back in the very, very 'olden days', when this was being written.


I think this only in regards to before those "killers" have been questioned and challenged, and they have been Totally open and honest.


I would not use the 'believe' word, and if you had replaced that word with the 'know' word, then yes, this is more or less, exactly, what I am saying here.




But, there is, literally, no 'problem' at all here.

Also, and furthermore, when you Ali's know how to arrive at what is, actually universal or objectively, Right, and Wrong, in Life, as well, then you also see that there is no 'problem', illogical or not, here, at all.


But, your whole way of 'looking' and 'seeing' here is not logical at all. As, what you have just proposed here has absolutely nothing at all to do with what I am actually talking about, and meaning.

What you are talking about here is nothing I have even thought about, let alone proposing is the way things be done.

Oh really?

Yes, really.

you are so far off here.

Well I have declared that killing animals is not only not wrong, it's right.

So, even if "luckyr" declares that it is right that I kill its brother, sister, mother, father, children, and/or any other animals, then this, certainly, still does not take absolutely any thing away from what I have said, and claimed, above here.

Again, the way that you are 'looking' here and what you are assuming, and 'seeing', here is so, so far away from what I have been saying, and meaning, here and thus so far away from what the actual Truth is, as well.

Of course you disagree with my declaration,

But I, certainly, do not disagree that that is what you have chosen to declare. However, if you are under some sort of conclusion that just because you, alone, or with some others, have decided to declare some thing, and that this makes what you have declared right, or good, then I think you will find that you are very sadly mistaken.

And, worse still, if this is what you thought or believes that I was saying, and meaning, then, again, you are way, way off here.

but from my perspective your conscious disagreement is because you haven't yet learned what your unconscious mind knows (and that I, the Enlightened One, know), which is that killing animals is right.

There are so many things False and/or Wrong here I am not sure yet where to begin, if I could even be bothered.

It doesn't matter what argument you put forward in disagreement, that's just your conscious mind flailing about, because your unconscious knowledge that I am correct, just hasn't yet learned I'm correct. If you're lucky, you'll learn I'm right, then we'll both be learned. If you never get there, that's okay too, your unconscious mind knows I'm right, even if you (meaning your conscious mind) never do.

Again, there are so many Falsehoods here I think this is best left to you and your Wrong thinking and beliefs alone here.

Just so you become aware, what you are presuming or believing I am saying and meaning here is absolutely so Wrongly and Falsely twisted and distorted that I cannot even be bothered unraveling them all, for you.

However, if you show curiosity and seek out clarity, then I, certainly, will.

Ah yes, the "your arguments are so wrong I can't be bothered to address them" gambit. The last refuge of those with no cogent reply. To be honest, you're not necessarily my target audience. Have a nice day.

[Age]

Do you have regular face to face time with humans, where you get feedback on your communication and how you are relating to other people?

'Regular', relative to who and/or what, exactly?

I meant in relation to time. A few times a week, say. Or even more regularly as part of work or some other perhaps near every day social/other activity. If you are unsure if about whether the frequency of your meeting with other people constitutes what I might consider regular, feel free to describe how often you meet friends, colleagues, others who do give you feedback on your communication and interpersonal approach.

Do you have 'regular' so-called 'face-to-face' 'time', with 'humans', "iwannaplato"?

I already described this, so I don't know why you're asking.

Obviously, you would not, yet, know why I am asking.

And, at the rate you are going you will never ever know.

viewtopic.php?p=715926#p715926
I used the word constant, which implies even more than regular contact and interaction with people in the ways I described. It is every day with family and communication issues are a daily part of discussions. At work it is pretty much every workday, given my work. There is daily feedback about communication and interpersonal interactions and regarding mine (and that of others). In my private life outside family it is once or twice a week. This is regular in the sense that it is not the exception in my life. I know it is coming each week, partly scheduled, partly not.

Tell you what: it seems like you want to be evasive.

I will tell you what: this is a 'philosophy forum', so when, and if, you want to discuss what are called 'philosophical issues', then I will.

However, until then what another does 'regularly', or not, in relation to what you, alone, consider 'regular' has no actual bearing on whether:

If driving fossil-fueled cars is immoral or not,
Nor on absolutely any other point I have made, here.

I suspect it is because you do not have much face to face contact with people and further get very little feedback from humans about your interpersonal communication and behavior and would rather not admit it - or lie about it.

you are absolutely free to keep making assumptions, like the one you are here, and even to keep making assumptions for the rest of your very short left life. However, continuing to keep doing this only will never mean that you will ever find out if your assumptions are Correct or not. 'We' already know, irrefutably, that this assumption of yours here, among others of yours, could be completely False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect.

So, 'we' will leave you with your assumption here.

However, if you want to admit that the claim you have made, a couple of times already, about how some thing occurred is False and Wrong, then that would be great. But, if you want to keep evading this Fact and keep detracting with absolutely 'out there' and completely off-tangent presumptions of yours, then okay.

Please PM me if you'd want to describe how much you actually meet with people who can and do give feedback to you about your communication and how you relate to others.

This is getting beyond bizarre now.

I have absolutely no intention of private messaging you until you start admitting that your claims are False and have been Wrong and Incorrect here after I pointed them out.

I am, also, specifically, interested in whether you ever get feedback about the following....
Hyperfocus
Myopic focus
Perseveration
Alienation - which need not be consider negative by the alienated person.

I am, very particularly interested if you are ever able to stop focusing on others and start focusing on your own Wrong doings and persistent negativity, in Life.

And then in logic around:
Fallacy of composition - In this case, it can be related to the fallacy of denying the antecedent, where someone assumes that because a specific argument for a conclusion is flawed, the conclusion itself must be false.

Since you will not ever provide even just one example of when I have ever, supposedly, done this here, then 'we' have absolutely nothing to 'look at' and 'discuss' here, now.

Again, you can keep 'judging' others all you want. But, is doing so, really, satisfying you, in your life?

Argument from Fallacy - if someone's argument has, according to you, a fallacious step or an error, then this according to you proves their conclusion false and/or your conclusion correct.

you are being an absolute idiot here now "iwannaplato".

I have never ever even thought this, let alone implied nor said this absolutely anywhere in this forum. Yet here you are continuing to assume things like this Falsehood is, and worse still continuing to believe your own made up assumptions and Falsehoods as being true and/or right.

Argumentum ex Silentio - silence about something has only one motivation and beyond that actually proves what you are asserting.
Confirmation Bias - especially related to interpreting the motivations of the behavior of others. If they don't do what you want/expect then you interpret their motivations in a convenient way, when other possibilities exist.

The latter logical issues could of course be handled here, but because of the patterns I mentioned in the first group (starting with hyperfocus), I find the discussion useless, and then also evasive on your part.

LOL

I have found even just trying to discuss absolutely anything with you here an absolutely useless process.

And, this is because your continue 'judging' of another just gets in the way.

This one has never taken the offer to have a private discussion, but you never know.

This one has claimed on a few occasions that it would never speak with me ever again. Yet, here it is doing so, once more, in the hope that its 'superiority belief' will be 'seen' and 'accepted' by others.

Look "iwannaplato", you have come here and made some claims, I just pointed out and showed where, and when, those claims of yours are False or Wrong. If you do not want to now just be open and honest and admit these False and Wrong claims of yours, then so be it. But, those claims of yours will always, still, remain Wrong and/or False, no matter how often and how hard you try to deflect here.

[Age]

Do you have regular face to face time with humans, where you get feedback on your communication and how you are relating to other people?

'Regular', relative to who and/or what, exactly?

I meant in relation to time. A few times a week, say. Or even more regularly as part of work or some other perhaps near every day social/other activity. If you are unsure if about whether the frequency of your meeting with other people constitutes what I might consider regular, feel free to describe how often you meet friends, colleagues, others who do give you feedback on your communication and interpersonal approach.

Do you have 'regular' so-called 'face-to-face' 'time', with 'humans', "iwannaplato"?

I already described this, so I don't know why you're asking.
viewtopic.php?p=715926#p715926
I used the word constant, which implies even more than regular contact and interaction with people in the ways I described. It is every day with family and communication issues are a daily part of discussions. At work it is pretty much every workday, given my work. There is daily feedback about communication and interpersonal interactions and regarding mine (and that of others). In my private life outside family it is once or twice a week. This is regular in the sense that it is not the exception in my life. I know it is coming each week, partly scheduled, partly not.

Tell you what: it seems like you want to be evasive. I suspect it is because you do not have much face to face contact with people and further get very little feedback from humans about your interpersonal communication and behavior and would rather not admit it - or lie about it.

Please PM me if you'd want to describe how much you actually meet with people who can and do give feedback to you about your communication and how you relate to others.

I am, also, specifically, interested in whether you ever get feedback about the following....
Hyperfocus
Myopic focus
Perseveration
Alienation - which need not be consider negative by the alienated person.

And then in logic around:
Fallacy of composition - In this case, it can be related to the fallacy of denying the antecedent, where someone assumes that because a specific argument for a conclusion is flawed, the conclusion itself must be false.
Argument from Fallacy - if someone's argument has, according to you, a fallacious step or an error, then this according to you proves their conclusion false and/or your conclusion correct.
Argumentum ex Silentio - silence about something has only one motivation and beyond that actually proves what you are asserting.
Confirmation Bias - especially related to interpreting the motivations of the behavior of others. If they don't do what you want/expect then you interpret their motivations in a convenient way, when other possibilities exist.

The latter logical issues could of course be handled here, but because of the patterns I mentioned in the first group (starting with hyperfocus), I find the discussion useless, and then also evasive on your part.

This one has never taken the offer to have a private discussion, but you never know.

While I was responding to this here I got logged out and lost my reply and I could not be bothered doing it again, but it ended with something like;

Look "iwannaplato", you could keep trying to ignore and evade the Fact that you made some claims here, which I have pointed out and showed not just where they were False or Wrong but also how, why, and/or when they were False and/or Wrong. So, you can keep trying to deflect away from this here, but doing so will never remove the Fact that those claims of yours are False or Wrong.

[Age]

Do you have regular face to face time with humans, where you get feedback on your communication and how you are relating to other people?

'Regular', relative to who and/or what, exactly?

I meant in relation to time. That it is not a exception, but comes at similarly spaced intervals. That it's part of an average week, for example, that a few times a week, you meet people where you get the kind of feedback I mentioned. But I'm happy to change the format of the question. How often do you meet people who give you feedback about your communication. Please PM me, if you want to answer this question. I am suggesting the move to PMs for reasons I give below.

Do you have 'regular' so-called 'face-to-face' 'time', with 'humans', "iwannaplato"?

I already described this, so I don't know why you're asking.
viewtopic.php?p=715926#p715926
I used the word constant, which implies even more than regular contact and interaction with people in the ways I described. It is every day with family and communication issues are a daily part of discussions. At work it is pretty much every workday, given my work. There is daily feedback about communication and interpersonal interactions and regarding mine (and that of others). In my private life outside family it is once or twice a week. This is regular in the sense that it is not the exception in my life. I know it is coming each week, partly scheduled, partly not.

Tell you what: it seems like you want to be evasive. I suspect it is because you do not have much face to face contact with people and further get very little feedback from humans about your interpersonal communication and behavior and would rather not admit it - or lie about it. I am used to people actually making an effort to meet me half way in an interaction. If they are unsure of what I mean, they might say 'do you mean __________?', for example. In other words they don't continuously throw more questions, the answers to which will lead to more questions. I prefer an interaction where there is shared responsibility. I would guess if you had regular discussions where you got feedback from people, this would come up. Unless you communicate in a more collaborative fashion in person.

Please PM me if you'd want to describe how much you actually meet with people who can and do give feedback to you about your communication and how you relate to others. If somehow this seems like an impossible task and you need to ask more clarifying questions, then, obviously, you need not bother.

Should you decide to PM me....

I am, also, specifically, interested in whether you ever get feedback about the following....
Hyperfocus
Myopic focus
Perseveration
Alienation - which need not be consider negative by the alienated person.

And then in logic around:
Fallacy of composition - In this case, it can be related to the fallacy of denying the antecedent, where someone assumes that because a specific argument for a conclusion is flawed, the conclusion itself must be false.
Argument from Fallacy - if someone's argument has, according to you, a fallacious step or an error, then this according to you proves their conclusion false and/or your conclusion correct.
Argumentum ex Silentio - silence about something has only one motivation and beyond that actually proves what you are asserting.
Confirmation Bias - especially related to interpreting the motivations of the behavior of others. If they don't do what you want/expect then you interpret their motivations in a convenient way, when other possibilities exist.

The latter logical issues could of course be handled here, but because of the patterns I mentioned in the first group (starting with hyperfocus), I find the discussion useless, and then also evasive on your part.

And then if you get feedback around referring to people at the time this is being written, there is only one mind, calling people it and other idiosyncracies of yours I've reacted to.

This one has never taken the offer to have a private discussion, but you never know. I have experienced that private contact can be more positive than public in some instances. This line of interaction with Age ends for me here. If this one decides to use a PM, I'll certainly see where that format goes.

LOL This one on a few occasions has 'threatened' to never speak with me, ever again. Yet here it is 'now', again, 'threatening' that its interaction ends with me, unless I private message it.

Is this one even aware that it could private message me? Obviously if it really was interested to, then it would have, already.

[Age]

I think if a person drives an "economy car" that gets decent fuel mileage and doesn't leave an inordinate carbon footprint, and doesn't make a lot of unnecessary trips, then they are being more or less ethical. People have to get around.

Legs and feet, only, were satisfactory for 'getting around' for a million or so years, prior.

Driving an unnecessarily large car that isn't as fuel efficient is probably worse on the scale, though people who perform work that requires them to utilize large vehicles can't really help it.

Here, once again, 'we' can see attempts at trying to 'justify', or trying to 'rationalize', an obviously Wrong behavior. Which was, exactly, what every adult human being did, back in those 'olden days', when this was being written.

It seems like it probably comes down to preventing inordinate wastefulness.

'Wastefulness' in regards to 'what', exactly?

Because absolutely every thing is relative to the observer, some could suggest that it would be 'wasteful' to not use all of that 'fossil-fuel' that gets brought to the surface, and processed.

Or, some could suggest that it could be 'wasteful' to not use all of the money that some human beings get, by the process of bringing fossil-fuel to the surface and processing it. If they did not buy so-called 'over-sized' vehicles, "themselves", in order to not waste all that monetary profit that they have obtained, by making 'fossil-fuels', then they could be 'wasting' that money, as well as 'wasting' all of the 'fossil-fuel' they have caused and created, as well.

[Age]

Oh really?

Yes, really.

you are so far off here.

Well I have declared that killing animals is not only not wrong, it's right.

So, even if "luckyr" declares that it is right that I kill its brother, sister, mother, father, children, and/or any other animals, then this, certainly, still does not take absolutely any thing away from what I have said, and claimed, above here.

Again, the way that you are 'looking' here and what you are assuming, and 'seeing', here is so, so far away from what I have been saying, and meaning, here and thus so far away from what the actual Truth is, as well.

Of course you disagree with my declaration,

But I, certainly, do not disagree that that is what you have chosen to declare. However, if you are under some sort of conclusion that just because you, alone, or with some others, have decided to declare some thing, and that this makes what you have declared right, or good, then I think you will find that you are very sadly mistaken.

And, worse still, if this is what you thought or believes that I was saying, and meaning, then, again, you are way, way off here.

but from my perspective your conscious disagreement is because you haven't yet learned what your unconscious mind knows (and that I, the Enlightened One, know), which is that killing animals is right.

There are so many things False and/or Wrong here I am not sure yet where to begin, if I could even be bothered.

It doesn't matter what argument you put forward in disagreement, that's just your conscious mind flailing about, because your unconscious knowledge that I am correct, just hasn't yet learned I'm correct. If you're lucky, you'll learn I'm right, then we'll both be learned. If you never get there, that's okay too, your unconscious mind knows I'm right, even if you (meaning your conscious mind) never do.

Again, there are so many Falsehoods here I think this is best left to you and your Wrong thinking and beliefs alone here.

Just so you become aware, what you are presuming or believing I am saying and meaning here is absolutely so Wrongly and Falsely twisted and distorted that I cannot even be bothered unraveling them all, for you.

However, if you show curiosity and seek out clarity, then I, certainly, will.

Ah yes, the "your arguments are so wrong I can't be bothered to address them" gambit.

But, it is not 'your argument/s' that I cannot be bothered with. It is your False or Wrong claims 'about me' and what I am, supposedly, saying and meaning that I could not be bothered addressing.

Can you recognize and see the difference here?

The last refuge of those with no cogent reply. To be honest, you're not necessarily my target audience. Have a nice day.

Who and/or what is 'your target audience', exactly?

[Iwannaplato]

No, really, Age. A PM.

I'm sure you can, in fact, hallucinate motivations that are convenient for you, but I suggest this option for the reasons given in my previous post.

And kudos to

Ah yes, the "your arguments are so wrong I can't be bothered to address them" gambit. The last refuge of those with no cogent reply. To be honest, you're not necessarily my target audience. Have a nice day.