Eodnhoj7: All Things are Distinctions

[Veritas Aequitas]

Then existence is nothing, as indistinct, and as nothing there is nothing that precedes distinction.
If existence is not nothing then it is distinct.

Is as existence is does not depict nothing.
There isan apple, i.e. an apple exists which emerged from a human-based FS, i.e. the science-biology FS.
Therefore 'is' aka 'existence' prior to distinction adopt to differentiate apples from other fruits.

If "is" is indistinct than it cannot depict anything as it is a meaningless term.

Meaningless?
"Is" is the most meaningful term in reality.

If you see the word 'apple', it is just pixels on a screen, on paper or a voice, which are meaningless in reality.
However, this is an apple as one sees it, eat it, and can be verified as real via the human-based science biology framework. What is fundamental is 'is' which denotes existence.
To distinguish an apple from orange or fruit from ball-bearings is secondary to 'existence' is.

Therefore 'is' denotes existence, be, and the like.

[Veritas Aequitas]

The Universe is a thing.
The Universe has no distinction.
Therefore, not all things are distinctions.

All things are equally of the same essence, namely, source.
No thing knows what any thing is. Isness just is, completely void of is not.
Distinction doesn’t exist for existence. Existence doesn’t know distinction.

There is no is-by-itself absolutely independent of the human conditions.

'Is' is just existence or be.
Whatever 'is' which is real can only be real as conditioned upon a human-based system of cognition.
That apple is real when it is verified to be objectively real by the science-biology system.
Common sense can verify an apple is real, but its objectivity is low, say 40/100 compare to science which is 99/100.

No thing knows what any thing is
An unknowable unknown thing is an oxymoron.

If I say there is a dog in a planet 1 billion light years away, then it is possible to be known [as done on Earth] when such a dog is presented for verification by the science-biology system.

When one say, there is a God [or square-circle] somewhere in the Universe [1 billion light years away] then is impossible to be known [even on Earth], because it is impossible to appear for verification by a gold standard of objectivity, i.e. science.

[Eodnhoj7]

Is as existence is does not depict nothing.
There isan apple, i.e. an apple exists which emerged from a human-based FS, i.e. the science-biology FS.
Therefore 'is' aka 'existence' prior to distinction adopt to differentiate apples from other fruits.

If "is" is indistinct than it cannot depict anything as it is a meaningless term.

Meaningless?
"Is" is the most meaningful term in reality.

If you see the word 'apple', it is just pixels on a screen, on paper or a voice, which are meaningless in reality.
However, this is an apple as one sees it, eat it, and can be verified as real via the human-based science biology framework. What is fundamental is 'is' which denotes existence.
To distinguish an apple from orange or fruit from ball-bearings is secondary to 'existence' is.

Therefore 'is' denotes existence, be, and the like.

Is only means something if there is contrast of what "is not".

If "is" means everything than you are falling under the fallacy of equivocation.

[Fairy]

There is no is-by-itself absolutely independent of the human conditions.

'Is' is just existence or be.

Is, is all alone, by itself, oneness, unity. Is is independent, as itself, for itself and by itself.
IS is the 'knowing' that cannot be known, for there is no other IS but IS alone, all one.
Th-IS intuition, is not of the mind, but is the awareness aware of the mind,but not the mind.

Whatever 'is' which is real can only be real as conditioned upon a human-based system of cognition.

Cognition is mind, but IS, is neither real nor unreal, as both these concepts belong to the mind. There's awareness of mind that knows the concepts real and unreal, and both as neither real or unreal, which is likened to using a thorn to remove a thorn, discarding both, until pure awareness is reached, which is neither real, nor unreal, but just pure ISNESS

That apple is real when it is verified to be objectively real by the science-biology system.
Common sense can verify an apple is real, but its objectivity is low, say 40/100 compare to science which is 99/100.

The apple is a nebulous idea, it's not actually real. Is a plastic or a wooden apple real, what is a real apple, but a fixed concept known, who or what knows the fixed concept that is apple? The answer is clear, awareness that is not an object does, the object known, in and of itself knows nothing of it's reality.

No thing knows what any thing is
An unknowable unknown thing is an oxymoron.

All known things know nothing is of course an oxymoron bound by the syntax of perceptible language which is obviously dual by it's very nature, in the same context, sound heard as perceptible words is a dual phenomena, in other words, the sound of silence, is a necessary contradiction part of understanding how the duality of the mind works, which is all being witnessed by nondual awareness.

If I say there is a dog in a planet 1 billion light years away, then it is possible to be known [as done on Earth] when such a dog is presented for verification by the science-biology system.

Only if the concept 'Dog' is fixed. Obviously the intelligence of the mind will relate to the Dog concept as being real as a fixed concept, as it is known, but even as it is known, as every fixed concept is known, these concepts are only fictious characters, mental constructs superimposed things upon the ISness of pure awareness without an object.

When one say, there is a God [or square-circle] somewhere in the Universe [1 billion light years away] then is impossible to be known [even on Earth], because it is impossible to appear for verification by a gold standard of objectivity, i.e. science.

The problem with that reasoning is it's irrationality. Especially when the mind only likes to deal with rationality, and fixed concepts, not nebulous concepts, which is just about every concept that was ever conceived, simply because no concept can ever be defined to be fixed, they are all of a nebulous quality.

[Veritas Aequitas]

That apple is real when it is verified to be objectively real by the science-biology system.
Common sense can verify an apple is real, but its objectivity is low, say 40/100 compare to science which is 99/100.

The apple is a nebulous idea, it's not actually real. Is a plastic or a wooden apple real, what is a real apple, but a fixed concept known, who or what knows the fixed concept that is apple? The answer is clear, awareness that is not an object does, the object known, in and of itself knows nothing of it's reality.

Nope, you are jumping to conclusion with your biasness.

I have already explained many times, what is an objective real apple must be conditioned to a specific human-based framework and system [FS] of which the scientific FS is the gold standard of objectivity.

Thus when an apple is confirmed to be real by the scientific FS, the average person will have high confidence level he can eat it i.e. greater confidence level than common sense.

As such, what is most real objectively is conditioned by the scientific FS as the gold standard, what else is higher to confirm an apple is real to give the highest confidence it can be eaten?

The point is the real apple must first exists to be distinguished as real or unreal by the scientific FS as of highest objectivity or or FS of lower objectivity.

[Veritas Aequitas]

If "is" is indistinct than it cannot depict anything as it is a meaningless term.

Meaningless?
"Is" is the most meaningful term in reality.

If you see the word 'apple', it is just pixels on a screen, on paper or a voice, which are meaningless in reality.
However, this is an apple as one sees it, eat it, and can be verified as real via the human-based science biology framework. What is fundamental is 'is' which denotes existence.
To distinguish an apple from orange or fruit from ball-bearings is secondary to 'existence' is.

Therefore 'is' denotes existence, be, and the like.

Is only means something if there is contrast of what "is not".

If "is" means everything than you are falling under the fallacy of equivocation.

Note,

In Linguistics (Grammar)
In English grammar, a copula is also called a linking verb. It connects the subject of a sentence to a subject complement (which describes or identifies the subject), rather than expressing an action. The most common copula in English is the verb "to be" and all its forms (am, is, are, was, were, been, etc.).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_(linguistics)

What is clear with you declare "I AM" that is the experience of your own existence and there is no need to bring in "not-I_AM" or I AM NOT.
It is from I-AM that one starts of distinguish.
No I-AM no distinction.

Reality is all-there-is-invoke the fallacy of equivocation? Dumb.

[Fairy]

That apple is real when it is verified to be objectively real by the science-biology system.
Common sense can verify an apple is real, but its objectivity is low, say 40/100 compare to science which is 99/100.

The apple is a nebulous idea, it's not actually real. Is a plastic or a wooden apple real, what is a real apple, but a fixed concept known, who or what knows the fixed concept that is apple? The answer is clear, awareness that is not an object does, the object known, in and of itself knows nothing of it's reality.

Nope, you are jumping to conclusion with your biasness.

I have already explained many times, what is an objective real apple must be conditioned to a specific human-based framework and system [FS] of which the scientific FS is the gold standard of objectivity.

Thus when an apple is confirmed to be real by the scientific FS, the average person will have high confidence level he can eat it i.e. greater confidence level than common sense.

As such, what is most real objectively is conditioned by the scientific FS as the gold standard, what else is higher to confirm an apple is real to give the highest confidence it can be eaten?

The point is the real apple must first exists to be distinguished as real or unreal by the scientific FS as of highest objectivity or or FS of lower objectivity.

You are not able to read the room. You're not listening. Define a real apple? Do that first, put your definition into words. Not just say an apple is an apple because that's what an apple is...you have to go deeper than that, and realise nothing is what it seems to the mind.

Also, it seems You are looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

The eye that is looking is a forward facing only seeing, and not a facing backwards at it's own face seeing, which would just be known as an objective face, that knows nothing of it's reality. Objects know nothing. Objects are known, by that which cannot be an object of knowing.
You might not be able to grasp what that means. Maybe you do, it's difficult to tell.

Reality doesn't have a face, it's faceless and selfless. Reality is an empty mirror projecting the apparent fullness of something, because it had to, as nothing is impossible, and only everything is, and that which doesn't exist, already doesn't exist in existence.

You are identified with the wrong I.. You are the one eye, appearing as the many of the one. Know the difference, where there is none.

[Fairy]

Meaningless?
"Is" is the most meaningful term in reality.

If you see the word 'apple', it is just pixels on a screen, on paper or a voice, which are meaningless in reality.
However, this is an apple as one sees it, eat it, and can be verified as real via the human-based science biology framework. What is fundamental is 'is' which denotes existence.
To distinguish an apple from orange or fruit from ball-bearings is secondary to 'existence' is.

Therefore 'is' denotes existence, be, and the like.

Is only means something if there is contrast of what "is not".

If "is" means everything than you are falling under the fallacy of equivocation.

Note,

In Linguistics (Grammar)
In English grammar, a copula is also called a linking verb. It connects the subject of a sentence to a subject complement (which describes or identifies the subject), rather than expressing an action. The most common copula in English is the verb "to be" and all its forms (am, is, are, was, were, been, etc.).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_(linguistics)

What is clear with you declare "I AM" that is the experience of your own existence and there is no need to bring in "not-I_AM" or I AM NOT.
It is from I-AM that one starts of distinguish.
No I-AM no distinction.

Reality is all-there-is-invoke the fallacy of equivocation? Dumb.

You're overthinking this, this is the mind virus trying to be in control of something that is none of it's business.

Be still, and know that I AM God.

Which is LIGHT, which is not a thing appearing as all things, as projections.

[Veritas Aequitas]

The apple is a nebulous idea, it's not actually real. Is a plastic or a wooden apple real, what is a real apple, but a fixed concept known, who or what knows the fixed concept that is apple? The answer is clear, awareness that is not an object does, the object known, in and of itself knows nothing of it's reality.

Nope, you are jumping to conclusion with your biasness.

I have already explained many times, what is an objective real apple must be conditioned to a specific human-based framework and system [FS] of which the scientific FS is the gold standard of objectivity.

Thus when an apple is confirmed to be real by the scientific FS, the average person will have high confidence level he can eat it i.e. greater confidence level than common sense.

As such, what is most real objectively is conditioned by the scientific FS as the gold standard, what else is higher to confirm an apple is real to give the highest confidence it can be eaten?

The point is the real apple must first exists to be distinguished as real or unreal by the scientific FS as of highest objectivity or or FS of lower objectivity.

You are not able to read the room. You're not listening. Define a real apple? Do that first, put your definition into words. Not just say an apple is an apple because that's what an apple is...you have to go deeper than that, and realise nothing is what it seems to the mind.

You are the one who is lost within the intellectual and rational jungle.

I have already explain 'what is real' here:

[/quote]
No wonder we are caught in a loop because you are blind-sighted by biasness.
I have already answered the above, here again;
viewtopic.php?p=798863#p798863

You need to define;
-what is a human being
-what is real

What is a Human Being


What is Real
"actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed."
(google dictionary)

So, a human being is real as verified scientifically via the science-biology system.

Do you deny the above?

Substitute 'apple' for 'human being'.
So, an apple is real as verified scientifically via the science-biology system.

One can say, this is a real apple based on the common and conventional sense, you can pluck a real apple from a tree, buy one and eat it. But the objective reality of such a claim cannot be higher than the gold standard of objectivity, i.e. as justified via the science-biology system.

Note the current dilemma of whether the honey you buy from the most reliable source is real, mixed or fake honey. It is very difficult to differentiate whether the honey is purely from the beehive using common sense or conventional methods.
The most objective method in this case to determine it is pure from the beehive is to rely on the science-chemistry system.
Exposing Fake Honey Using Carbon-13
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKvNp0fAaZ8

[Veritas Aequitas]

Is only means something if there is contrast of what "is not".

If "is" means everything than you are falling under the fallacy of equivocation.

Note,

In Linguistics (Grammar)
In English grammar, a copula is also called a linking verb. It connects the subject of a sentence to a subject complement (which describes or identifies the subject), rather than expressing an action. The most common copula in English is the verb "to be" and all its forms (am, is, are, was, were, been, etc.).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_(linguistics)

What is clear with you declare "I AM" that is the experience of your own existence and there is no need to bring in "not-I_AM" or I AM NOT.
It is from I-AM that one starts of distinguish.
No I-AM no distinction.

Reality is all-there-is-invoke the fallacy of equivocation? Dumb.

You're overthinking this, this is the mind virus trying to be in control of something that is none of it's business.

Be still, and know that I AM God.

Which is LIGHT, which is not a thing appearing as all things, as projections.

This is a philosophical forum [not a market place], so the highest level of thinking must be used where necessary.

In the above, you are just making claims without objective justifications at all.

There are ~ 1 billion atheists around the world [communists, Buddhists, general], so who is right?

Majority agreement is not the truth [ad populum fallacy] e.g. once the majority believe the Sun revolved round the Earth which is so obvious to common sense, but it is Science-cosmology that revealed the truth which is acceptable by the majority 99.9%.

So when you claim which is so contentious, you need to bring objective justifications.
You are insulting your own intelligence if you don't bring objective justifications.
But you cannot due to cognitive bias and psychological desperations from an existential crisis.

Btw, are you familiar with 'the worm at the core' of existence?
Do some research on it.

There is a lot more knowledge you have to catch up if only you can modulate the potential cold turkey threat.

[Eodnhoj7]

Meaningless?
"Is" is the most meaningful term in reality.

If you see the word 'apple', it is just pixels on a screen, on paper or a voice, which are meaningless in reality.
However, this is an apple as one sees it, eat it, and can be verified as real via the human-based science biology framework. What is fundamental is 'is' which denotes existence.
To distinguish an apple from orange or fruit from ball-bearings is secondary to 'existence' is.

Therefore 'is' denotes existence, be, and the like.

Is only means something if there is contrast of what "is not".

If "is" means everything than you are falling under the fallacy of equivocation.

Note,

In Linguistics (Grammar)
In English grammar, a copula is also called a linking verb. It connects the subject of a sentence to a subject complement (which describes or identifies the subject), rather than expressing an action. The most common copula in English is the verb "to be" and all its forms (am, is, are, was, were, been, etc.).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_(linguistics)

What is clear with you declare "I AM" that is the experience of your own existence and there is no need to bring in "not-I_AM" or I AM NOT.
It is from I-AM that one starts of distinguish.
No I-AM no distinction.

Reality is all-there-is-invoke the fallacy of equivocation? Dumb.

Actually if "is" means all things you are equating one word to everything....this is purely universal equivocation.

You call me dumb and yet you continue arguing with someone you claim is an idiot...why are you threatened by an idiot?

"Is" is distinct by what "is not".

"Is" and "is not" are both distinctions, a duality.