Philosophy of Mind

[Darkneos]

I suspect that the forms or expressions of consciousness are, in fact, immediate and delayed reactions to the outside world.

Dunno, I mean I know our brains make a best guess of what's going on out there so there's that. There's also the fact that our vision is more an average of everything than real time updates.

Imagine going to a philosophy forum, claiming there are many particular things, but when you are just asked for an example, you then realise that actually there is not one of 'those things', at all.

There is, like was mentioned, but like everyone knows you don't actually care about those.

Again, 'this one', still, claims there are many particular, while, still, not providing just one example.

Again, this is because there is not one. And, each time it does not provide an example, which backs up and supports its claims, then the more it is revealing about "itself".

Imagine going to a philosophy forum with the conclusion in mind, how sad...

LOL 'The one' who came, here, with the conclusion is 'you'. As proved by 'your very claim', which you obviously had already concluded, and believed, is absolutely true.

Only 'now', after you were questioned, you have come to realise that there actually is none. Again, as proved by your completely lack of ability to even just think of one example, only.

Again, you don't care about contrary evidence (even thought it was given), thankfully no one owes you an explanation.

[Age]

I suspect that the forms or expressions of consciousness are, in fact, immediate and delayed reactions to the outside world.

Dunno, I mean I know our brains make a best guess of what's going on out there so there's that. There's also the fact that our vision is more an average of everything than real time updates.

There is, like was mentioned, but like everyone knows you don't actually care about those.

Again, 'this one', still, claims there are many particular, while, still, not providing just one example.

Again, this is because there is not one. And, each time it does not provide an example, which backs up and supports its claims, then the more it is revealing about "itself".

Imagine going to a philosophy forum with the conclusion in mind, how sad...

LOL 'The one' who came, here, with the conclusion is 'you'. As proved by 'your very claim', which you obviously had already concluded, and believed, is absolutely true.

Only 'now', after you were questioned, you have come to realise that there actually is none. Again, as proved by your completely lack of ability to even just think of one example, only.

Again, you don't care about contrary evidence (even thought it was given), thankfully no one owes you an explanation.

LOL 'your new claim', here, is just deflection, and another attempt at deception, but the only one you are fooling and deceiving, here, is "yourself".

Look, you made 'the claim' that there are many 'separate chains', 'with starts'.

I asked you to provide examples of these particular things.

you, obviously, have not been able to provide even just one example, only.

[Belinda]

A horse went into a bar. The barman asked it what it would like to drink. The horse did no answer him, so he went to serve another customer. When the barman went back the horse had disappeared. The barman asked if the horse was really there. The other customer said " that would be putting de cart before de horse".

[Darkneos]

A horse went into a bar. The barman asked it what it would like to drink. The horse did no answer him, so he went to serve another customer. When the barman went back the horse had disappeared. The barman asked if the horse was really there. The other customer said " that would be putting de cart before de horse".

As in Rene Descartes? Not sure I get it.

I'm just poking at Age because I've met their type and heard their "arguments" and nothing will ever be good enough.

[Belinda]

A horse went into a bar. The barman asked it what it would like to drink. The horse did no answer him, so he went to serve another customer. When the barman went back the horse had disappeared. The barman asked if the horse was really there. The other customer said " that would be putting de cart before de horse".

As in Rene Descartes? Not sure I get it.

I'm just poking at Age because I've met their type and heard their "arguments" and nothing will ever be good enough.

That is your excuse for your own ignorance?
The wee horse joke wasn't a reply to you . Let he who has ears to hear let him hear.

[Darkneos]

A horse went into a bar. The barman asked it what it would like to drink. The horse did no answer him, so he went to serve another customer. When the barman went back the horse had disappeared. The barman asked if the horse was really there. The other customer said " that would be putting de cart before de horse".

As in Rene Descartes? Not sure I get it.

I'm just poking at Age because I've met their type and heard their "arguments" and nothing will ever be good enough.

That is your excuse for your own ignorance?
The wee horse joke wasn't a reply to you . Let he who has ears to hear let him hear.

Or maybe some clarity in order?
Like I said above I've met folks like Age before and there's no convincing them out of their position. Even when I showed them they just insist otherwise, it's a waste of time.

[Age]

As in Rene Descartes? Not sure I get it.

I'm just poking at Age because I've met their type and heard their "arguments" and nothing will ever be good enough.

That is your excuse for your own ignorance?
The wee horse joke wasn't a reply to you . Let he who has ears to hear let him hear.

Or maybe some clarity in order?
Like I said above I've met folks like Age before and there's no convincing them out of their position.

But, folks do not need convincing of 'their position'.

So, why did you say and write what you did, here.

Even when I showed them they just insist otherwise, it's a waste of time.

But, you have not even presented any thing, to show.

Look, in case you have forgotten, or in case 'others' do not yet know what actually took place, here. you made the claim that there are lots of separated chains, all with their own starts.

I then asked you to present examples of 'this'.

you, however, and unfortunately for you, have not been able to provide just one single solitary example.

So, what the actual Truth is, here, is that it is you "darkneos" who is 'the one' who believes that 'your claim' is absolutely true, and even the Fact that you can not think of just one example, and can not present any examples, here, does not phase you from believe 'your own claim', here, to be absolutely true.

Again, as I have been saying and pointing out, through people like "darkneos", the power of belief, and 'the way' the brain works, 'folks' like "darkneos" become completely blind, and end up living in complete darkness.

[Age]

A horse went into a bar. The barman asked it what it would like to drink. The horse did no answer him, so he went to serve another customer. When the barman went back the horse had disappeared. The barman asked if the horse was really there. The other customer said " that would be putting de cart before de horse".

As in Rene Descartes? Not sure I get it.

I'm just poking at Age because I've met their type and heard their "arguments" and nothing will ever be good enough.

LOL
LOL
LOL

I have not even provided 'an argument', here.

I have just been waiting, patiently, for 'you' to provide just 'one example' for 'your claim', here.

Which obviously you have not been able to.

And, again, you have not been able to for the very reason that I have pointed out, and explained.

So, what is 'my type', exactly?

[Darkneos]

That is your excuse for your own ignorance?
The wee horse joke wasn't a reply to you . Let he who has ears to hear let him hear.

Or maybe some clarity in order?
Like I said above I've met folks like Age before and there's no convincing them out of their position.

But, folks do not need convincing of 'their position'.

So, why did you say and write what you did, here.

Even when I showed them they just insist otherwise, it's a waste of time.

But, you have not even presented any thing, to show.

Look, in case you have forgotten, or in case 'others' do not yet know what actually took place, here. you made the claim that there are lots of separated chains, all with their own starts.

I then asked you to present examples of 'this'.

you, however, and unfortunately for you, have not been able to provide just one single solitary example.

So, what the actual Truth is, here, is that it is you "darkneos" who is 'the one' who believes that 'your claim' is absolutely true, and even the Fact that you can not think of just one example, and can not present any examples, here, does not phase you from believe 'your own claim', here, to be absolutely true.

Again, as I have been saying and pointing out, through people like "darkneos", the power of belief, and 'the way' the brain works, 'folks' like "darkneos" become completely blind, and end up living in complete darkness.

Examples were already given by more than one person, you just didn't care, predictably...

[Age]

Or maybe some clarity in order?
Like I said above I've met folks like Age before and there's no convincing them out of their position.

But, folks do not need convincing of 'their position'.

So, why did you say and write what you did, here.

Even when I showed them they just insist otherwise, it's a waste of time.

But, you have not even presented any thing, to show.

Look, in case you have forgotten, or in case 'others' do not yet know what actually took place, here. you made the claim that there are lots of separated chains, all with their own starts.

I then asked you to present examples of 'this'.

you, however, and unfortunately for you, have not been able to provide just one single solitary example.

So, what the actual Truth is, here, is that it is you "darkneos" who is 'the one' who believes that 'your claim' is absolutely true, and even the Fact that you can not think of just one example, and can not present any examples, here, does not phase you from believe 'your own claim', here, to be absolutely true.

Again, as I have been saying and pointing out, through people like "darkneos", the power of belief, and 'the way' the brain works, 'folks' like "darkneos" become completely blind, and end up living in complete darkness.

Examples were already given by more than one person, you just didn't care, predictably...

Now you are lying, absolutely.

And, I will prove this, absolutely, by asking you to provide the link to, or the actual words themselves, where what 'you claim', here, was allegedly written.

If you do not provide any thing, then this will be the second time you have not.

So, let 'us' see if 'you' can prove "yourself" to be right, here. Or, will you, again, prove 'me' to be Right, once more.

[Age]

Or maybe some clarity in order?
Like I said above I've met folks like Age before and there's no convincing them out of their position.

But, folks do not need convincing of 'their position'.

So, why did you say and write what you did, here.

Even when I showed them they just insist otherwise, it's a waste of time.

But, you have not even presented any thing, to show.

Look, in case you have forgotten, or in case 'others' do not yet know what actually took place, here. you made the claim that there are lots of separated chains, all with their own starts.

I then asked you to present examples of 'this'.

you, however, and unfortunately for you, have not been able to provide just one single solitary example.

So, what the actual Truth is, here, is that it is you "darkneos" who is 'the one' who believes that 'your claim' is absolutely true, and even the Fact that you can not think of just one example, and can not present any examples, here, does not phase you from believe 'your own claim', here, to be absolutely true.

Again, as I have been saying and pointing out, through people like "darkneos", the power of belief, and 'the way' the brain works, 'folks' like "darkneos" become completely blind, and end up living in complete darkness.

Examples were already given by more than one person, you just didn't care, predictably...

your use of the 'predictably', here, shows another prime example of 'confirmation bias' at work, and at play, and of just how closed, and blind, people could really become.

So, please 'carry on' as you have been, here, "darkneos". 'your very words', here, are proving 'my words' to be absolutely True, Right, Accurate, and Correct.

[Darkneos]

But, folks do not need convincing of 'their position'.

So, why did you say and write what you did, here.



But, you have not even presented any thing, to show.

Look, in case you have forgotten, or in case 'others' do not yet know what actually took place, here. you made the claim that there are lots of separated chains, all with their own starts.

I then asked you to present examples of 'this'.

you, however, and unfortunately for you, have not been able to provide just one single solitary example.

So, what the actual Truth is, here, is that it is you "darkneos" who is 'the one' who believes that 'your claim' is absolutely true, and even the Fact that you can not think of just one example, and can not present any examples, here, does not phase you from believe 'your own claim', here, to be absolutely true.

Again, as I have been saying and pointing out, through people like "darkneos", the power of belief, and 'the way' the brain works, 'folks' like "darkneos" become completely blind, and end up living in complete darkness.

Examples were already given by more than one person, you just didn't care, predictably...

your use of the 'predictably', here, shows another prime example of 'confirmation bias' at work, and at play, and of just how closed, and blind, people could really become.

So, please 'carry on' as you have been, here, "darkneos". 'your very words', here, are proving 'my words' to be absolutely True, Right, Accurate, and Correct.

The irony of you accusing folks of confirmation bias, like I said people gave examples you just ignored them, like I knew you would...

[Age]

Examples were already given by more than one person, you just didn't care, predictably...

your use of the 'predictably', here, shows another prime example of 'confirmation bias' at work, and at play, and of just how closed, and blind, people could really become.

So, please 'carry on' as you have been, here, "darkneos". 'your very words', here, are proving 'my words' to be absolutely True, Right, Accurate, and Correct.

The irony of you accusing folks of confirmation bias, like I said people gave examples you just ignored them, like I knew you would...

And, as I already said,

I will prove you are lying, absolutely, by asking you to provide the link to 'your claim' that people gave examples.

I also already said,

If you do not provide any thing, then this will be the second time you have not

So, as I, also, already noted,

Once more you have, here, proved 'me' to be Right, once again.

Also, you have made 'another claim', here, so let 'us' see if you will provide any thing backing up this 'new claim', this time. What, exactly, are you referring to, with 'your belief' that 'I' have 'confirmation bias', here.

Are you able to provide absolutely any thing, this time?

[Darkneos]

your use of the 'predictably', here, shows another prime example of 'confirmation bias' at work, and at play, and of just how closed, and blind, people could really become.

So, please 'carry on' as you have been, here, "darkneos". 'your very words', here, are proving 'my words' to be absolutely True, Right, Accurate, and Correct.

The irony of you accusing folks of confirmation bias, like I said people gave examples you just ignored them, like I knew you would...

And, as I already said,

I will prove you are lying, absolutely, by asking you to provide the link to 'your claim' that people gave examples.

I also already said,

If you do not provide any thing, then this will be the second time you have not

So, as I, also, already noted,

Once more you have, here, proved 'me' to be Right, once again.

Also, you have made 'another claim', here, so let 'us' see if you will provide any thing backing up this 'new claim', this time. What, exactly, are you referring to, with 'your belief' that 'I' have 'confirmation bias', here.

Are you able to provide absolutely any thing, this time?

Like I said everyone gets it but you and also evidence doesn't matter to you, examples where given you just ignored them (like I predicted)...

[Age]

The irony of you accusing folks of confirmation bias, like I said people gave examples you just ignored them, like I knew you would...

And, as I already said,

I will prove you are lying, absolutely, by asking you to provide the link to 'your claim' that people gave examples.

I also already said,

If you do not provide any thing, then this will be the second time you have not

So, as I, also, already noted,

Once more you have, here, proved 'me' to be Right, once again.

Also, you have made 'another claim', here, so let 'us' see if you will provide any thing backing up this 'new claim', this time. What, exactly, are you referring to, with 'your belief' that 'I' have 'confirmation bias', here.

Are you able to provide absolutely any thing, this time?

Like I said everyone gets it

But, no one gets 'its', including even you, LOL.

As I have proved by showing your absolute inability to provide just one example, only.

And, does absolutely any one want to agree with "darkneos" that every one gets 'it'?

If yes, then speak up and show "yourself", here.

but you and also evidence doesn't matter to you, examples where given you just ignored them (like I predicted)...

Once more 'this one' attempts to deceive and fool 'the readers', here.

There is not a single person that would say and claim that examples were given, besides those who obviously lie, like 'yourself', of course.

Any one can just read through our communication, here, and see, 'as clear as day', as some might say, that you made 'a claim', I asked your 'for an example', and that you, nor anyone else, has provided any example at all.

LOL The fact that you actually believe you could even 'try to' deceive and fool readers, here, when the actual words, here, can be clearly pointed to and seen, shows and proves just how fooled you really are, or just how deceptive you are really 'trying to be', here.

Again, imagine claiming that there are many separated chains, all with their own beginnings or starts, but never providing just one example, only. Then imagine 'trying to' claim that many examples have been provided, and that it is 'the other' who is ignoring those examples.

Now, who is the Truly ignorant one, here?