Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:38 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 11:55 amWhen 'you' can answer the question; 'Who am 'I'?' properly and correctly and 'you' have also understood and KNOW how thee Mind and the brain actually work, then 'you' will NOT be wondering any more WHY 'I' am writing a book.

No one ever wrote or read a book.

If NO one EVER wrote or read a book, then what do you call 'it' that writes and reads books?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:38 pm But I wish you lots of fun in la la land with your imaginary friend.

Okay.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:29 pm Look, 'you' ALREADY BELIEVE that 'you' ALREADY KNOW what the truth is, correct?

If this is correct, then what is 'it', which 'you' are seeking and looking for here, in this forum?

I'm not seeking or looking for anything in this forum, I'm just playing the 'you' and 'I' game where 'you' throw the ball and 'I' catch it.

It's a fun game.

Bye the way, I have no requirement for belief in what I already know.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:59 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 11:55 amWhen 'you' can answer the question; 'Who am 'I'?' properly and correctly and 'you' have also understood and KNOW how thee Mind and the brain actually work, then 'you' will NOT be wondering any more WHY 'I' am writing a book.

That's because 'you' won't have to know or wonder 'Who am I'' because the book will contain the answer to the question '' Who am I''

Only problem here is that the narrative would have to be believed. No belief, would mean there is no knowledge AT ALL of ''Who am I'' ?


And that is a dilemma for Ken, because Ken has no beliefs. Ken is just a fictional idea manifest in the form of an image, an image of the imageless. In reality the 'WHO' question never arises, the 'who' is just a fictional belief.

See how effortlessly this is explained.

But 'you' STILL have a LOT MORE OF EXPLAINING TO DO, that is; IF 'you' REALLY want to be FULLY UNDERSTOOD.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:59 pm The problem here is that SOURCE has NO need to be explained twice. SOURCE has no need for a copy...for one very good reason. Everyone knows this because everyone is no one.

'you' have started numerous of 'your' sentences with; "The problem here is ...", YET there is NO actual problem here AT ALL. Except, OF COURSE, only those 'problems' which 'you', human beings, make up and create.

What is 'this' here, which SUPPOSEDLY "EVERY one KNOWS"?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:59 pm So in my humble opinion, all yee distinguished ladies and gentlemen have no need to be selling water by the river. We've all heard the story so many times before over and over and over again.

So, WHY does the one known as "dontaskme" KEEP REPEATING the same stories over and over again?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:59 pm I feel a song coming on...or even a movie or a book....

A reality made up of just water colours of paint written upon flowing water.

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:38 pm

No one ever wrote or read a book.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:30 pmIf NO one EVER wrote or read a book, then what do you call 'it' that writes and reads books?

I've underlined the answer for you. I think you may have a problem with understanding what you are reading.


Also, it's not an ''If'' it's a fact.

Please don't get me to repeat what is a fact.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:37 pmSo, WHY does the one known as "dontaskme" KEEP REPEATING the same stories over and over again?

Same reason why the one known as Age KEEPs REPEATING the same stories over and over again.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:41 pm

SO AGAIN, all you've said is a lawnmower is writing the book. Or was it the boogieman?

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 11:47 amThee ONLY one who has said this is the one known as "dontaskme".

You can only know that as and through what was written.

So do you believe the narrative as it was written, as you read it ...do you believe this narrative that was written to be true?

WHY do 'you' SAY that the one known here, in this forum, as "age" or "ken" has NO BELIEFS, but then go on to ask 'me' IF 'i' BELIEVE SOME 'thing'?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:59 pm Do you believe that a character called 'dontaskme' exists and that this character can say what you are claiming to have been said when you read the written words of this character?

I neither BELIEVE nor DISBELIEVE ANY thing. AND,

I KNOW, EXACTLY, who AND what the one called "dontaskme" REALLY IS.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:37 pmWhat is 'this' here, which SUPPOSEDLY "EVERY one KNOWS"?

SOURCE

Did you forget again?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:51 pm Age aka the physical universe is writing a book.

The one known as "age" is NOT Also Known As 'the physical universe'. The one known as "age" will NEVER Also be Known As the 'physical universe' NOR absolutely ANY thing else OTHER than who and what 'it' ACTUALLY IS.

To even think or imagine this, or to even think or imaging that this has been what was said, is on the edge of absolute absurdity.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:51 pm 2 Questions to Age aka the physical universe:

1: what are you going to title your book?

2: what are you going to do with the book when it's finished?

These question are based on ABSOLUTE ABSURD ASSUMPTIONS and just as WRONG CONCLUSIONS.

But to answer YOUR questions here:

1. Not yet decided.

2. Nothing particular.

What do 'you' do after 'you' have finished writing words down?

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:42 pm
WHY do 'you' SAY that the one known here, in this forum, as "age" or "ken" has NO BELIEFS, but then go on to ask 'me' IF 'i' BELIEVE SOME 'thing'?

It was you who said you had no beliefs, and so I'm just repeating back to you what you said. I'm your echo.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:42 pmI neither BELIEVE nor DISBELIEVE ANY thing. AND,

I KNOW, EXACTLY, who AND what the one called "dontaskme" REALLY IS.

So do I

And I believe that knowing. I believe that an object is what the concept says it is, if I didn't believe the concept, then the object could be absolutely any thing. Concepts are fixed, for example: a tree can never be a dontaskme and vice versa.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:16 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:11 pm'you' REALLY do NOT YET have ANY comprehension NOR ANY understanding of what 'I' have been ACTUALLY MEANING here, have you?

'you' REALLY do NOT YET have ANY comprehension NOR ANY understanding of what 'I' have been ACTUALLY MEANING here, have you?

NO. And this is EXACTLY WHY 'I' ask 'you' for CLARIFICATION.

Unfortunately, however, 'you' are YET ABLE to provide ANY really.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:18 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:11 pm
This is what 'I' have been saying, AND MEANING. That is; 'I', in the non visible sense, is thee one and ONLY One, which is FOREVER and actually does SEE ALL.

No shit sherlock.

FINALLY.

And 'I', in the non visible sense, is thee One and ONLY Mind, Itself.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:48 pm
What do 'you' do after 'you' have finished writing words down?

Nothing.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:35 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:29 pm Look, 'you' ALREADY BELIEVE that 'you' ALREADY KNOW what the truth is, correct?

If this is correct, then what is 'it', which 'you' are seeking and looking for here, in this forum?

I'm not seeking or looking for anything in this forum, I'm just playing the 'you' and 'I' game where 'you' throw the ball and 'I' catch it.

It's a fun game.

But 'you' do NOT KNOW who and what 'you' ARE, nor who and what 'I' AM, YET.

Therefore, it could well be argued that 'you' have a LOT MORE to 'catch' YET.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:35 pm Bye the way, I have no requirement for belief in what I already know.

And because there is still a LOT that this 'you' does NOT YET KNOW this is WHY 'you' STILL have BELIEF, and STILL ('have to'), BELIEVE some things.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:50 pm
'you' REALLY do NOT YET have ANY comprehension NOR ANY understanding of what 'I' have been ACTUALLY MEANING here, have you?


NO. And this is EXACTLY WHY 'I' ask 'you' for CLARIFICATION.

Unfortunately, however, 'you' are YET ABLE to provide ANY really.

Gosh that must really suck that you are yet able to provide any clarifcation for your request for them. Have you tried asking SOURCE ...that may be able to provide them for you.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:39 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:38 pm

No one ever wrote or read a book.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 8:30 pmIf NO one EVER wrote or read a book, then what do you call 'it' that writes and reads books?

I've underlined the answer for you. I think you may have a problem with understanding what you are reading.


Also, it's not an ''If'' it's a fact.

Please don't get me to repeat what is a fact.

IF 'you', "dontaskme", INSIST that "NO one" reads, nor writes, books, then WHY is it 'you', "dontaskme", WHO ALSO makes the statement; "I think 'YOU' may have a problem with understanding what 'YOU' are READING?

Can 'you' SEE the CONTRADICTION here?

Stating that 'NO one' reads but also stating that 'you may have a problem with understanding what 'YOU ARE READING' is EXTREMELY self-contradicting, and therefore could be LOOKED AT and SEEN as complete illogical and absurd nonsense. Unless, OF COURSE, this, apparent, CONTRADICTION could be CLEARED UP through CLARIFICATION and EXPLANATION.

So, can 'you' CLEAR UP this, apparent, CONTRADICTION?

If yes, then will 'you'?