Philosophy Now Forum

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:33 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 1:16 pm

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 12:53 pm If you say so, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, correct?

I don't know what you mean by "absolutely true".

Okay, this is fair enough. This, "I don't know what you mean", is also what you just about always 'go to', when you do not want to answer or respond to some thing.

And you always ask the question "If you say so, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, correct?" when you think the person is incorrect.

I think every book on the Socratic method covers this in Chapter 1?

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm If you say and believe so, then this could not be anything else but absolutely true, to you.

I told you - I have no idea. Things being "absolutely true" is your language, not mine. I have no idea what you mean.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm Lol once again, you are obviously WRONG, and as such completely stuck, and therefore completely incapable of providing any actual proof of what you claim is irrefutably true.

I am perfectly capable, yet totally unwilling to provide any proof. Google is your friend.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm I have suggested before, if one wants to claim some thing, then it is best to have at least some thing to back up and support that claim BEFORE making the claim, itself.

Your suggestion was considered and ignored.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm But being an adult human being, you BELIEVE you know better, correct?

That is not a complete sentence. I know better than whom or what?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 5:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:33 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 1:16 pm
I don't know what you mean by "absolutely true".

Okay, this is fair enough. This, "I don't know what you mean", is also what you just about always 'go to', when you do not want to answer or respond to some thing.

And you always ask the question "If you say so, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, correct?" when you think the person is incorrect.

But that is exactly NOT what I think at all.

I actually on occasions I think the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you think or believe I think.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 5:15 pmI think every book on the Socratic method covers this in Chapter 1?

Okay.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 5:17 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm If you say and believe so, then this could not be anything else but absolutely true, to you.

I told you - I have no idea. Things being "absolutely true" is your language, not mine. I have no idea what you mean.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm Lol once again, you are obviously WRONG, and as such completely stuck, and therefore completely incapable of providing any actual proof of what you claim is irrefutably true.

I am perfectly capable, yet totally unwilling to provide any proof. Google is your friend.

So, ANOTHER OWN who says I can back up and support what I claim, but I am just unwilling to.

Some might infer certain things from this?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 5:17 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm I have suggested before, if one wants to claim some thing, then it is best to have at least some thing to back up and support that claim BEFORE making the claim, itself.

Your suggestion was considered and ignored.

Okay.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 5:17 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 2:37 pm But being an adult human being, you BELIEVE you know better, correct?

That is not a complete sentence. I know better than whom or what?

What we were talking about, obviously.

You claimed that young children lie. I KNOW they do NOT.

You then made some ridiculous comment to me, which I replied that you being an adult human being, you BELIEVE you know better, in regards to me, and in regards to what children do or do not do, correct?

But because you do not back up and support your claims, then I am unable to SHOW and PROVE how WRONG you REALLY ARE.

This is the reason WHY you are unwilling to back up your own claims here.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:33 am But that is exactly NOT what I think at all.

OK.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:33 am I actually on occasions I think the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you think or believe I think.

Was this one of those occasions?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am So, ANOTHER OWN who says I can back up and support what I claim, but I am just unwilling to.

Some might infer certain things from this?

Only some? I imagine everybody would infer certain things.

Whether their inferences are correct is another matter.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am You claimed that young children lie. I KNOW they do NOT.

Since I am inferring that you are a child, I am also inferring that you are lying.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am You then made some ridiculous comment to me, which I replied that you being an adult human being, you BELIEVE you know better, in regards to me, and in regards to what children do or do not do, correct?

I don't know better - I just have more data by virtue of having acquired it over a longer duration of lifespan.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am But because you do not back up and support your claims, then I am unable to SHOW and PROVE how WRONG you REALLY ARE.

Why do you want to show any such things?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am This is the reason WHY you are unwilling to back up your own claims here.

You have inferred incorrectly.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:54 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:33 am But that is exactly NOT what I think at all.

OK.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:33 am I actually on occasions I think the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you think or believe I think.

Was this one of those occasions?

Yes.

If I was to look back over all of my writings in this forum I think it would be found I NEVER was thinking what you think or believe I was, in relation to that comment you made here.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:56 am If I was to look back over all of my writings in this forum I think it would be found I NEVER was thinking what you think or believe I was, in relation to that comment you made here.

You don't know what I believed, nor do I know what you were thinking.

You never say what you are thinking.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:57 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am So, ANOTHER OWN who says I can back up and support what I claim, but I am just unwilling to.

Some might infer certain things from this?

Only some? I imagine everybody would infer certain things.

But there are some, like me, who do not infer certain things, from what others say. Some, like me, like to remain completely OPEN, always. Some, like me, just allow things to proceed, and allow the Truth to flow freely, instead of imagining, or assuming, what the truth is.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:57 pmWhether their inferences are correct is another matter.

Exactly, which is why I constantly say I do not like to assume, or infer, anything. I just like to look at all things, exactly as they are.

But as I say, you are free to do, or imagine, absolutely any thing that you want to do, or imagine.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:57 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am You claimed that young children lie. I KNOW they do NOT.

Since I am inferring that you are a child, I am also inferring that you are lying.

I do not care. That, also, in no way backs up and supports your claim. (By the way what am I supposedly lying about?)

Obviously, your claim that all humans lie could never be proven true, nor correct.

As I have already stated: I KNOW young children do not lie.

This fact can be, and has already been, very easily proven true.

Therefore, NOT all humans lie. Full stop.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:57 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am You then made some ridiculous comment to me, which I replied that you being an adult human being, you BELIEVE you know better, in regards to me, and in regards to what children do or do not do, correct?

I don't know better - I just have more data by virtue of having acquired it over a longer duration of lifespan.

But you have forgotten to take into consideration just how much of that "data" could be corrupted, or just plain old WRONG.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:57 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am But because you do not back up and support your claims, then I am unable to SHOW and PROVE how WRONG you REALLY ARE.

Why do you want to show any such things?

I do not want you to do anything.

But, generally, and especially on a philosophy forum, when claims are made, then it is a good idea to be able to back up and support those claims with, at least, something.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:57 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:47 am This is the reason WHY you are unwilling to back up your own claims here.

You have inferred incorrectly.

So, what is your reason for your unwillingness to back up your own claims here?

I am sure some of the readers are interested to see if my "inference" is incorrect, like you have claimed it is, or actually correct.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:16 am

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:56 am If I was to look back over all of my writings in this forum I think it would be found I NEVER was thinking what you think or believe I was, in relation to that comment you made here.

You don't know what I believed, nor do I know what you were thinking.

But I know what you have written. If you believe it or not is a completely other matter. I have obviously made this clear, by what i have written.

If you read what I actually write, then you would know what I am thinking.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:16 amYou never say what you are thinking.

Really?

What do you think the words actually are, which I write?