Philosophy Now Forum

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:53 pm Prediction is just an interpretation of the future.

Well, I think it's kind of useful to predict whether there's enough toilet paper BEFORE you start taking a shit.

You only make that mistake once.

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:00 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:53 pm Prediction is just an interpretation of the future.

Well, I think it's kind of useful to predict whether there's enough toilet paper BEFORE you start taking a shit.

You only make that mistake once.

You keep using that word "useful" over and over again like a broken record...and it is starting to sound "dirty" to me, like the word "useful" is becoming synonymous to "whore" or "mercenary" in my mind.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:45 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:00 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:53 pm Prediction is just an interpretation of the future.

Well, I think it's kind of useful to predict whether there's enough toilet paper BEFORE you start taking a shit.

You only make that mistake once.

You keep using that word "useful" over and over again like a broken record...and it is starting to sound "dirty" to me, like the word "useful" is becoming synonymous to "whore" or "mercenary" in my mind.

Don’t get too triggered, it is just a word.

It answers the “Why?” question.

Why do you seek that which you seek?
Why do go into the depths of metaphysics?

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:50 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:45 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:00 am
Well, I think it's kind of useful to predict whether there's enough toilet paper BEFORE you start taking a shit.

You only make that mistake once.

You keep using that word "useful" over and over again like a broken record...and it is starting to sound "dirty" to me, like the word "useful" is becoming synonymous to "whore" or "mercenary" in my mind.

Don’t get too triggered, it is just a word.

It answers the “Why?” question.

Why do you seek that which you seek!

Actually it doesn't. "Use" is just a projection of the observer's subjective state and is entirely relativistic.

"Use"....use...use....hmm...usuary.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:52 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:50 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:45 pm

You keep using that word "useful" over and over again like a broken record...and it is starting to sound "dirty" to me, like the word "useful" is becoming synonymous to "whore" or "mercenary" in my mind.

Don’t get too triggered, it is just a word.

It answers the “Why?” question.

Why do you seek that which you seek!

Actually it doesn't. "Use" is just a projection of the observer's subjective state and is entirely relativistic.

"Use"....use...use....hmm...usuary.

Why did you define “use”?

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:54 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:52 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:50 pm
Don’t get too triggered, it is just a word.

It answers the “Why?” question.

Why do you seek that which you seek!

Actually it doesn't. "Use" is just a projection of the observer's subjective state and is entirely relativistic.

"Use"....use...use....hmm...usuary.

Why did you define “use”?

I did not do or not do anything...the word just seems to bend to other higher laws and projects itself in a linear manner to various grades.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:00 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:54 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:52 pm

Actually it doesn't. "Use" is just a projection of the observer's subjective state and is entirely relativistic.

"Use"....use...use....hmm...usuary.

Why did you define “use”?

I did not do or not do anything...the word just seems to bend to other higher laws and projects itself in a linear manner to various grades.

Why did you say that?

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:05 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:00 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:54 pm
Why did you define “use”?

I did not do or not do anything...the word just seems to bend to other higher laws and projects itself in a linear manner to various grades.

Why did you say that?

So the "word", or rather "symbol", of "use" does not progress to various "words/symbols" as grades of it?

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:15 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:05 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:00 pm

I did not do or not do anything...the word just seems to bend to other higher laws and projects itself in a linear manner to various grades.

Why did you say that?

So the "word", or rather "symbol", of "use" does not progress to various "words/symbols" as grades of it?

Why should the symbol not progress to other various words/symbols as grades of it?

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:17 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:15 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:05 pm
Why did you say that?

So the "word", or rather "symbol", of "use" does not progress to various "words/symbols" as grades of it?

Why should the symbol not progress to other various words/symbols as grades of it?

It eliminates the meaning of the prior symbol unless all progress maintains a self-referentiality.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:50 pm It eliminates the meaning of the prior symbol unless all progress maintains a self-referentiality.

Why should we maintain the meaning of the prior symbol and maintain self-referentiality?

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:59 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:50 pm It eliminates the meaning of the prior symbol unless all progress maintains a self-referentiality.

Why should we maintain the meaning of the prior symbol and maintain self-referentiality?

Because the symbol which progresses from the prior symbol, using the "use"/"usefulness" example provided prior, always observes that with a progressive variation comes a self-cycling and maintenance of the prior variable.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:07 pm Because the symbol which progresses from the prior symbol, using the "use"/"usefulness" example provided prior, always observes that with a progressive variation comes a self-cycling and maintenance of the prior variable.

Why do you want to maintain the prior variable?

You said so yourself. The problem is reason. No reason - no problem.

The problem is symbols. No symbols - no problem.

Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:15 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:07 pm Because the symbol which progresses from the prior symbol, using the "use"/"usefulness" example provided prior, always observes that with a progressive variation comes a self-cycling and maintenance of the prior variable.

Why do you want to maintain the prior variable?

You said so yourself. The problem is reason. No reason - no problem.

The problem is symbols. No symbols - no problem.

The problem is symbols and the problem is reason, and they must be negated. But if they are negated, reason as "measurement" occurs and we are left with a new rational process altogether.

Killing philosophy just results in philosophy resurrecting itself.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:18 pm The problem is symbols and the problem is reason, and they must be negated. But if they are negated, reason as "measurement" occurs and we are left with a new rational process altogether.

Killing philosophy just results in philosophy resurrecting itself.

Why are symbols and reason a problem?
Why must they be negated?
Why encourage the resurrection of philosophy by killing it?