Philosophy Now Forum

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 11:59 am So, 'this one' asked 'me',
What does the word "definition" mean?

To which I responded with 'an answer'.

You responded with, "It means whatever the speaker wants it to mean".

Well 'I' was just going of, and on, what 'you' said and claimed.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm And that is not a valid answer because you didn't tell me what meaning people assign to it.

1. I was never asked to.

2. I did not have to.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm You just stated a banal truism noone asked for.

So, what was 'it' that you were asking for, exactly?

And, what even is a 'valid answer', to you?

In fact, will you even provide a 'valid answer' to your own question, here?

If no, then why not?

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 11:59 am However, 'this one' completely and utterly misinterpreted 'my answer' and took it 'so far out of context', then its own version and interpretation was not even what I said and wrote.

That's not true.

If this is what you believe is true, then okay.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm You keep misunderstanding what other people are saying ( which is, ironically, what you accuse other people of. )

If you want to believe that you never misunderstand, and/or that I keep misunderstanding, here, then okay.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm I didn't misinterpret it.

If this is what you want to believe is true, then okay.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm I understand what you said very well.

Again, if this is what you want to believe is true, then okay.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm And I didn't paraphrase it incorrectly because I wasn't relly trying to paraphrase it.

If you want to call the expressing of 'my words' using 'different words' not 'paraphrasing', then okay.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm I merely said that your answer is effectively the same as, "It means whatever it means".

But, 'my answer' is nothing like what you misinterpreted them to, effectively, mean.

But, because you believe, absolutely, that you did not misinterpret, and that you understand what I said very well, you will, obviously, believe otherwise, here.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm It's like someone asking "Who's Peter?" and you responding with "Peter is a person called Peter". It's true but it says nothing of niterest.

But, 'it' is absolutely nothing like 'this'. However, if you, really, do want to keep believing that 'it' is, then that is also perfectly fine and okay with me.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm You're obviously a bit too much of a literalist.

And, it could also be said that you are obviously a bit too much of a non 'literalist'.

However, to do so would be just as ridiculous and stupid.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 11:59 am LOL 'I' have already explained that the 'common definition' all depends on where, and when, the 'common definition' is in relation to, exactly. Of which 'this one' obviously never clarified anywhere, here.

And I have told you that it's enough for you to explain what meaning YOU or ANYONE ELSE assign to the word.

Where and when, exactly, did you, supposedly, tell me 'this'?

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm It does not really have to be a common meaning ( since that's too much of a headache for you. )

Yet, it was you who claimed, 'I am asking about the common definition though'.

But now, it does not, really, have to be a common meaning. So, what is 'it', exactly, that you are, 'now', wanting and desiring, here?

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm The word "common" means "frequently occuring".

Okay. But why are 'you' telling 'us' what the word, 'common', means, 'to you', exactly?

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm A common meaning would thus be one that frequently occurs, e.g. a lot of people people use it a lot of the time. And if you also need a timeframe, you can stick to the last 50 years or so.

1. How many is a 'lot of people'.

2. Is the 'last 50 years or so', from when you wrote those words, or from when a reader reads those words?

3. In what country and/or culture are you referring to, exactly?

4. And, from which dictionary would 'you' like 'me' to look in, exactly, to find 'the definition' and the 'valid answer', which you are seeking and wanting, here?

5. Also, which one of the different meanings, exactly, would you like 'me' to present to 'you', here?

6. In other words, which meaning would 'you' like 'me' to respond to 'you' with, which would satisfy 'you' as being the 'valid answer'?

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 11:59 am But now, supposedly, people, probably, do not like interacting, 'with me', because;

1. 'I' am, supposedly, 'clearly not capable of just answering questions'. And/or,

2. 'I', supposedly and allegedly, 'lack the basic skills of communication'.

Both are Absolutely Positively True.

Yet, although 'you' believe, absolutely that both of them are 'Absolutely Positively True', (with capital letters), here you are, still, communicating 'with me', and, specifically, communicating, with me, in regards to the actual answers 'I' provided to 'your questions'.

Oh, 'the irony', some would be very clearly recognizing and noticing.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:37 pm

accelafine wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 10:35 am Not to mention the fact that Lacewing was driven off by Fairy's jealous rage. God I detest misogynistic handmaidens, especially phonies like 'fairy'.

Harbal told me that Lacewing wasn’t his romantic intimate type, only after I had curiously asked him about his past experiences with Lacewing on this forum. They were both having fun frolicking on the forum but were living in different countries so could only interact through cyberspace. I asked Harbal what happened to their relationship. He told me to my face that she wasn’t his type.

I understand that Harbal was looking for a female soulmate on the internet. Harbal pursued me, I didn’t pursue him.
Lacewing left this forum because I told her some home truths about Harbal’s real feelings for her.
Lacewing can post here anytime she wants, no one is stopping her. What you should be asking yourself is what is the actual real reason these people are not posting at the moment?

If Harbal was lying to me, even though he told me he hates liars, then so be it. Liars will be exposed in the light of truth, because I hate liars too.

As for liars. Such is the nature of the human condition.

But, lying is certainly not the so-called 'nature of the human condition'.

All of you adult human beings only lie because this is what you learned to do through Wrong and abusive past experiences. Which, obviously, all of you have had to endure through.

The 'nature of the human condition' is the very opposite of lying, and abusing. Yet, every one of you adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, lie, and abuse.

And, just saying and/or claiming, 'I hate liars', never ever means 'the one' who is saying and/or claiming 'that', does not lie, "itself".

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 1. I was never asked to.

Yes, you were.

I know because I was the one who asked the question.

You don't because you weren't the one who asked the question.

But for some strange reason, you think you know better than me what I asked you. That conviction makes you effectively evasive.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm And I have told you that it's enough for you to explain what meaning YOU or ANYONE ELSE assign to the word.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am Where and when, exactly, did you, supposedly, tell me 'this'?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am Yet, it was you who claimed, 'I am asking about the common definition though'.

But now, it does not, really, have to be a common meaning. So, what is 'it', exactly, that you are, 'now', wanting and desiring, here?

Unfortunately for you, I have evidence.

viewtopic.php?p=788684#p788684

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Wed Sep 17, 2025 2:34 pm I am asking about the common definition though. So you're not really answering my question.

You are also free to tell us how you're using the word.

Everything except for, "It means whatever it means to you". That's not an answer.

That was posted 4 days ago on page #2.

Of course, your response was a defensive one. "But you didn't ask for a common definition!" Yes, I did, you just didn't understand the question. But you won't admit you misunderstood it, won't you? Of course you won't. It's never your fault.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 3:38 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 3:27 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 3:11 pm No one here knows Harbal. Only Fairy knows him.

Your distorted projected image of him bears no resemblance to him in real life, best just to keep your assumptions to yourself since you’re the creator of them, no one else.

That's a terrible argument.

If a serial killer only kills people when he's in Novosibirsk, are those who have seen him kill other people, but who have no idea what he does outside of that city, wrong for calling him a serial killer?

The point is that his presence on the Internet is destructive.

What he does outside of it is irrelevant.

I could just as easily get killed crossing the road on the way to Morrison’s to buy my groceries.

So what, we’re all gonna die one day. Truth is, no one actually dies in the making of this movie, because the evil devil is God’s creation, and so every created thing must be loved equally and unconditionally, infinitely for eternity, for there’s nothing that is not God.

There’s nothing outside of God that could be opposed to God. Even the idea of infinite Gods is an idea in God.

But, 'evil', or just Wrong/abusive doing, is actually 'outside' of God, and absolutely nothing that God wants, nor even created.

Sure, you adult human beings who have the 'freedom' to choose to do absolutely whatever you want to do, are created by the very Thing that is said to have created every thing, but 'your own Wrong doing' is not God, Itself. God wants nothing, and has nothing at all, to do with the Wrong that you adult humans completely freely choose to do. If you adults want to keep doing the Wrong that you all do, then you are completely free to do so. But, God is, always, guiding you other-wise. Although you, obviously, are not always 'listening', and 'hearing'.

The following series of questions that you asked is further proof that you're a hyper-literal pedantic gadfly who derails threads by demanding precision that is not only unnecessary but also impossible to attain.

Nonetheless, I will answer each one of them. Don't worry about that.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 1. How many is a 'lot of people'.

Pick the meaning that you think is used by the greatest number of people.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 2. Is the 'last 50 years or so', from when you wrote those words, or from when a reader reads those words?

It does not matter. You're free to choose.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 3. In what country and/or culture are you referring to, exactly?

English speaking countries.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 4. And, from which dictionary would 'you' like 'me' to look in, exactly, to find 'the definition' and the 'valid answer', which you are seeking and wanting, here?

You're free to use any.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 5. Also, which one of the different meanings, exactly, would you like 'me' to present to 'you', here?

The one you think is the most commonly used.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 6. In other words, which meaning would 'you' like 'me' to respond to 'you' with, which would satisfy 'you' as being the 'valid answer'?

The one you think is the most commonly used.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am Yet, although 'you' believe, absolutely that both of them are 'Absolutely Positively True', (with capital letters), here you are, still, communicating 'with me', and, specifically, communicating, with me, in regards to the actual answers 'I' provided to 'your questions'.

Oh, 'the irony', some would be very clearly recognizing and noticing.

So you want me to stop talking to a socially inept child?

I shouldn't bother trying to help it?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:46 am All of you adult human beings

Question #4:
If everyone else is a human being, what exactly are you?

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 4:03 pm Age—

Do you realize how frustrating your posts are to forum members other than yourself?

If, and when, they tell me, then yes.

And, do 'my words' really have that much control over you people, here?

accelafine wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 8:55 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 8:50 pm

accelafine wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 8:06 pm

Well that's completely the wrong end of the stick. Did you miss her own Harbal threads? I doubt if Harbal's a sociopath either. Fairy could well be, however. Her latest prey appears to be a vulnuerable, mentally-defective autist.

Why do you believe I’m a predator Of men just because I’m a woman discussing philosophy with men on a philosophy forum?

You've hijacked multiple threads to cavort with Kenny. You've created whole threads to honour him. You've described him as a 'genius'. I mean, 'Questions to Age' when ''Age' has never been known to answer a question on here. EVER??

LOL The 'power of belief' is Truly inspiring and amazing to watch play out in real.

accelafine wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 9:39 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 9:10 pm

accelafine wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 9:08 pm Age is a genius and this forum is privileged to have him here.

--Fairy

Yes, Age is a genius. In my opinion, so what, why do you care what I think about some philosophers?

A genius at what? Annoying people? You mean a genius like Einstein? Bach? Isaac Newton? Shakespeare? Bob Dylan? What does he do exactly? He lies a lot--and very poorly. Does that qualify him?

1. Where and when, exactly, have I ever supposedly lied in this forum?

2. What do you mean by 'lies very poorly', exactly?

3. If you do not provide any examples of when I have, supposedly, lied, and done so very poorly', then why not? What are you so afraid of, exactly?

Obviously if your claims, here, were true, then you could at least back them up with some things.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:56 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 1. I was never asked to.

Yes, you were.

I know because I was the one who asked the question.

You don't because you weren't the one who asked the question.

But for some strange reason, you think you know better than me what I asked you. That conviction makes you effectively evasive.

LOL 'This one', again, goes straight to assuming, and straight to jumping to a conclusion, without ever once even just considering to seek out clarification nor clarity first.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:02 am

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sat Sep 20, 2025 1:34 pm And I have told you that it's enough for you to explain what meaning YOU or ANYONE ELSE assign to the word.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am Where and when, exactly, did you, supposedly, tell me 'this'?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am Yet, it was you who claimed, 'I am asking about the common definition though'.

But now, it does not, really, have to be a common meaning. So, what is 'it', exactly, that you are, 'now', wanting and desiring, here?

Unfortunately for you, I have evidence.

viewtopic.php?p=788684#p788684

And, in this so-called 'evidence' you actually prove, irrefutably, that you had, once more, mistook, misinterpreted, and misunderstood , exactly, what I was actually saying and meaning.

As can also be seen below, here.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:02 am

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Wed Sep 17, 2025 2:34 pm I am asking about the common definition though. So you're not really answering my question.

You are also free to tell us how you're using the word.

Everything except for, "It means whatever it means to you". That's not an answer.

That was posted 4 days ago on page #2.

Thank you for presenting the 'actual proof', from 'you', which 'I' have been referring to, exactly.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:02 am Of course, your response was a defensive one. "But you didn't ask for a common definition!" Yes, I did, you just didn't understand the question. But you won't admit you misunderstood it, won't you? Of course you won't. It's never your fault.

LOL 'This one' could not have misinterpreted and/or taken out of context 'my words' and what I meant just about any further.

However, 'this one' believes, absolutely, that it does not take any thing out of context nor misunderstands any thing at all, here. Which is Truly humourous to watch and play out, here.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:17 am The following series of questions that you asked is further proof that you're a hyper-literal pedantic gadfly who derails threads by demanding precision that is not only unnecessary but also impossible to attain.

Why do you believe, absolutely, that it is impossible to attain, when it has already been obtained?

Also, there is no wonder why people like 'this one' were still so lost and confused and still seeking answers and the Truth, when they believed, absolutely, that precision in regards to words, and thus, meanings was completely unnecessary.

Nonetheless, I will answer each one of them. Don't worry about that.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 1. How many is a 'lot of people'.

Pick the meaning that you think is used by the greatest number of people.[/quote]

'This one' has, once again, just proved that I actually have answered its question adequately, sufficiently, and validly. Although this is absolutely contrary to its absolute belief, here.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:17 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 2. Is the 'last 50 years or so', from when you wrote those words, or from when a reader reads those words?

It does not matter. You're free to choose.

Okay.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:17 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 3. In what country and/or culture are you referring to, exactly?

English speaking countries.

Okay.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:17 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 4. And, from which dictionary would 'you' like 'me' to look in, exactly, to find 'the definition' and the 'valid answer', which you are seeking and wanting, here?

You're free to use any.

Okay

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:17 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 5. Also, which one of the different meanings, exactly, would you like 'me' to present to 'you', here?

The one you think is the most commonly used.

Okay.

But I have no idea which one is the most commonly used. And, do not forget what I do not like, here.

Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 2:17 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 21, 2025 1:40 am 6. In other words, which meaning would 'you' like 'me' to respond to 'you' with, which would satisfy 'you' as being the 'valid answer'?

The one you think is the most commonly used.

But I am not thinking which one is the most commonly used one. For the reasons I have already informed of.

Which one do you think is the most commonly used one?

And, by the way, what would your or my answer be even in relation to, here, exactly?

In other words, why are you even asking such a completely trivial, mundane, and off topic question for, anyway?

six in a row. That must be some kind of record.