Name that fallacy...

[Age]

OF COURSE NOT. And, 'I' have been CONTINUALLY SAYING 'this' and POINTING 'this' Fact OUT.

And, let 'us' NOT FORGET that OBVIOUSLY some JUDGMENTS ARE ACTUALLY JUSTIFIED.

Of course they can be.

GREAT. So, now 'we' can AGREE UPON and ACCEPT that MAKING JUDGMENTS IS NOT necessarily a 'bad' NOR 'negative' 'thing' AT ALL, right?

Again, an unnecessary question.[/quote]

But that QUESTION, and 'your' REPLY, WAS VERY NECESSARY, and VERY HELPFUL, IN MY Creation here.

'you' REALLY, REALLY DO HAVE issue/s AND trouble just ANSWERING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, and even just ASKING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, let 'us' NOT FORGET.

Here 'we' can SEE the RESULT OF A VERY ABUSIVE and thus Wrong 'upbringing'.

I think 'of course they can be' is very clear.

GREAT. THANK 'you' FOR ANSWERING, and CLARIFYING, FINALLY.

Imagine a voice in the head or a viral subroutine in a computer, that is always taking up space and time, and doesn't care, really, about priorities, it has the priority of getting the mind to engage and turn back on itself.

Okay. BUT 'this' is JUST HYPOTHETICAL, and 'this' DOES NOT RELATE AT ALL TO WHAT IS ACTUAL True AND Right, NOR even TO what IS even POSSIBLE.

The motives can vary and presumably even accidental viral patterns can happen. But in the end the motives, if any, don't matter.

Okay, if 'you' SAY SO.

One COULD ALSO SAY, 'Imagine a 'being', within a computer or not, who does NOT LOOK AT, READ, nor LISTEN TO ONLY 'the words' PRESENTED BEFORE 'it', and MUCH PREFERS TO LOOK AT and LISTEN TO 'its' OWN VOICE, PRESUMPTIONS, PRECONCEPTIONS, and BELIEFS, ONLY.

AND THEN JUST SAYING what the OBVIOUS 'motives' WOULD BE, and EXPLAIN that HOW, ACTUALLY, 'they' DO MATTER.

BUT ALTHOUGH one COULD DO 'this' I WILL NOT, now.

So, it's so odd that you denied you made judgments of all humans at the time of this writing.

AND, I STILL AM DENYING EVER DOING ANY such 'thing'.

You could have saved time and been more honest and agreed that you did make these kinds of negative judgments.

BUT I NEVER MADE 'these kinds of negative judgments'. ONCE AGAIN, I suggest 'you' READ ONLY the ACTUAL WORDS that I SAY, WRITE, and USE here, AND DO 'this' WITHOUT the PRECONCEPTIONS, PRESUMPTIONS, nor BELIEFS, which 'you' ARE currently SHOWING 'you' HAVE and ARE WANTING TO HOLD ONTO here.

Yup, well, there you go. The answers right there in your own words.

YES, THE ANSWERS ARE RIGHT THERE, and RIGHT-HERE, IN MY OWN WORDS.

'you' ARE PROVING MY CLAIMS IRREFUTABLY True. Which, in turn, IS HELPING IN CREATING and REACHING 'the goal' here, which I HAVE SET OUT TO ACCOMPLISH, and CREATE.

You're still confused about what proof is.

REALLY?

Another useless question.

REALLY?

HAVE 'you' EVER CONSIDERED that what is USELESS, TO 'you', IS NOT USELESS, TO "another"?

Or, are 'your' OBVIOUSLY VERY CLOSED VIEWS OF 'things' here PREVENTING and/or STOPPING 'you' FROM SEEING and RECOGNIZING 'this' VERY IRREFUTABLE Fact, AND Truth?

'you' seem to think, or even BELIEVE, that HOW 'you' LOOK AT and SEE 'things' IS THE SAME FOR, or SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR, EVERY one. BUT, this IS the RESULT of a VERY 'ego-centric' 'person/perspective'.

'you', by the way, have STILL NOT INFORMED 'the readers' here OF what 'proof' ACTUALLY IS, EXACTLY, nor WHY 'I' AM ALLEGEDLY STILL CONFUSED ABOUT what 'proof' is.

Actually I did.

Okay. BUT ABSOLUTELY NO INDICATION OF WHEN NOR WHERE 'this' HAS SUPPOSEDLY HAPPENED and OCCURRED WILL BE PROVIDED, BY 'you', right "iwannaplato"?

BUT, 'this' WAS, and STILL IS, a VERY COMMON HABIT OF 'yours' "iwannaplato". Which 'you' OBVIOUSLY TO NOT WANT TO RECOGNIZE, ACKNOWLEDGE, and CHANGE.

Again, you extrapolate from my not doing what you think I should do, to how I am in general and arrive at a negative judgment of me without proof.

IF 'this' IS what 'you' HAVE CONCLUDED, and EXTRAPOLATED, FROM 'my words' here, then OKAY.

Did 'you' ARRIVE AT 'this' VERY NEGATIVE JUDGMENT, OF 'me', WITH or WITHOUT PROOF?

If 'you' HAVE PROOF, then 'you' WILL NEVER EVER PROVIDE 'it' WILL 'you', "iwannaplato"?

AND INSTEAD 'you' ARE FAR MORE LIKELY TO TALK ABOUT, and CLAIM, that I DO NOT KNOW the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 'evidence' AND 'proof', right?

Welcome to the category 'adult humans at the time of this writing.'

Welcome to PROVIDING FURTHER PROOF of JUST HOW MUCH 'you', adult human beings, BACK THEN, WOULD 'anthropomorphize' OTHER 'things'.

And further note some of these generalized negative judgments - this last one, and the also the one about my supposed belief in my own omniscience,

BUT I NEVER BELIEVED 'that'. BUT WHILE 'you' CONTINUE TO IGNORE or DEFLECT FROM what I HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN SAYING, and MEANING, here 'you' WILL NEVER EVER LEARN, and KNOW, 'this'.

Also, did 'you' NOTE 'your' OWN NEGATIVE JUDGMENT? Or, did 'this' SLIP PAST 'you' AS WELL?

as examples - some of them are so obviously incorrect, but further a moment's reflection would show you that you have no justification for them AND they are convenient.

BUT 'they' ARE NOT Incorrect. 'They' ARE ALSO JUSTIFIED, ABSOLUTELY AS WELL by the way.

'you' ARE JUST NOT YET AWARE OF 'this', OBVIOUSLY.

Now humans do this. We are fallible creatures. It happens.

AND, 'you', adult ones, WERE/ARE ALSO VERY, VERY WEAK, AFRAID, and SCARED CREATURES, AS WELL.

As can be VERY CLEARLY SEEN here, in these writings here.

But in the context of dealing with someone who claims transcendence, hints at this incredible role they have,

I, ONCE AGAIN, have NEVER so-called 'hinted' AT 'this'.

ONCE AGAIN, what can be CLEARLY SEEN here is the 'CONFIRMATION BIASES' EXISTING WITHIN 'this one' here, known as "iwannaplato", and EXISTING BECAUSE OF 'its' currently HELD ONTO PRESUMPTIONS and PREEXISTING BELIEF/S.

claims to know the secrets to everything

BUT, ONCE 'they' ARE KNOWN, then 'they', OBVIOUSLY, ARE NOT 'secrets' ANYMORE. Well NOT TO 'those OF us' WHO and UNCOVERED, or LEARNED, 'these things'.

BUT, OBVIOUSLY, 'they' could well STILL BE 'secrets' TO 'you' AND "others" here "iwannaplato".

and implicitly not to be involved in the problems that plague humanity

I AM NOT EVEN AWARE of ANY so-called and/or PERCEIVED 'problems' that ARE, SUPPOSEDLY, 'plaguing' 'you', human beings, here.

So, HOW, EXACTLY, could 'I' IMPLY NOT TO BE INVOLVED IN 'your problems', "iwannaplato"?

it's toxic.

'What', EXACTLY, is, SUPPOSEDLY, so-called 'toxic'?

In this case for yourself and I suppose anyone falling for it, but I don't see that happening, at least not here.

ONCE MORE, I do NOT even KNOW what 'you' ARE REFERRING TO here, EXACTLY.

[Age]

Would 'you' like to EXPLAIN FURTHER and/or ELABORATE on 'this sentence' and CLAIM here?

If no, then is it BECAUSE 'you' would PREFER to KEEP 'this' A SECRET, AS WELL?

I have been pointing out thing supporting this in nearly every posts for days now.

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' have MANAGED TO COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISS EXACTLY what I WAS TALKING ABOUT and REFERRING TO here.

But, 'this' WAS THE COMMON HABIT OF 'those' WHO did NOT LOOK AND LISTEN FROM the Truly OPEN PERSPECTIVE.

'These ones', literally, WHEN 'reading' and/or 'listening' TO "another" were ACTUALLY LISTENING TO what can be called 'the little voice' WITHIN 'those heads', ALONE, or FAR MORE SO.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN and PROVED True, ONCE MORE.

Perhaps you think I didn't do a good job, but asking me if I want to keep it secret is just silly.

Well "others" COULD PROVE 'you' True, AND 'me' Wrong, here. Or, vice-versa, OF COURSE.

So, 'we' CAN JUST WAIT, TO SEE what ACTUALLY TRANSPIRES here, 'now'.

It's gaslighting, though I can't be sure you know you are gaslighting.

I can NOT BE SURE that 'you' WILL EVER DIVULGE what 'gaslighting' even MEANS, or REFERS TO, TO 'you', EXACTLY, NEITHER.

After all, 'you' DO HAVE A VERY COMMON HABIT OF ACCUSING "others" OF 'things', which 'you' REALLY DO NOT LIKE TO DIVULGE what 'they' ARE, EXACTLY.

But, WHY 'they' DID 'this' TYPE OF HABIT IS ALREADY KNOWN, but NOT SO BY 'these people, apparently.

[Iwannaplato]

But that QUESTION, and 'your' REPLY, WAS VERY NECESSARY, and VERY HELPFUL, IN MY Creation here.

No. It was redundant. If not, then it would be wise to respond to every assertion with 'really?' and you should be asking yourself this question after each subthought.

'you' REALLY, REALLY DO HAVE issue/s AND trouble just ANSWERING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, and even just ASKING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, let 'us' NOT FORGET.

False generalization. I do not wish to engage in this process with you the way you want me to. With others who I do not find toxic, I am quite open to clarification. Again a self-serving judgment and belief.

Here 'we' can SEE the RESULT OF A VERY ABUSIVE and thus Wrong 'upbringing'.

I am sorry about what you experienced as a child. I truly am.

I think 'of course they can be' is very clear.

GREAT. THANK 'you' FOR ANSWERING, and CLARIFYING, FINALLY.

I wrote that before the question 'really?' No finally about it. Asked and answered directly.

Imagine a voice in the head or a viral subroutine in a computer, that is always taking up space and time, and doesn't care, really, about priorities, it has the priority of getting the mind to engage and turn back on itself.

One COULD ALSO SAY, 'Imagine a 'being', within a computer or not, who does NOT LOOK AT, READ, nor LISTEN TO ONLY 'the words' PRESENTED BEFORE 'it', and MUCH PREFERS TO LOOK AT and LISTEN TO 'its' OWN VOICE, PRESUMPTIONS, PRECONCEPTIONS, and BELIEFS, ONLY.

People can say all sorts of things.

[Age]

OKAY, BUT YET 'you' STILL CONTINUE TO INTERACT WITH 'me'.

Yes. Because the patterns of toxicity mirror/are similar to patterns I encounter, have encountered and likely will encounter elsewhere.

So, it appears that 'you' now LIKE TO INTERACT WITH what 'you' CLAIM IS 'toxic'. And, NOT JUST WITH 'me' but WITH "others" AS WELL.

Which, ACTUALLY, EXPLAINS A GREAT DEAL OF WHY 'you' CONTINUE TO INTERACT IN 'toxic' WAYS. Especially considering 'those things' that 'you' ARE HOLDING ONTO and MAINTAINING.

So, it gives me an opportunity to learn (hint, hint) and change (hint, hint) in other situations.

What 'you' are 'hint, hinting' AT here I HAVE NO IDEA OF, AT ALL.

One positive thing about the internet is it slows an encounter down.

Okay.

And I have already learned something very important from our interaction, something very valuable to me.

Okay, that IS GOOD that 'you' ARE AT LEAST LEARNING some 'thing' here.

I have described this, several days back, at a very general level, not particularly personally.

Okay, but 'you' OBVIOUSLY MISSED this, which I DESCRIBED EARLIER.

In any case, good observation.

BUT I HAD NOT STOPPED OBSERVING this FROM the OUTSET OF WHEN 'you' SAID and CLAIMED it.

I consider your patterns not just but often toxic and yet I continue to interact.

Okay. So not it appears that even if someone HAS ABSOLUTE True, Right, Accurate, and/or Correct knowledge of 'things' that 'you' do NOT YET KNOW, 'you' STILL DO NOT WANT TO INTERACT WITH 'that one', SOLELY BASED UPON 'your' OWN ASSUMPTION or BELIEF that 'the way' 'that one' interacts is so-called 'toxic', (whatever 'that' ACTUALLY MEANS).

You must realize how many voices, faces, books, films, videos, people, entities say they have these truths.

AND, FOR ABSOLUTELY EVERY one OF 'them', and I CHOOSE TO, I THEN QUESTION and/or CHALLENGE 'them' OVER 'their CLAIM.

What I HAVE ALSO OBSERVED, as well AS REALIZED, 'they', 'RUN AWAY', figuratively speaking, IF and WHEN 'they' can NOT back up AND support 'their CLAIMS'.

Obviously how these people interact and what they say/do are going to affect which ones I move toward in that way and which I ignore (as far as their role at teacher, revealer of (supposed) truth. Someone simply claiming to have this knowledge, well, that's a dime a dozen.

BUT, OBVIOUSLY, some one could just COME ALONG, SAY and CLAIM, ' I HAVE and/or KNOW 'the Truth' ', AND JUST MAYBE 'they' ACTUALLY DO.

Also, 'that one' COULD BE IN NO RUSH, and SO JUST WAITS PATIENTLY.

Or, do 'you' PRESUME or BELIEVE that 'this' could NOT HAPPEN and OCCUR?

Nothing you've expressed so far has struck me as particularly new or of great insight and, as I've said, I find your patterns often toxic.

BUT WHAT I SAY, AND what ARE PATTERNS, are TWO DIFFERENT 'things'.

Now, if 'you' BELIEVE that I have NOT SAID ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' that so-called 'STRUCK' 'you' as so-called 'particularly new', then so be 'it'. 'This' IS PERFECTLY FINE, well WITH 'me'.

And, then, you're not the only option, if you even are an option, for learning about those things.

There was OBVIOUSLY NO suggestion AT ALL that I WAS, nor AM.

Also, do 'you', now, BELIEVE that I could NOT be A so-called 'option'?

I doubt it in the extreme.

WHY, IN 'the extreme'?

Do 'you', currently, HAVE or HOLD SOME PRECONCEIVED IDEA of WHO and/or WHAT could ONLY BE AN 'option'?

And then I have options that have been helpful, some for long periods, and without the toxicity.

'you' REALLY WILL NOT EXPLAIN NOR ELABORATE ON 'your' USE OF THE 'toxicity' word here, will 'you'?

[Age]

Would 'you' like to LEARN A FEW MORE 'things' LIKE:

WHO and WHAT the word God REFERS TO, EXACTLY?
WHO, and WHAT, 'I' AM, EXACTLY?
Who and what 'you' ARE, EXACTLY?
The MEANING of Life?
The PURPOSE of 'your', human beings', lives?
HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?
WHAT and HOW 'you', adult human beings, are the ONLY 'things' WHO DO Wrong and CREATE 'problems'?
WHAT 'problems' ARE, EXACTLY?
HOW TO SOLVE ALL OF 'those problems'?
HOW TO CREATE A Truly Peaceful AND Harmonious world FOR Everyone, and HOW 'this' WILL, and DOES, COME ABOUT?
HOW TO RESOLVE and thus REACH THE RESOLUTION OF ALL so-called 'philosophical discussions/questions'?
HOW the Universe WORKS, EXACTLY?
HOW the Universe CREATES, EXACTLY?
WHAT the Universe IS, EXACTLY?

Sure. Tell us The MEANING of Life.

FINALLY.

Living; being alive.

[Age]

But that QUESTION, and 'your' REPLY, WAS VERY NECESSARY, and VERY HELPFUL, IN MY Creation here.

No. It was redundant.

'you' ARE SHOWING and REVEALING HOW SO 'self-centered' 'you' ARE here "iwannaplato", that 'you' STILL HAVE NOT YET BEEN ABLE TO SEE and RECOGNIZE what I have BEEN SHOWING and REVEALING here.

If not, then it would be wise to respond to every assertion with 'really?' and you should be asking yourself this question after each subthought.

REALLY?

'you' REALLY, REALLY DO HAVE issue/s AND trouble just ANSWERING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, and even just ASKING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, let 'us' NOT FORGET.

False generalization.

NOT BY YOUR WORDS here "iwannaplato".

I do not wish to engage in this process with you the way you want me to.

OKAY.

BUT WHEN "others" DO NOT ENGAGE in THE PROCESS, WITH 'you', the way 'you' WANT, then 'they' ARE so-called 'toxic' or 'their DIFFERENT WAY', which 'you' just DO NOT LIKE is, SUPPOSEDLY, 'toxic', and CLASSIFIED BY 'you' AS 'toxic'. Which just SHOWS and REVEALS the 'self-centeredness' AGAIN, and MORE.

With others who I do not find toxic, I am quite open to clarification.

Well I HAVE YET TO SEE and/or RECOGNIZE 'this' IN 'this forum'.

Again a self-serving judgment and belief.

If 'you' SAY SO.

Here 'we' can SEE the RESULT OF A VERY ABUSIVE and thus Wrong 'upbringing'.

I am sorry about what you experienced as a child. I truly am.

ONCE AGAIN, COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSED WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT and REFERRING TO, EXACTLY.

I think 'of course they can be' is very clear.

GREAT. THANK 'you' FOR ANSWERING, and CLARIFYING, FINALLY.

I wrote that before the question 'really?'

REALLY?

No finally about it.

IF 'you' SAY and BELIEVE SO.

Asked and answered directly.

YES 'you' DID, FINALLY.

Imagine a voice in the head or a viral subroutine in a computer, that is always taking up space and time, and doesn't care, really, about priorities, it has the priority of getting the mind to engage and turn back on itself.

One COULD ALSO SAY, 'Imagine a 'being', within a computer or not, who does NOT LOOK AT, READ, nor LISTEN TO ONLY 'the words' PRESENTED BEFORE 'it', and MUCH PREFERS TO LOOK AT and LISTEN TO 'its' OWN VOICE, PRESUMPTIONS, PRECONCEPTIONS, and BELIEFS, ONLY.

People can say all sorts of things.
[/quote]

VERY, VERY True.

And, I HAVE BEEN USING 'this forum', AND, 'the posters' here to SHOW and REVEAL SO.

[Iwannaplato]

So, it appears that 'you' now LIKE TO INTERACT WITH what 'you' CLAIM IS 'toxic'. And, NOT JUST WITH 'me' but WITH "others" AS WELL.

No. First, there's a big difference between dealing with toxic patterns offline. There can be serious power imbalances or other potential and realized consequences on my life or the lives of others involved. The interactions also, as I mentioned, happen faster out there. It is much easier to be fooled, corrupted, hurt, confused. Online is a different story.

Online, yes, there can be moments I like. And any time an insight comes that part of the process, whether online or offline, I can like. But generally offline it unpleasant. Since these patterns are a potential, I find it valuable to get insights into the patterns in the slowed down, not on the fly way it happens online.

I am not sure where you got the idea that I like it, but I note the word 'appears.'

Which, ACTUALLY, EXPLAINS A GREAT DEAL OF WHY 'you' CONTINUE TO INTERACT IN 'toxic' WAYS. Especially considering 'those things' that 'you' ARE HOLDING ONTO and MAINTAINING.

Since it only appeared to you that way, it would have been more consistant to say it would explain. That is one of your patterns. You open with a qualification, here appears, but then move on and simply assert.

So, it gives me an opportunity to learn (hint, hint) and change (hint, hint) in other situations.

What 'you' are 'hint, hinting' AT here I HAVE NO IDEA OF, AT ALL.

That's ok with me.

Obviously how these people interact and what they say/do are going to affect which ones I move toward in that way and which I ignore (as far as their role at teacher, revealer of (supposed) truth. Someone simply claiming to have this knowledge, well, that's a dime a dozen.

BUT, OBVIOUSLY, some one could just COME ALONG, SAY and CLAIM, ' I HAVE and/or KNOW 'the Truth' ', AND JUST MAYBE 'they' ACTUALLY DO.

Obviously how these people interact and what they say/do are going to affect which ones I move toward in that way and which I ignore (as far as their role at teacher, revealer of (supposed) truth. Someone simply claiming to have this knowledge, well, that's a dime a dozen.

Nothing you've expressed so far has struck me as particularly new or of great insight and, as I've said, I find your patterns often toxic.

BUT WHAT I SAY, AND what ARE PATTERNS, are TWO DIFFERENT 'things'.

Now, if 'you' BELIEVE that I have NOT SAID ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' that so-called 'STRUCK' 'you' as so-called 'particularly new', then so be 'it'. 'This' IS PERFECTLY FINE, well WITH 'me'.

Great.

And, then, you're not the only option, if you even are an option, for learning about those things.

There was OBVIOUSLY NO suggestion AT ALL that I WAS, nor AM.

Also, do 'you', now, BELIEVE that I could NOT be A so-called 'option'?

I doubt it in the extreme.

WHY, IN 'the extreme'?

Because of the toxic patterns mainly.

Do 'you', currently, HAVE or HOLD SOME PRECONCEIVED IDEA of WHO and/or WHAT could ONLY BE AN 'option'?

I'm not sure what that means.

And then I have options that have been helpful, some for long periods, and without the toxicity.

'you' REALLY WILL NOT EXPLAIN NOR ELABORATE ON 'your' USE OF THE 'toxicity' word here, will 'you'?

I have explained in the specific what I thought some of your toxic patterns are.

[Age]

So, it appears that 'you' now LIKE TO INTERACT WITH what 'you' CLAIM IS 'toxic'. And, NOT JUST WITH 'me' but WITH "others" AS WELL.

No. First, there's a big difference between dealing with toxic patterns offline. There can be serious power imbalances or other potential and realized consequences on my life or the lives of others involved. The interactions also, as I mentioned, happen faster out there. It is much easier to be fooled, corrupted, hurt, confused. Online is a different story.

Okay. But 'you' ONCE AGAIN MISSED the POINT I WAS and AM MAKING here.

Online, yes, there can be moments I like. And any time an insight comes that part of the process, whether online or offline, I can like. But generally offline it unpleasant. Since these patterns are a potential, I find it valuable to get insights into the patterns in the slowed down, not on the fly way it happens online.

Okay. BUT what can be SEEN here is the ABILITY of the adult human being to 'reason out', or 'try to justify', 'things'.

I am not sure where you got the idea that I like it, but I note the word 'appears.'

Now here 'this' is WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT.

Which, ACTUALLY, EXPLAINS A GREAT DEAL OF WHY 'you' CONTINUE TO INTERACT IN 'toxic' WAYS. Especially considering 'those things' that 'you' ARE HOLDING ONTO and MAINTAINING.

Since it only appeared to you that way, it would have been more consistant to say it would explain. That is one of your patterns. You open with a qualification, here appears, but then move on and simply assert.

BUT 'you' did NOT HAVE TO LIKE, NOR even DISLIKE, for the EXPLANATION of WHY 'you' CONTINUE TO INTERACT IN 'toxic' WAYS, to BE-COME and BE VERY CLEAR here.

'you' seem to HAVE MISSED 'this' AS WELL.

So, it gives me an opportunity to learn (hint, hint) and change (hint, hint) in other situations.

What 'you' are 'hint, hinting' AT here I HAVE NO IDEA OF, AT ALL.

That's ok with me.

GREAT.

Now, 'we' have A CLEARER EXAMPLE of the NEGATIVE JUDGMENTS, which 'this one' MAKES OF 'me', AND OF WHAT I DO, but YET DOES the EXACT SAME 'thing', 'itself'.

Obviously how these people interact and what they say/do are going to affect which ones I move toward in that way and which I ignore (as far as their role at teacher, revealer of (supposed) truth. Someone simply claiming to have this knowledge, well, that's a dime a dozen.

BUT, OBVIOUSLY, some one could just COME ALONG, SAY and CLAIM, ' I HAVE and/or KNOW 'the Truth' ', AND JUST MAYBE 'they' ACTUALLY DO.

Obviously how these people interact and what they say/do are going to affect which ones I move toward in that way and which I ignore (as far as their role at teacher, revealer of (supposed) truth. Someone simply claiming to have this knowledge, well, that's a dime a dozen.

Nothing you've expressed so far has struck me as particularly new or of great insight and, as I've said, I find your patterns often toxic.

BUT WHAT I SAY, AND what ARE PATTERNS, are TWO DIFFERENT 'things'.

Now, if 'you' BELIEVE that I have NOT SAID ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' that so-called 'STRUCK' 'you' as so-called 'particularly new', then so be 'it'. 'This' IS PERFECTLY FINE, well WITH 'me'.

Great.

And, then, you're not the only option, if you even are an option, for learning about those things.

There was OBVIOUSLY NO suggestion AT ALL that I WAS, nor AM.

Also, do 'you', now, BELIEVE that I could NOT be A so-called 'option'?

I doubt it in the extreme.

WHY, IN 'the extreme'?

Because of the toxic patterns mainly.

WERE 'you' AT ALL AWARE that I WRITE the WAY I DO here FOR A VERY PARTICULAR REASON/LESSON?

Either way, I think 'you' WILL BE VERY, VERY SURPRISED WHAT that REASON/LESSON IS FOR, EXACTLY?

Do 'you', currently, HAVE or HOLD SOME PRECONCEIVED IDEA of WHO and/or WHAT could ONLY BE AN 'option'?

I'm not sure what that means.

'you' SAID and CLAIMED that 'I' am NOT the ONLY option, (even IF I am an option), for learning about those things'. 'That QUESTION' IS JUST ASKING whether 'you' have SOME PRECONCEIVED IDEA ABOUT what COULD BE AN 'option'. 'you' have OBVIOUS ALREADY RULED 'me' OUT as being the ONLY 'option', so I WAS, and STILL AM, CURIOS as to whether 'you' have ANY PRECONCEIVED IDEA/S here ABOUT 'options', FROM WHERE 'you' COULD LEARN ABOUT 'these things' here?

Like ALL OF MY QUESTIONS 'they' are NOT TRICK QUESTIONS. And, 'this Truly OPEN QUESTION' INVOLVES JUST and ONLY A 'Yes' OR 'No' ANSWER.

And then I have options that have been helpful, some for long periods, and without the toxicity.

'you' REALLY WILL NOT EXPLAIN NOR ELABORATE ON 'your' USE OF THE 'toxicity' word here, will 'you'?

I have explained in the specific what I thought some of your toxic patterns are.

BUT 'this' IS NOT WHAT I WAS ASKING ABOUT NOR REFERRING TO.

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' REALLY DO MISS A LOT OF the ACTUAL POINTS I ASK FOR and/or ARE REFERRING TO.

[FlashDangerpants]

Would 'you' like to LEARN A FEW MORE 'things' LIKE:

WHO and WHAT the word God REFERS TO, EXACTLY?
WHO, and WHAT, 'I' AM, EXACTLY?
Who and what 'you' ARE, EXACTLY?
The MEANING of Life?
The PURPOSE of 'your', human beings', lives?
HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?
WHAT and HOW 'you', adult human beings, are the ONLY 'things' WHO DO Wrong and CREATE 'problems'?
WHAT 'problems' ARE, EXACTLY?
HOW TO SOLVE ALL OF 'those problems'?
HOW TO CREATE A Truly Peaceful AND Harmonious world FOR Everyone, and HOW 'this' WILL, and DOES, COME ABOUT?
HOW TO RESOLVE and thus REACH THE RESOLUTION OF ALL so-called 'philosophical discussions/questions'?
HOW the Universe WORKS, EXACTLY?
HOW the Universe CREATES, EXACTLY?
WHAT the Universe IS, EXACTLY?

Sure. Tell us The MEANING of Life.

FINALLY.

Living; being alive.

What a space saving snippet of wisdom. What do you have for "HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?"

[Age]

Sure. Tell us The MEANING of Life.

FINALLY.

Living; being alive.

What a space saving snippet of wisdom.

Well there IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, which suggests that PURE WISDOM and/or IRREFUTABLE Truth IS NOT PURELY SIMPLE, QUICK, SHORT, and/nor EASY.

In Fact 'snippets of wisdom', or 'IRREFUTABLE Truths', ARE VERY QUICK, SIMPLE, and EASY TO FIND. As SHOWN and REVEALED, ONCE MORE here.

What do you have for "HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?"

One is ALWAYS Truly FULLY OPEN, and which IS what HAS ALLOWED 'you', human beings, TO IMAGINE, INVENT, and Create ALL that 'you' HAVE, and WILL, as well as ALLOWED 'you' TO LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and REASON ALL that 'you' HAVE, and WILL.

The other just GRASPS and STORES 'information', which 'you', human beings, HAVE.

Which one is which I will LET 'you' WORK OUT and DECIDE here now "flashdangerpants".

[FlashDangerpants]

FINALLY.

Living; being alive.

What a space saving snippet of wisdom.

Well there IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, which suggests that PURE WISDOM and/or IRREFUTABLE Truth IS NOT PURELY SIMPLE, QUICK, SHORT, and/nor EASY.

In Fact 'snippets of wisdom', or 'IRREFUTABLE Truths', ARE VERY QUICK, SIMPLE, and EASY TO FIND. As SHOWN and REVEALED, ONCE MORE here.

What do you have for "HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?"

One is ALWAYS Truly FULLY OPEN, and which IS what HAS ALLOWED 'you', human beings, TO IMAGINE, INVENT, and Create ALL that 'you' HAVE, and WILL, as well as ALLOWED 'you' TO LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and REASON ALL that 'you' HAVE, and WILL.

The other just GRASPS and STORES 'information', which 'you', human beings, HAVE.

Which one is which I will LET 'you' WORK OUT and DECIDE here now "flashdangerpants".

So the brain stores information and the mind is truly open. But how EXACTLY do they do those things? What I am actually asking is "HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?"

[Age]

What a space saving snippet of wisdom.

Well there IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, which suggests that PURE WISDOM and/or IRREFUTABLE Truth IS NOT PURELY SIMPLE, QUICK, SHORT, and/nor EASY.

In Fact 'snippets of wisdom', or 'IRREFUTABLE Truths', ARE VERY QUICK, SIMPLE, and EASY TO FIND. As SHOWN and REVEALED, ONCE MORE here.

What do you have for "HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?"

One is ALWAYS Truly FULLY OPEN, and which IS what HAS ALLOWED 'you', human beings, TO IMAGINE, INVENT, and Create ALL that 'you' HAVE, and WILL, as well as ALLOWED 'you' TO LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and REASON ALL that 'you' HAVE, and WILL.

The other just GRASPS and STORES 'information', which 'you', human beings, HAVE.

Which one is which I will LET 'you' WORK OUT and DECIDE here now "flashdangerpants".

So the brain stores information and the mind is truly open.

Yes, and the Mind IS ALWAYS OPEN I will REMIND 'you' here.

But how EXACTLY do they do those things?

The Mind JUST IS, ALWAYS OPEN. Like HOW the Universe JUST IS, ALWAYS IN MOTION.

HOW, EXACTLY, the brain does what 'it' does IS from the evolutionary process, which has CREATED EVERY OTHER physical/visible 'thing' to JUST DO what 'they' EACH and ALL DO DO.

How the human brain WORKS, EXACTLY, is by JUST OBTAINING INFORMATION, and JUST STORING INFORMATION, or KNOWLEDGE if one likes.

That is HOW 'they' DO, or WORK, EXACTLY. BUT, MAYBE 'you' WANT TO LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and KNOW MORE here. Which IS the SIGN OF True INTELLIGENCE, and AN EXAMPLE of the UNINTERRUPTED Mind, AT WORK.

If 'you' PREFER I COULD EXPLAIN, or SHOW, IN OTHER WAYS, through STORIES or EXAMPLES if 'this' HELPS. See, EVERY one LEARNS BETTER, or MORE SIMPLY and/or MORE EASILY in SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT WAYS.

What I am actually asking is "HOW the Mind AND the brain WORK, EXACTLY?"

The human brain JUST receives IN-FORM-ATION, through ANY or ALL of the five senses, which FORMS 'you', the person, INTO 'who' 'you' currently ARE, and 'who' 'you' WILL BE-COME. This 'information' IS 'gathered' within the brain, and held within 'thought', and 'stored', as 'knowledge'.

And, the (ALWAYS OPEN) Mind, Itself, is what ALLOWS 'you', human beings, individually, to EQUALLY be ABLE TO LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and REASON ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing', AND, collectively, ABSOLUTELY EVERY 'thing'.

[FlashDangerpants]

How the human brain WORKS, EXACTLY, is by JUST OBTAINING INFORMATION, and JUST STORING INFORMATION, or KNOWLEDGE if one likes.

How does it do that?

[Age]

How the human brain WORKS, EXACTLY, is by JUST OBTAINING INFORMATION, and JUST STORING INFORMATION, or KNOWLEDGE if one likes.

How does it do that?

What does the 'it' word REFER TO, EXACTLY?

Also, did 'you' READ the rest of what I WROTE and SAID in that same post?

[FlashDangerpants]

How the human brain WORKS, EXACTLY, is by JUST OBTAINING INFORMATION, and JUST STORING INFORMATION, or KNOWLEDGE if one likes.

How does it do that?

What does the 'it' word REFER TO, EXACTLY?

Also, did 'you' READ the rest of what I WROTE and SAID in that same post?

I did. But you only mentioned sense data and that's not really interesting. How EXACTLY does the brain acquire KNOWLEDGE though? Knowledge of something less boring than hot and cold or redness v greenness. How EXACTLY does the BRAIN get INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE about HATS and CHEESE?