Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Disable your ad blocker to continue using our website.
You can, so call, "argue" to an empty point, if you so wish to, and inevitably quite often that is exactly what you do do. But that is because of how you start ALL of your, so called, "arguments", and because of what you always use for your premises in your "arguments".
If, and when, you use what are or could be essentially just false and wrong premises anyway, then you will enevitably end up at empty points, or just false or wrong conclusions.
My arguments are looping contexts that variables by nature, that intrinsically empty can progress to further contexts...there is no contradiction as contexts are assumed and all assumptions exist through contexts because of there inherent empty nature that allows further contexts to be "assumed" (ie fit in, be imprinted, etc.)
And ALL of this is just an ASSUMPTION, which OBVIOUSLY could ALL be completely and utterly WRONG.
Your, so called "arguments" are so empty that you can not even answer questions, so as to clarify what it is that you really want to express.
Saying every thing is just assumptions, which loop back onto empty points, is not really saying much at all. Although, I suppose, your are proving your empty point about it all leads to an empty point.
Are you at all able to actually pin point it down that what you want us to understand, realize, and know?
Age wrote:
To me motion happens change happens but there is still NO actual thing as time
But you are saying that change happens WITHIN time
Time is simply the name for the distance between points within the spectrum of Existence
So when I say that change happens within time I mean conceptually rather than physically
Its more a mental model rather than actual reality because maybe time doesnt exist at all
Age wrote:
To me motion happens change happens but there is still NO actual thing as time
But you are saying that change happens WITHIN time
Time is simply the name for the distance between points within the spectrum of Existence
So when I say that change happens within time I mean conceptually rather than physically
Its more a mental model rather than actual reality because maybe time doesnt exist at all
Okay, now that sounds far more like the actual Truth of things.
My arguments are looping contexts that variables by nature, that intrinsically empty can progress to further contexts...there is no contradiction as contexts are assumed and all assumptions exist through contexts because of there inherent empty nature that allows further contexts to be "assumed" (ie fit in, be imprinted, etc.)
And ALL of this is just an ASSUMPTION, which OBVIOUSLY could ALL be completely and utterly WRONG.
Your, so called "arguments" are so empty that you can not even answer questions, so as to clarify what it is that you really want to express.
Saying every thing is just assumptions, which loop back onto empty points, is not really saying much at all. Although, I suppose, your are proving your empty point about it all leads to an empty point.
Are you at all able to actually pin point it down that what you want us to understand, realize, and know?
And ALL of this is just an ASSUMPTION, which OBVIOUSLY could ALL be completely and utterly WRONG.
Your, so called "arguments" are so empty that you can not even answer questions, so as to clarify what it is that you really want to express.
Saying every thing is just assumptions, which loop back onto empty points, is not really saying much at all. Although, I suppose, your are proving your empty point about it all leads to an empty point.
Are you at all able to actually pin point it down that what you want us to understand, realize, and know?
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:19 pm
Sculptor believes that there is no experience of time when there is no change. If it is so then why waiting is so bothersome? Obviously, there should be no waiting if there is no passage of psychological time.