Philosophy Now Forum

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 11:06 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:55 pm I'm just pointing out absurdity.

But you have NOT pointed out 'absurdity' at all. 'you' just SEE and UNDERSTAND 'things' differently than 'I' do.

Much of what you say is contrived absurdity.

If that is what you see and believe it is, then that is what 'it' IS, to you.

But, if you only judge your books by their covers, or judge the words you see on your own first impression, and NEVER look into them NOR CLARIFY, then you will HOLD what you first believe is true.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am
You can try to frame it as just "seeing/understanding things differently" so that you don't have to face what you're actually doing.

IF, and WHEN, you EVER point out what I actually doing, then I will FACE IT.

'you' are the one who does NOT look at and face what you do.

But what you are 'trying to' point out about me is NOT what I am actually doing but rather what you PERCEIVE I am doing, which, to be completely frank AND Honest, may well be two completely different and/or opposing things.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am People on this forum keep pointing this out to you, and you respond with more contrived and dishonest noise to try to justify/validate whatever absurdity you're claiming at that moment --

And, as I keep pointing out, people on this forum do NOT clarify with me BEFORE they make assumptions and jump to conclusions.

I have also pointed out that I write in very specific ways, for very specific reasons.

If you BELIEVE my claims are an absurdity, then GREAT. This is the response that I sometimes want from people in this forum. This is CLEAR EVIDENCE and PROOF just how quickly the brain will close off the OPEN Mind and jump to illogical conclusions, almost immediately. Without even once contemplating whether it would be better to just CLARIFY that, whatever conclusion that it has jumped to, is right or not.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am instead of simply acknowledging that you're momentarily full of crap.

As I have stated numerous times already, I can back up and support my views and claims. But, unfortunately, I have yet to get tested on my ACTUAL views and ACTUAL claims. What most people do here, in this forum, is exactly what you are doing here now in this thread, that is; ASSUMING I am saying and meaning some thing, jumping to a CONCLUSION that your ASSUMPTION is true, right, and correct, and then BELIEVING that what you SEE and UNDERSTAND is absolutely true, right, and correct.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am So it ends up being more of your absurdity on top of your absurdity.

GREAT. If that is what you ASSUME, have CONCLUDED, and BELIEVE is true and right, then that is PERFECT, for me. But, as I have continually suggested, if you want to make a claim, then I suggest that you have at least some thing to back up and support your claims BEFORE you make the actual claim. So, in saying that, how about you find and pick what you claim is my first, supposed, "absurdity", then 'try to' PROVE that you way you have perceived it is how it is EXACTLY what I was saying and actually meaning, and then 'try to' PROVE with sound, logical reasoning how what I am ACTUALLY meaning is an "absurdity".

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am It would be very simple: Just stop making claims!

Some might suggest that you just prove your claims.

If you want to continually make claims, then I suggest you prove them to be true, especially considering the forum that we are in here, now.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am You clearly don't KNOW a lot that you claim to!

Some have already SEEN the actual EVIDENCE and PROOF of this in your very own writings, about 'you'.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am Even if you want to think you do, tap into the awareness that you don't.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 11:06 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:55 pm I don't actually care about your typical answers/excuses.

And this is a typical response from someone who already assumes and believes that they KNOW the truth already.

No, it is the response of someone who has already seen you continually demonstrate being a noisy fraud. There's no reason to keep going down that path with you. You are clearly addicted to going in endless self-absorbed circles of your thoughts, assumptions, and projections. It would be more interesting if you explored/discussed why you do that.

I have explored this quite often, and I KNOW exactly what I am doing, and WHY I am doing it here, in this forum.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:59 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 11:06 pm...in the days of when this is being written.

Oh get over yourself! You're not writing a fucking eternal Bible or history manual for humanity and the Universe.

Is this the absolutely, without doubt, irrefutable CERTAIN Truth?

Or, are 'you' at all somewhat open at all to LOOKING INTO this, and then DISCUSSING this?

If it is the former one, then as someone claims in another thread, then it is 'you' who is NOT the sane person.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 11:17 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 4:30 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:27 pm

And here is just one PRIME EXAMPLE of how 'hell' actually exists, through sound, logical reasoning.

If human beings have agreed upon an area, and labeled that area 'hell', then 'hell' obviously exists, in that form.

People do not go there when they die.
No one who goes there, goes there as a punishment from god.

But if we are talking about another 'hell', then that is another issue, for another discussion.

My words in relation to your picture and words were in reply to your picture of that 'hell'.

What some may be noticing is that what I am doing is HIGHLIGHTING how it is only through CLARITY when we start to FULLY UNDERSTAND what "another" is actually saying, talking about, AND meaning. Because as EVIDENCED and PROVEN here words can actually be in reference to many different things and therefore can mean many different things. So, it is only AFTER clarifying with "another" can we Truly KNOW what the "other" is Truly talking about, AND MEANING.

If people, however, want to talk about and discuss another place, where people supposedly go "there" when they die, and/or the place where people supposedly go "there" as a punishment from God, then let us discuss that and talk about that 'place'. I am sure that through a Truly OPEN and Honest, peaceful discussion sound, logical reasoning will come through forthwith.

Listen, Atla II, if you have nothing to say then don't post.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:07 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 11:17 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 4:30 pm

People do not go there when they die.
No one who goes there, goes there as a punishment from god.

But if we are talking about another 'hell', then that is another issue, for another discussion.

My words in relation to your picture and words were in reply to your picture of that 'hell'.

What some may be noticing is that what I am doing is HIGHLIGHTING how it is only through CLARITY when we start to FULLY UNDERSTAND what "another" is actually saying, talking about, AND meaning. Because as EVIDENCED and PROVEN here words can actually be in reference to many different things and therefore can mean many different things. So, it is only AFTER clarifying with "another" can we Truly KNOW what the "other" is Truly talking about, AND MEANING.

If people, however, want to talk about and discuss another place, where people supposedly go "there" when they die, and/or the place where people supposedly go "there" as a punishment from God, then let us discuss that and talk about that 'place'. I am sure that through a Truly OPEN and Honest, peaceful discussion sound, logical reasoning will come through forthwith.

Listen, Atla II, if you have nothing to say then don't post.

But I say what I want to say.

If you see what I say as being "nothing", then that is what it will be, to you.

If you have nothing to say about 'hell', then just leave it at that.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 12:27 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:07 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 11:17 pm

But if we are talking about another 'hell', then that is another issue, for another discussion.

My words in relation to your picture and words were in reply to your picture of that 'hell'.

What some may be noticing is that what I am doing is HIGHLIGHTING how it is only through CLARITY when we start to FULLY UNDERSTAND what "another" is actually saying, talking about, AND meaning. Because as EVIDENCED and PROVEN here words can actually be in reference to many different things and therefore can mean many different things. So, it is only AFTER clarifying with "another" can we Truly KNOW what the "other" is Truly talking about, AND MEANING.

If people, however, want to talk about and discuss another place, where people supposedly go "there" when they die, and/or the place where people supposedly go "there" as a punishment from God, then let us discuss that and talk about that 'place'. I am sure that through a Truly OPEN and Honest, peaceful discussion sound, logical reasoning will come through forthwith.

Listen, Atla II, if you have nothing to say then don't post.

But I say what I want to say.

If you see what I say as being "nothing", then that is what it will be, to you.

If you have nothing to say about 'hell', then just leave it at that.

If you have nothing to say on this topic then try another one, and stop pissing people about.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:45 pm I do NOT believe any such thing.

Reality does not make such a claim.

Any such claim comes from the idea there is a someone, or a mind that can know of SUCH NOT'S AND THINGS AS SUCH..when in reality, NO such NOTS AND THINGS AND SUCHES exist, except in this CONception...aka fictional story no one is thinking, reading nor writing.

To artificially claim and believe there is a someone/mind who can claim ''my views that 'hell' exists are based on sound, logical reasoning.'' is based on groundless empty assumptions arising from absolutely nowhere to no one, for no reason, other than to create a story based on nothing but the nothingness in which it is sourced.

So even the claim ( I do NOT believe any such thing) is a BELIEF..otherwise the claim could not be known, it wouldn't even show up on the screen of consciousness if the belief was not known.

Bye the way..it is not known what knows...except what is believed to be known.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:45 pm
This is a bit like the diagram below. Not getting any where is being stuck here now, or no where, really. If you are getting no where, then you are stuck now here, which some would say, " is, literally, 'hell' ".

See, this is where you are continuously going astray with your flawed reasoning, again and again.

You claim and believe using a diagram, which is nothing more than an empty image. You use an empty image and then claim that empty image is literally what 'hell' is like...and this is where you are well and truly flawed in the way you communicate what you are so desperately trying to communicate. In fact this 'hell' idea is just that, it's an idea made up, it's a total fiction upon real reality.

The image is not separate from the seer, and is all the seer has got to use as prove of this 'hell' existing, as and through the empty image. The empty image can only be an image of the imageless seer...and is why you are always playing with nothing but the emptiness that is your own believed seeing mind. You are literally making your story up as you go along, in the way it suits you only, as you perceive it to be from your own personal perspective, which can be nothing more than a self bias assumption.

Bye the way, there is nothing in this reality to make anything with or of, except belief and assumption that arise as an idea from nothingness...and so I will keep pointing this obvious flaw out to you that you believe 'hell' exist, because liars are just not welcome in reality, in truth, reality never lies...just as the camera lens which is the all seeing eye never lies. For the all seeing eye is emptiness appearing full. Full of emptiness.

.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:00 pm
But 'I' was NEVER 'dissatisfied'.

Liar.

The mind is never satisfied. That's why it cannot shut up, like it has proved over and over again.

This 'I' thingy is never satisfied as long as it is able to make the claim it is never dissastified, simple logic states that there is no such state as a none satisfactory state...the claimed non-satisfactory state just does not exist, it's another one of your made up ideas.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmIs it possible that the word 'ken' could be a label for some thing else?

Well in all common parlance, the name is usually thought of as being a male name. But if you want to play silly minds games, then i suppose the name 'ken' could possibly be a label for 'baked beans', so yeah, my gosh, why on earth didn't I think of that.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmOr, was that never considered?

Obviously not this time.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmWas just what you assumed was/is true, was/is just believed to be true also?

Well yah, kind of like the way you assume, believe to be true the character labeled dontaskme is assumed believed to be true.
I'm now guessing that next time, you'll be informing me that the female name Wendy, is really just a label for peanut butter.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmIs it NOT possible that the label "ken" could refer to any thing other than a male human being?

The label was referring to the data showing up in my consciousness, that this consciousness then acted to respond to, which was a name identified as a male name, and at the time of that knowing, there was no other thought arising as to what other thing the label could have stood for, so I really have absolutely no idea what point you are failing to attempt to make here.
I simply said that the female is smarter than the male...And in no way was a reference being made to the character known as Age in that statement...but that you believed and assumed there was, was just another assumption you claim you never make or have, but really you do, because you do it all the time, you just cannot help it, especially when you believe in the reality of such characters, which you do.

If you didn't believe in the characters existence, then you would not be able to talk about them in the way you do, they would not even enter your mind, but they obviously do enter your mind, because everything you say and do is all inside your own little noggin.



.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:10 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 12:27 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:07 am
Listen, Atla II, if you have nothing to say then don't post.

But I say what I want to say.

If you see what I say as being "nothing", then that is what it will be, to you.

If you have nothing to say about 'hell', then just leave it at that.

If you have nothing to say on this topic then try another one, and stop pissing people about.

I have said what I have wanted to say. Now, if any one has any interest, then they will show that by either challenging what I have said and/or ask me some clarifying questions. But, OBVIOUSLY if people SEE NOTHING in what I have said, then I suggest they just IGNORE the 'nothing', COMPLETELY.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:35 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:45 pm I do NOT believe any such thing.

Reality does not make such a claim.

Any such claim comes from the idea there is a someone, or a mind that can know of SUCH NOT'S AND THINGS AS SUCH..when in reality, NO such NOTS AND THINGS AND SUCHES exist, except in this CONception...aka fictional story no one is thinking, reading nor writing.

Is this a claim made by 'reality', or by some 'thing' else?

See, if, as 'you propose and CLAIM, reality does not make such a claim, then who and/or what just made this claim under the label "dontaskme"?

If reality did not make that claim, then who did?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:35 pm To artificially claim and believe there is a someone/mind who can claim ''my views that 'hell' exists are based on sound, logical reasoning.'' is based on groundless empty assumptions arising from absolutely nowhere to no one, for no reason, other than to create a story based on nothing but the nothingness in which it is sourced.

And, a claim could also be made that; To artificially claim and believer there is a someone/mind who can claim "views and claims are based on groundless empty assumptions arising from absolutely nowhere to no one, for no reason, other than to create a story based on nothing but the nothingness in which it is sourced.

BUT, what purpose would this serve to make such a claim? And, also, by the way, who possibly would, or who even could, make such a claim as this?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:35 pm So even the claim ( I do NOT believe any such thing) is a BELIEF..otherwise the claim could not be known, it wouldn't even show up on the screen of consciousness if the belief was not known.

This OBVIOUS ABSURDITY of this is BLINDING.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:35 pm Bye the way..it is not known what knows...except what is believed to be known.

But 'I' KNOW what knows.

Just because 'you' do NOT believe this and/or do NOT like this FACT, that does NOT mean that 'you' are even close to thee Truth of things here.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:45 pm
This is a bit like the diagram below. Not getting any where is being stuck here now, or no where, really. If you are getting no where, then you are stuck now here, which some would say, " is, literally, 'hell' ".

See, this is where you are continuously going astray with your flawed reasoning, again and again.

You claim and believe using a diagram,

I do NOT believe any thing. Although you obviously ASSUME and BELIEVE I do. Even though you have absolutely NO actual evidence NOR proof of this, and NEVER actually could, from the definition of 'believe', which I use, you are NOT able to see any thing other than what the BELIEF is.

The very nature of BELIEFS, themselves, are unyielding, even to thee actual Truth of things, and this is WHY 'you' can NOT SEE what is just BLATANTLY True.

By the way, I just replied to diagrams that were 'used' by "OTHER" posters in this thread and forum. The diagram that you have reference here was actually USED by 'you', the one known as "dontaskme". I just replied to the post that that diagram was in.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm which is nothing more than an empty image.

So WHY did 'you', "dontaskme", post an 'empty image'.

You do recall that it was 'you' who POSTED and USED that EMPTY IMAGE, correct?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm You use an empty image and then claim that empty image is literally what 'hell' is like...

In WHAT UNIVERSE have I EVER claimed that that EMPTY IMAGE, which YOU POSTED, "is LITERALLY what 'hell' is like".

I USED the WORDS and SAID, 'This is a BIT like the diagram below'. The 'diagram', which 'you' POSTED, that is.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm and this is where you are well and truly flawed in the way you communicate what you are so desperately trying to communicate.

I am, obviously, NOT 'trying to' communicate ANY thing here, in this forum. This is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS by the very FACT that I have said that my INTENTION is to NOT communicate, what I want to communicate, here, in this forum.

So, besides the very FACT that I am NOT 'trying to' communicate ANY thing here, in this forum, I am also OBVIOUSLY NOT 'desperately' 'trying to' communicate ANY thing here, in this forum, also.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm In fact this 'hell' idea is just that, it's an idea made up, it's a total fiction upon real reality.

But 'you' idea of 'real reality' is there are NO human beings.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm The image is not separate from the seer, and is all the seer has got to use as prove of this 'hell' existing, as and through the empty image. The empty image can only be an image of the imageless seer...and is why you are always playing with nothing but the emptiness that is your own believed seeing mind.

Is this what "dontaskme" does as well?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm You are literally making your story up as you go along, in the way it suits you only, as you perceive it to be from your own personal perspective, which can be nothing more than a self bias assumption.

'It' can in fact be some thing else.

Or, is what you claim here the REALLY 'real reality'?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm Bye the way, there is nothing in this reality to make anything with or of, except belief and assumption that arise as an idea from nothingness...

So, because you are, as they say, "hell bent" on opposing and 'trying to' argue against 'me' and what 'I say', you have now come up with the idea that 'belief' and 'assumption' are the ONLY things 'really real' in reality but which have actually risen as an idea from nothingness also, because really, to you, there is nothing in 'this' 'reality', anyway. Is this somewhat correct?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm and so I will keep pointing this obvious flaw out to you that you believe 'hell' exist, because liars are just not welcome in reality, in truth, reality never lies...

But I do NOT believe 'hell' exists. Did you FORGET?

I have a view of what 'hell' is, which fits in with the religious view of 'hell', and which will help in explaining EXACTLY HOW human beings can and will eventually come to be living in 'heaven', or in peace and harmony, here on earth.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm just as the camera lens which is the all seeing eye never lies. For the all seeing eye is emptiness appearing full. Full of emptiness.

.

Okay, as long as 'you' have absolutely ALL-OF-this CLEAR and FULLY UNDERSTOOD, then that is all that really matters, correct?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:26 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:00 pm
But 'I' was NEVER 'dissatisfied'.

Liar.

The mind is never satisfied.

To me, the Mind is always OPEN.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:26 pm That's why it cannot shut up, like it has proved over and over again.

But that is NOT the Mind, to me.

What is the 'mind', to you?

Also, what do you use as evidence that the mind cannot shut up? The incessant chatting within that head, and the continual 'need' from that one to say things in this forum?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:26 pm This 'I' thingy is never satisfied as long as it is able to make the claim it is never dissastified, simple logic states that there is no such state as a none satisfactory state...the claimed non-satisfactory state just does not exist, it's another one of your made up ideas.

And, what are 'your' ideas if they are NOT made up?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmIs it possible that the word 'ken' could be a label for some thing else?

Well in all common parlance,

From the definition of the word 'parlance' that I just looked at, then the contradiction and irony here is striking and humorous. So, thank 'you' once again.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm the name is usually thought of as being a male name.

You appear to have MISSED what the clarifying question was actually asking. Here it is again;
Is it possible that the word 'ken' could be a label for some thing else?

To give you a hint at what the answer could possibly be, then the answer could possibly be either;
Yes it is possible. Or,
No it is not possible.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm But if you want to play silly minds games,

But I am the one who is just asking the very simple clarifying questions.

You are the one talking about other things.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm then i suppose the name 'ken' could possibly be a label for 'baked beans', so yeah, my gosh, why on earth didn't I think of that.

So, thee True and Right Answer to my very simple clarifying question IS' - Yes it is possible that the word "ken" could have been used for some thing other than a 'male'. Therefore, just as I have previously suggested, if 'you' want to find out, and thus KNOW, what thee actual Truth IS, then do NOT assume NOR believe absolutely ANY thing, and just ask clarifying questions until you DISCOVER or UNCOVER thee actual Truth.

All of this is very basic, very simple, and very easy REALLY.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmOr, was that never considered?

Obviously not this time.

Okay. Oh, and by the way, THANK YOU for being Honest, this time.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmWas just what you assumed was/is true, was/is just believed to be true also?

Well yah, kind of like the way you assume, believe to be true the character labeled dontaskme is assumed believed to be true.

This sentence does NOT, and I repeat DOES NOT, make sense to me.

This is BECAUSE I do NOT assume NOR believe any such thing.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm I'm now guessing that next time, you'll be informing me that the female name Wendy, is really just a label for peanut butter.

You can guess/assume that for as long as you like. But if you do assume/guess this, then I would ask 'you', WHY?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:23 pmIs it NOT possible that the label "ken" could refer to any thing other than a male human being?

The label was referring to the data showing up in my consciousness,

And this would be a GREAT TIME to HIGHLIGHT just how the human brain works. See, 'it' can only work on the data, which has already been installed within it.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm that this consciousness then acted to respond to,

But what do 'you' mean by 'this' consciousness?

I have asked you previously to clarify just how many Consciousnesses there are, and you informed me that there is only One. But now you are suggesting that there are more than One Consciousness because, to me, the One Conscious SEES and KNOWS WHAT data within 'that' brain IS WRONG and WHY it IS WRONG.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm which was a name identified as a male name, and at the time of that knowing, there was no other thought arising as to what other thing the label could have stood for, so I really have absolutely no idea what point you are failing to attempt to make here.

The POINT WAS 'you' were ASSUMING that the word 'ken' CAN ONLY refer to ONE THING ONLY. But now the POINT IS, IF 'you' EVER want to 'learn MORE' or become WISER, and/or correct that ALREADY held 'data', then I suggest that you STOP ASSUMING things, and CLARIFY FIRST.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm I simply said that the female is smarter than the male...

And is this based on what is ACTUALLY True, which fits in PERFECTLY with Reality? Or, is this some idea, which just coincidentally was just made up from and thus came from the data within the brain of one of the female gendered one of the species, known as 'human being'?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm And in no way was a reference being made to the character known as Age in that statement...

Is this ABSOLUTELY True?

After all the words under the label "dontaskme" did actually say;
And always remember this Age, the female is smarter than the male. But don't take that personally,

If 'you' were, in NO way, making a reference to the, so called, "character" of the one known as "age", then what did you mean by, "don't take that personally"?

Also, how is stating that the female is smarter than the male a, so called, "metaphorical meaning for oneness" exactly?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm but that you believed and assumed there was, was just another assumption you claim you never make or have, but really you do, because you do it all the time, you just cannot help it, especially when you believe in the reality of such characters, which you do.

Okay, if this is what you ASSUME and BELIEVE is true, then this MUST BE TRUE, to you.

There is OBVIOUSLY absolutely NOTHING that can be said NOR shown to a human being with a BELIEF, which could or would show otherwise. This has been PROVEN over and over again, countless times throughout human history.

While you BELIEVE what you do, then there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the Universe, NOR even the Universe, Itself, which could SHOW you otherwise. So, as I say, I just let 'you' BELIEVE whatever 'you' want to BELIEVE is true.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:52 pm If you didn't believe in the characters existence, then you would not be able to talk about them in the way you do, they would not even enter your mind, but they obviously do enter your mind, because everything you say and do is all inside your own little noggin.



.

But this ONLY goes for 'me' correct?

Because EVERY 'thing' 'you' say and do is NOT inside "your", so called, "own little noggin", correct?

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 2:40 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:35 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:45 pm I do NOT believe any such thing.

Reality does not make such a claim.

Any such claim comes from the idea there is a someone, or a mind that can know of SUCH NOT'S AND THINGS AS SUCH..when in reality, NO such NOTS AND THINGS AND SUCHES exist, except in this CONception...aka fictional story no one is thinking, reading nor writing.

Is this a claim made by 'reality', or by some 'thing' else?

See, if, as 'you propose and CLAIM, reality does not make such a claim, then who and/or what just made this claim under the label "dontaskme"?

If reality did not make that claim, then who did?

There is no WHO ...the label / concept OF ANY THING is the known. It is NOT KNOWN what is the ACTUAL source aka the WHO of all that is known.

There is no one making a claim except in this conception labeled ( I ) which is a knowledge arising from an unknown source.
Why an unknown source - and not a known source? is because an unknown doesn't exist for the mind, the mind can only identify with a known source. And so even known sources are also knowns that cannot know anything.

For example, even to say 'I am' the source of knowing..is also a known...so the point being made is that there is NO KNOWN beginning nor ending that can be known AS AN ORIGINAL source of any thing KNOWN - and is why thee actual SOURCE of any thing known is unknowable...and will always remain a total mystery for ever eternally. Some people, aka fictional characters known as people refuse to accept or believe that.

And is why all claims of ownership of knowledge is a fictional untrue, for knowledge aka this fiction, can only point to the illusory nature of reality.

What is meant by reality does not make a claim - is like saying a tree can make a claim that is it a tree, or the sky can make a claim that it is the sky.
Well it's the same for any concept, a concept cannot make any claim of ownership, or purport to be the KNOWER without turning this knower into a known, a known that cannot know. So even claiming there is a SOURCE is also a known, aka knowledge, aka a fiction.

This is very difficult for the mind to grasp, because the mind is so used to dealing with conceptual KNOWNS only....it has no knowledge of their source, which is the unknown.



.

Dontaskme wrote:
And in no way was a reference being made to the character known as Age in that statement...

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:53 amIs this ABSOLUTELY True?

After all the words under the label "dontaskme" did actually say;
And always remember this Age, the female is smarter than the male. But don't take that personally,

There is nothing absolutely true about any story - the statement is a fictional story Age. How many more times do you want me to repeat that all claimed knowledge... is a fictional story, which absolutely is void of any absolute truth to it, ..except aS A BELIEF ..which is just another lie.


.