The Existential Crisis

[Atla]

If that is what you see them as being, and you say they are, then that is what they ARE, to you.

As I have already said and noted; the more that is being written, then the more the statements are being VERIFIED True, Right, and Correct. Thanks to 'you'.

Thus, the more that is actually being REVEALED, again thanks to 'you'.

Those that are starting to discover, learn, and understand and know who and what the 'you' actually IS, will be-coming Truly amazed at what is actually unfolding here NOW, and on reflection, what has been unfolding and coming-to-light.

The Unfolding has spoken. We are all witnessing something beautiful.

As I already implied, the more that you write, then the more is actually being REVEALED.

The Universe just can't keep its mouth shut

[Sculptor]

You could not have misconstrued me anymore than you have here.



If you had decided to CLARIFY with me first, BEFORE you ASSUMED what I was saying and meaning, then you may have come to realize that what you are saying here has absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO with what I actually said, AND MEANT.



But not ALL carry a massive set of 'expectations' at all. In fact, some have absolutely NO 'expectations' at all. But when you use the 'we' word, you maybe referring to some else entirely.

When you stop getting so hysterical and TRY to actually understand what people are trying to communicate to you, you will learn something.

Just as I was implying, if you decided to CLARIFY with me first, then you will SHOW that you are actually trying to understand what I am communicating, to you, and then you will have learned some thing.

Why did you make the assumption that I was "getting so hysterical"?

Now, you have made the other assumption that I am not understanding what you are trying to communicate, and so I did not learn something.

So, what was it that you were trying to communicate to me? What is that thing you want, think, or believe I could learn?

We all, and at all times carry expectations. Your idiotic response is a case in point.

In case you MISSED it, I said; 'But not ALL carry a massive set of 'expectations' at all.

And, if you decide to CLARIFY with me first, then you will SHOW that you are actually trying to understand what I am communicating, to yu, and then you may learn some thing.

Now, you made the HUGE CLAIM that 'we' ALL, and at ALL times carry expectations. I am NOT sure what else you could be 'trying to' communicate here other than "ALL people at ALL times carry expectations". Is this what you are 'trying to' communicate, with me?

If yes, then that WAS ALREADY UNDERSTOOD.

Now, let us see if you understand what I am trying to communicate, to you. Do you understand what I ACTUALLY MEAN when I say; 'Not ALL carry a massive set of 'expectations' at all, as you claimed earlier on?

If yes, then what do I ACTUALLY MEAN?

But if you do not yet understand, then I have ALREADY suggested what to do.

Oh, and by the way, you have now made the claim that "Your idiotic response is a case in point". Are you at all AWARE that just because I do NOT agree with you and do NOT accept your conclusions and claims that this then does NOT mean that I do not understand what you are saying, AND MEANING?

If you were NOT aware before, then you are NOW.

You have expected and only seen what you want to see in what I have written and utterly failed to find anything in it you did not expect to find.

What are you ASSUMING and CLAIMING I "expected" to see in what you have written? And, what have I, supposedly, "utterly failed to find anything in what you wrote, which I supposedly did not "expect" to find?

From my perspective, the VERY THINGS you are ASSUMING and CLAIMING in regards to 'me' is EXACTLY what 'you', yourself, are doing.

I was NOT 'expecting' ANY thing in what you wrote. What I saw was what you wrote, which was;
"we carry a massive set of expectations based upon out existing world view."

If that does NOT mean "we carry a massive set of expectations based upon our existing world view", then what does that actually mean?

Also, I was even OPEN enough to ask you to clarify what the word 'we' here was in reference to, SO THAT I did NOT make any assumptions at all.

I was NOT and am NOT 'expecting' ANY thing at all from your writings.

In that you are, as per usual, wrong on a series of levels you could not even hint at.

There has been probably countless times I have been accused of being "wrong" YET NOT ONE shred of evidence is provided for this. NOT even a hint as to what it is that I am supposedly "wrong" about is even given other than PRIME EXAMPLES like this one, which is: "You are wrong on a series of levels".

Now, do NOT forget you are in a philosophy forum. Therefore, I suggest backing up and supporting this claim with some actual evidence and/or proof, so that we at least have SOME thing to LOOK AT, and DISCUSS.

I purposely came into a philosophy forum to get my views scrutinized, criticized, and challenged. I also wanted to be questioned in regards to what I say. Yet I get more successful attempts at this from kindergarten aged children then I do from most in this forum.

How many times are you going to hint that I am WRONG but NEVER provide any actual thing for your claim other than that is what you BELIEVE?

Have you noticed just HOW MANY TIMES all you do is say what you BELIEVE IS TRUE but NEVER provide any evidence nor proof for it?

Also, if as you propose and claim here that there can be NO perfectly objective observation, then there is also NO "matter of fact" as absolutely EVERY thing would just be a 'matter of opinion', which includes absolutely EVERY thing you have said here. And, which you would have to Honestly admit, EVERY one of your opinions here could also be completely and utterly WRONG.

Since there is no place you can stand without having a point of view, yes, there can be no perfect objective observation.

BUT WHY?

What does 'perfect objective observation' ACTUALLY MEAN, to you.

See, from my perspective, these two things you have proposed here DO NOT necessarily belong with each other. Certainly YOUR conclusion does NOT follow on from YOUR premise.

In the first instance you can only look with your eyes.

So, does this mean to you that ALL, so called, "blind people" can NOT have a point of view?

The human eye is not capable of seeing everything in front of it. People see what they can only see, and usually what they want to see.

They only see what they consider relevant. That immediately eliminates them from being able to see a thing perfectly objectively.

Do you fall into these categories as well?

This is psychology 101.

LOL

If that is psychology 101, then there is about 1 million and 1 more lessons you have to also learn.

Also, you say that like psychology does not change.

Was psychology 101 in the 1920 the SAME as in the year 1980 as it is in the year 2020?

It's not difficult, but you might have to stop bleating and actually THINK for a few seconds.

Once again, each time you talk ABOUT 'me' the resemblance to 'you' is STRIKINGLY BRIGHT.

I shall not be holding my breath.

Again, the resemblance is as CLEAR as daylight.



Again, this has absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER AT ALL to do with what I actually MEAN.

You don't even know what you mean.

Oh, and by the way, I totally agree that;
1. When people disagree about what they have actually observed, then this will cause great confusion among them.
2. The observational process, for some people, is an interpretive process.
3. Some people have a massive set of expectations, based upon their existing, so called, "world" view, which directly results in distorting them from what thee One and ONLY actual universal view IS, and, which directly distorts them from learning HOW to have and be at an advantage point where one can actually obtain a perfect objective observation. (But obviously if one ALREADY BELIEVES that a Truly objective observation is NOT possible, then they would NOT be OPEN enough to SEE this. They would BELIEVE that their observation here is, contradictory, a view that cannot be disputed nor refuted).
4. Observations cannot even be easily expressed and understood, by those with biases.

Also, if you are ever become interested in actually finding out and knowing how your assumptions, interpretations, and biases have so misconstrued what I have actually meant, then I will be more than happy and glad to answer any and all of your clarifying questions.

As can be CLEARLY EVIDENCED ONCE AGAIN, NOT ONE solitary notion of interest NOR investigation to what I am actually saying AND MEANING is being shown.
[/quote]

You are being a bit shouty.
I never read shouty posts.
When you calm down and have something reasonable to say I might even read your post.

[Age]

The Unfolding has spoken. We are all witnessing something beautiful.

As I already implied, the more that you write, then the more is actually being REVEALED.

The Universe just can't keep its mouth shut

If that is what you are hearing, then that must be what IS 'happening'.

[Age]

When you stop getting so hysterical and TRY to actually understand what people are trying to communicate to you, you will learn something.

Just as I was implying, if you decided to CLARIFY with me first, then you will SHOW that you are actually trying to understand what I am communicating, to you, and then you will have learned some thing.

Why did you make the assumption that I was "getting so hysterical"?

Now, you have made the other assumption that I am not understanding what you are trying to communicate, and so I did not learn something.

So, what was it that you were trying to communicate to me? What is that thing you want, think, or believe I could learn?

We all, and at all times carry expectations. Your idiotic response is a case in point.

In case you MISSED it, I said; 'But not ALL carry a massive set of 'expectations' at all.

And, if you decide to CLARIFY with me first, then you will SHOW that you are actually trying to understand what I am communicating, to yu, and then you may learn some thing.

Now, you made the HUGE CLAIM that 'we' ALL, and at ALL times carry expectations. I am NOT sure what else you could be 'trying to' communicate here other than "ALL people at ALL times carry expectations". Is this what you are 'trying to' communicate, with me?

If yes, then that WAS ALREADY UNDERSTOOD.

Now, let us see if you understand what I am trying to communicate, to you. Do you understand what I ACTUALLY MEAN when I say; 'Not ALL carry a massive set of 'expectations' at all, as you claimed earlier on?

If yes, then what do I ACTUALLY MEAN?

But if you do not yet understand, then I have ALREADY suggested what to do.

Oh, and by the way, you have now made the claim that "Your idiotic response is a case in point". Are you at all AWARE that just because I do NOT agree with you and do NOT accept your conclusions and claims that this then does NOT mean that I do not understand what you are saying, AND MEANING?

If you were NOT aware before, then you are NOW.

You have expected and only seen what you want to see in what I have written and utterly failed to find anything in it you did not expect to find.

What are you ASSUMING and CLAIMING I "expected" to see in what you have written? And, what have I, supposedly, "utterly failed to find anything in what you wrote, which I supposedly did not "expect" to find?

From my perspective, the VERY THINGS you are ASSUMING and CLAIMING in regards to 'me' is EXACTLY what 'you', yourself, are doing.

I was NOT 'expecting' ANY thing in what you wrote. What I saw was what you wrote, which was;
"we carry a massive set of expectations based upon out existing world view."

If that does NOT mean "we carry a massive set of expectations based upon our existing world view", then what does that actually mean?

Also, I was even OPEN enough to ask you to clarify what the word 'we' here was in reference to, SO THAT I did NOT make any assumptions at all.

I was NOT and am NOT 'expecting' ANY thing at all from your writings.

In that you are, as per usual, wrong on a series of levels you could not even hint at.

There has been probably countless times I have been accused of being "wrong" YET NOT ONE shred of evidence is provided for this. NOT even a hint as to what it is that I am supposedly "wrong" about is even given other than PRIME EXAMPLES like this one, which is: "You are wrong on a series of levels".

Now, do NOT forget you are in a philosophy forum. Therefore, I suggest backing up and supporting this claim with some actual evidence and/or proof, so that we at least have SOME thing to LOOK AT, and DISCUSS.

I purposely came into a philosophy forum to get my views scrutinized, criticized, and challenged. I also wanted to be questioned in regards to what I say. Yet I get more successful attempts at this from kindergarten aged children then I do from most in this forum.

How many times are you going to hint that I am WRONG but NEVER provide any actual thing for your claim other than that is what you BELIEVE?

Have you noticed just HOW MANY TIMES all you do is say what you BELIEVE IS TRUE but NEVER provide any evidence nor proof for it?

Since there is no place you can stand without having a point of view, yes, there can be no perfect objective observation.

BUT WHY?

What does 'perfect objective observation' ACTUALLY MEAN, to you.

See, from my perspective, these two things you have proposed here DO NOT necessarily belong with each other. Certainly YOUR conclusion does NOT follow on from YOUR premise.

In the first instance you can only look with your eyes.

So, does this mean to you that ALL, so called, "blind people" can NOT have a point of view?

The human eye is not capable of seeing everything in front of it. People see what they can only see, and usually what they want to see.

They only see what they consider relevant. That immediately eliminates them from being able to see a thing perfectly objectively.

Do you fall into these categories as well?

This is psychology 101.

LOL

If that is psychology 101, then there is about 1 million and 1 more lessons you have to also learn.

Also, you say that like psychology does not change.

Was psychology 101 in the 1920 the SAME as in the year 1980 as it is in the year 2020?

It's not difficult, but you might have to stop bleating and actually THINK for a few seconds.

Once again, each time you talk ABOUT 'me' the resemblance to 'you' is STRIKINGLY BRIGHT.

I shall not be holding my breath.

Again, the resemblance is as CLEAR as daylight.



Again, this has absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER AT ALL to do with what I actually MEAN.

You don't even know what you mean.

Oh, and by the way, I totally agree that;
1. When people disagree about what they have actually observed, then this will cause great confusion among them.
2. The observational process, for some people, is an interpretive process.
3. Some people have a massive set of expectations, based upon their existing, so called, "world" view, which directly results in distorting them from what thee One and ONLY actual universal view IS, and, which directly distorts them from learning HOW to have and be at an advantage point where one can actually obtain a perfect objective observation. (But obviously if one ALREADY BELIEVES that a Truly objective observation is NOT possible, then they would NOT be OPEN enough to SEE this. They would BELIEVE that their observation here is, contradictory, a view that cannot be disputed nor refuted).
4. Observations cannot even be easily expressed and understood, by those with biases.

Also, if you are ever become interested in actually finding out and knowing how your assumptions, interpretations, and biases have so misconstrued what I have actually meant, then I will be more than happy and glad to answer any and all of your clarifying questions.

As can be CLEARLY EVIDENCED ONCE AGAIN, NOT ONE solitary notion of interest NOR investigation to what I am actually saying AND MEANING is being shown.

You are being a bit shouty.
I never read shouty posts.
When you calm down and have something reasonable to say I might even read your post.

I might NOT be shouting at all. I might just be, quietly, emphasizing, and doing it in another way of the four or five ways that I use to emphasize.

You would obviously have to LOOK AT a post FIRST, before you could make the assumption/interpretation, "it is a shouty post". If you are just looking for words, which, to you, indicate that "it is a, so called, "shouty" post", so you then can make the pre-decided decision to not read the actual post, then, as I ALREADY MADE CLEAR, but which you OBVIOUSLY would NOT YET KNOW is; it is actually 'you' who is the actual one who, literally, has expected and only seen what you want to see in what I have written and utterly failed to find anything in it you did not expect to find.

'You', once again, are proving, with actual evidence, how you do EXACTLY what you accuse 'me' of doing.

By the way HOW would you KNOW that I do NOT have "something reasonable to say" if you, supposedly, you have NOT 'even' read my post? Your obvious lies or excuses again are strikingly "brilliant".

And, if you supposedly NEVER read, so called, "shouty" posts, then what do you use to gauge what a "shouty" post IS exactly? Also, are you 'even' aware that EVERY one of my posts looks more or less relatively the exact same? So, if one of them is supposedly a, so called, "bit shouty", then they would ALL be the relatively same, and, if you supposedly NEVER read shouty posts, then you would have OBVIOUSLY NEVER read ANY of mine.

Or, do you just decide, at the moment, IF you read or not?

Some might be seeing that actually you read posts but when you do NOT want to SEE what is actually being pointed out in them about 'you', then you just say things like you "NEVER read shouty posts". You also might say this when you do NOT want to answer Honestly the questions being posed to you in those posts. But you will NEVER recognize and SEE these FACTS because you will supposedly NEVER read THIS post.

[Atla]

As I already implied, the more that you write, then the more is actually being REVEALED.

The Universe just can't keep its mouth shut

If that is what you are hearing, then that must be what IS 'happening'.

Says the Universe.

[Age]

The Universe just can't keep its mouth shut

If that is what you are hearing, then that must be what IS 'happening'.

Says the Universe.

Is this, to you, what the Universe says?

[Atla]

If that is what you are hearing, then that must be what IS 'happening'.

Says the Universe.

Is this, to you, what the Universe says?

No, I'm not mentally ill like you

[Age]

Says the Universe.

Is this, to you, what the Universe says?

No, I'm not mentally ill like you

Okay, then ALL is perfectly fine and well. Well, with 'you' anyway, correct?

[Atla]

Is this, to you, what the Universe says?

No, I'm not mentally ill like you

Okay, then ALL is perfectly fine and well. Well, with 'you' anyway, correct?

Word salad

[Age]

No, I'm not mentally ill like you

Okay, then ALL is perfectly fine and well. Well, with 'you' anyway, correct?

Word salad

Is this all you can finish off with?

If I say that you can have the final say, then will that make you happy?

[Atla]

Okay, then ALL is perfectly fine and well. Well, with 'you' anyway, correct?

Word salad

Is this all you can finish off with?

If I say that you can have the final say, then will that make you happy?

Idiot, this is not a debate so there is nothing final to say. It's a fact that you are mentally ill and only spout delusional bullshit, everyone knows it.

[Dontaskme]

If 'you' are saying what is correct or not correct, then that means 'you' know, and, if the only knowing there is, is Consciousness, Itself, then that would mean that 'you' are Consciousness, Itself, correct?

If we truly know that Consciousness is all there is, this question would not arise.

I purposely came into a philosophy forum to get my views scrutinized, criticized, and challenged. I also wanted to be questioned in regards to what I say.

If we truly know that Consciousness is all there is, such questions would not arise, and no answers would ever be needed.

Only you (consciousness) can know what you know. This Consciousness is the only knowing there is - it's blindingly self-evident. No other evidence or clarification is necessary.

.

[Age]

Word salad

Is this all you can finish off with?

If I say that you can have the final say, then will that make you happy?

Idiot, this is not a debate so there is nothing final to say. It's a fact that you are mentally ill and only spout delusional bullshit, everyone knows it.

As long as you are happy to get the last word in and make it KNOWN that 'I' am an "idiot", "mentally ill, and "only spout delusional bullshit", then that is all that matter, correct?

Although, according to your so called "logic", everyone knew this about 'me' already anyway.

[Age]

If 'you' are saying what is correct or not correct, then that means 'you' know, and, if the only knowing there is, is Consciousness, Itself, then that would mean that 'you' are Consciousness, Itself, correct?

If we truly know that Consciousness is all there is, this question would not arise.

But it is because I do NOT know Consciousness is "all there is" I am asking you the question, which you are now 'trying to' deflect from answering.

See, there is obviously more than just Consciousness, as evidenced by these actual words used to communicate between two "things".

I purposely came into a philosophy forum to get my views scrutinized, criticized, and challenged. I also wanted to be questioned in regards to what I say.

If we truly know that Consciousness is all there is, such questions would not arise, and no answers would ever be needed.

Only you (consciousness) can know what you know. [/quote]

BUT, obviously "others" can know what 'you' or 'i' know.

By the way, to me, 'you' is NOT Consciousness.

This Consciousness is the only knowing there is - it's blindingly self-evident. No other evidence or clarification is necessary.

.

But 'you' are NOT answering the actual questions I am asking you.

You keep referring to some thing, which I do NOT yet agree with.

[Atla]

Is this all you can finish off with?

If I say that you can have the final say, then will that make you happy?

Idiot, this is not a debate so there is nothing final to say. It's a fact that you are mentally ill and only spout delusional bullshit, everyone knows it.

As long as you are happy to get the last word in and make it KNOWN that 'I' am an "idiot", "mentally ill, and "only spout delusional bullshit", then that is all that matter, correct?

Although, according to your so called "logic", everyone knew this about 'me' already anyway.

More bullshit