Philosophy Now Forum

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:40 pm

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:37 pm You cannot experience non existence [ not unless you are actually dead ]
Experience by definition has to be within that what pertains to existence

Ok, so you are necessarily claiming that what you are experiencing now IS existence. Naturally - this is an axiomatic, not an empirical claim.

I have a million counter-hypotheses for you. What you are experiencing right now is NOT existence.

Penal coolony Matrix style.
Purgatory.
Biblical Hell.

Obviously, IF any thing is experiencing, then there is NO non-existence. Surely this is NOT that hard to understand.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:30 am Obviously, IF any thing is experiencing, then there is NO non-existence. Surely this is NOT that hard to understand.

Well, I don't know. You seem to be conflating experiencing with existing.

If they are the same thing then why do you need two different words to say the same thing?

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:51 pm

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:48 pm Imaginary existence is not the same as non existence
Non existence by definition is the absence of everything including imagining what you think may be real
Non existence has no time or space or property or dimension to it at all and so it cannot possibly be real

Look! You are talking about definitions again

I don't care about defining/labeling things. Things are what they are.

I am simply asking you the question. IF you claim that you are able to tell the difference between "existence" and "non-existence"
Then convince me why this is not "non-existence".

Explain the difference.

If there is SOME thing, then that is existence.
If there is NO thing, then that is non-existence.
There is some thing.
Therefore, there is existence.

The difference between 'existence' and 'non-existence' is OBVIOUS.
If "you" are experiencing SOME thing, then that is existence.
If there is NO thing to experience, then that is non-existence.
If there is NO thing, then there is NOTHING, to experience.
"you" are some thing, therefore what "you" experience IS existence.
Now, imagine NOTHING at all, that is non-existence.

Is the DIFFERENCE obvious NOW?

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:37 am If there is SOME thing, then that is existence.
If there is NO thing, then that is non-existence.

This is confusing me.

Is NO thing not a thing?

If there is non-existence then doesn't that mean that non-existence exists?

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:03 pm

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:00 pm

Logic wrote:
Explain the difference

I have explained the difference very simply and precisely but you reject my explanation
And you cannot ask me to explain it again because it will be exactly the same as before

Your explanation is insufficient.

You cannot offer an experiment such that we can DETERMINE whether we are in the existning or non-existing universe.

If there is an 'I', then there is existence.
There is an 'I', therefore there is existence.

OBVIOUSLY, NOTHING is in non-existence.
There can NOT be a thing in a so called "non-existing Universe".

If an 'I' exists, then that is the ONLY experiment NEEDED to VERIFY an existing Universe, OBVIOUSLY.

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:03 pmThus - your definition is a truism. it does not meet the bar for verification.

The "bar" has already been met.

What can NOT be verified and proven is YOUR own BELIEFS.

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:07 pm

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:06 pm Communication would be useless without commonly accepted definitions / meanings
And so you should care otherwise it is a waste of time us exchanging opinions / facts

I can't for the life of me fathom a context, or a practical scenario in which you would ever want to exchange the fact "the universe exists" with me.

Or "X is real".
Or "Y is logical"

Perhaps as a futile attempt at convincing me to sway to your way of thinking....

But none of those are testable/verifiable/falsifiable claims. They are just frameworks for thought.

YES I agree that both X is real and Y is logical ARE both meaningless, worthless, and useless frameworks OF thought.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:42 am If an 'I' exists, then that is the ONLY experiment NEEDED to VERIFY an existing Universe, OBVIOUSLY.

Nonsense! The universe can exist with or without an I.

let me show you. I am giving up my identity and the universe remains standing!!!


The one known as Logik has given up selfhood and no longer recognizes the "I".
Logik is still observing that the universe is standing.

So it seems pretty clear that the universe is not dependent on the I.

The I is coincidental, not incidental.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this: It's just language.

THE UNIVERSE DOES NOT EXIST. A giant wad of candyfloss exists!

You can SAY whatever the hell you want and nothing happens.

AlexW wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:18 pm Isn’t this whole discussion about having beliefs or not getting a bit tiresome?

WHEN, and IF, people STOP saying I have beliefs and accusing me of this, OR provide some actual EVIDENCE that I do have a belief, then I will STOP repeating myself.

Maybe first try to find the one that is meant to have a belief - what exactly is this thing called “Age” that has (no) beliefs?

Yes WHEN, and IF, "they" work this out. THEN, "they" will comprehend and understand what I am saying. And more so WHY I am say it.

AlexW wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:18 pmThe body? No, a body can’t have beliefs, right?

It is correct that a 'body' can NOT have beliefs. But just as true is there can be beliefs within a human body.

AlexW wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:18 pmThe mind. Yes! Maybe? Don’t know?

No. It is that SIMPLE.

AlexW wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:18 pm So... Does the mind (whatever thought arises right now) belong to someone called “Age”?

No. On a few accounts.

AlexW wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:18 pmDoes “Logik” have a mind? Do any of you own a thought, decide to think a thought? Only if you can own/control thought, and if you can find this owner/thinker of thought can you have a belief.

The Owner/Knower of "thought", which obviously can and DOES control "thought" is NOT a "you". It is thee one and only 'I'.

AlexW wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:18 pmOtherwise thoughts labelled as “belief “ simply arise, but they don’t belong to anyone...

Thoughts, themselves, are, literally, the thinking/NOT knowing "one", sometimes referred to as "you (and/or) people".

AlexW wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:18 pmSo, yes, Age is correct in stating “I don’t have any beliefs “ but who is saying that? There is no entity “Age” to say that...

Yes there is and individual self entity, self labelled, "age" but, in the scheme of things, this is NO entity really. it is nothing more than a collection of gathered "thoughts" which thinks it knows what is true, right, and correct. This "no" entity, labelled "age", is NOT worth listening to. In fact "it" is nothing that has ever been worthy of ever being heard. This "no" entity really does NOT deserve to be listened to at all.

BUT, what does deserve to be LISTENED TO and HEARD is the True Self that is WITHIN EVERY thing. This Self WILL TELL "you" what is actually and really True, and Right, and Correct.

If any one Truly WANTS to SEE and UNDERSTAND the True and whole big picture of Life/Everything, then just keep asking clarifying questions, from a Truly OPEN, non-assuming, non-judgmental, and non-believing perspective, then ALL can and WILL be revealed.

The full and whole True Picture of ALL-THERE-IS can be SHOWN and ILLUSTRATED, thus SEEN, literally, through correctly defined words.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:02 am WHEN, and IF, people STOP saying I have beliefs and accusing me of this, OR provide some actual EVIDENCE that I do have a belief, then I will STOP repeating myself.

If controlling what other people say about you is the hill you want to die on - so be it.

You have beliefs. And there is nothing you can do to make me stop saying it.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 6:02 am

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:51 pm All the evidence that has been shown to you , you have rejected

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:47 am I have NOT even seen any thing yet, to reject. I can NOT reject 'that' what I have NOT yet seen.
NO evidence has been shown. You just keep saying it has, without ever actually producing any.

Q.E.D

You may feel happy and satisfied in that "you" have deflected away from the point at hand, which is you STILL CAN, or WILL, NOT provide any actual EVIDENCE, but the only one "you" are FOOLING is your "self". I think it will be found that the readers are SEEING straight past your continual attempts at deflecting away from the FACT, which is; That the very reason you will NOT provide any thing is because you CAN NOT.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:07 am

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 6:02 am

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:51 pm All the evidence that has been shown to you , you have rejected

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:47 am I have NOT even seen any thing yet, to reject. I can NOT reject 'that' what I have NOT yet seen.
NO evidence has been shown. You just keep saying it has, without ever actually producing any.

Q.E.D

You may feel happy and satisfied in that "you" have deflected away from the point at hand, which is you STILL CAN, or WILL, NOT provide any actual EVIDENCE, but the only one "you" are FOOLING is your "self". I think it will be found that the readers are SEEING straight past your continual attempts at deflecting away from the FACT, which is; That the very reason you will NOT provide any thing is because you CAN NOT.

I think that the readers are indeed SEEING straight past your bullshit.
To any rational reader the evidence is clear.

Any evidence I provide - Age will it reject as non-evidence.

And that's evidence that Age doesn't care about evidence.

Age only cares about that which he wants to hear.

Age is seeking validation for his BELIEFS.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:24 am

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:22 am

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:31 pm
No it doesn't.

To me "it" does.

So you believe that I have contradicted myself.

NO. I DO NOT BELIEVE ANY THING.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:24 am When, in fact, I haven't.

IF THAT IS WHAT YOU BELIEVE, then that is just FINE with me.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:24 amIs this evidence that you have beliefs?

NO. I do NOT have any beliefs.

ALL of the evidence I NEEDED is in YOUR words, and is NOW in the posts that I WROTE, which by the way that EVIDENCE I wrote, you have ONCE AGAIN completely omitted from YOUR post here

The readers can inform me if what I wrote was sufficient enough evidence or NOT.

Now, in case you MISSED what I actually wrote, which you do have a very strong tendency to do, I will provide it for you, and SHOW it again.

I asked you if you could SEE a contradiction in writing that 'Everything one says is wrong', and, 'That that statement is '100% certain'?

Instead of providing the yes or no answer, which was all that was required, you preferred to INSIST that those two statements are NOT a contradiction.

Now, this would have to imply that 'Everything "logik" says could be RIGHT' but 'Everything "others" say is WRONG'.

You then insisted that this is WRONG, and stated that 'Everything logik says is wrong' ALSO, which then helps in explaining WHY "logik" keeps missing things that I say, and keeps INSISTING on obviously VERY contradictory things also when unintentional lies being told and said are pointed out.

To me the OBVIOUS IRONY of stating: 'Everything you say IS wrong' and 'I am 100% certain of that', clearly SHOWS that the one that said that subconsciously and/or even unconsciously BELIEVES that they can say things with absolute certainty and BE RIGHT but "EVERYTHING" what others say IS WRONG.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:28 am NO. I DO NOT BELIEVE ANY THING.

I say you do and that's that.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:28 am NO. I do NOT have any beliefs.

Yes you do. And there is nothing you can say or do to convince me otherwise.

Clearly this is the hill you want to die on

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:28 am To me the OBVIOUS IRONY of stating: 'Everything you say IS wrong' and 'I am 100% certain of that', clearly SHOWS that the one that said that subconsciously and/or even unconsciously BELIEVES that they can say things with absolute certainty and BE RIGHT but "EVERYTHING" what others say IS WRONG.

I don't believe any such thing. That is your belief.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:35 am

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:30 am Obviously, IF any thing is experiencing, then there is NO non-existence. Surely this is NOT that hard to understand.

Well, I don't know. You seem to be conflating experiencing with existing.

Just to make it CLEAR that is NOT what I am doing here.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:35 amIf they are the same thing then why do you need two different words to say the same thing?

They are NOT the same thing at all. Never have been, as far as I am aware. You really do NEED to STOP making assumptions, and writing them down as though they are somehow real and the Truth of things. Continually doing this has obviously NOT helped you at all.

YES I agree that I "SEEM" to be doing some thing, from your perspective. BUT that does NOT mean that I am actually doing that thing at all. Just because some thing APPEARS within that body, that does NOT mean that that APPEARANCE is the real and actual Truth of things.

I NEVER conflated 'experiencing' with 'existing' at all.

If this is what you THINK is happening, then why did you NOT just ask for clarification FIRST. Before you went down some off beaten track of ASSUMPTIONS that was leading absolutely NO WHERE other than a completely WRONG conclusion?

If you would LIKE TO read what I wrote again, and then ASK some clarifying questions, then GREAT. Maybe you WILL find fault in what I wrote that way, because you are NOT doing it the way you have been going now. If, however, you do NOT want to read what I write more thoroughly and then ask clarifying questions, then so be it. But you WILL just have to accept that what APPEARED to YOU is completely and utterly false and NOT at all real.

If you WANT to PROVE me WRONG or INCORRECT anywhere, then you will need a bit more than just; "You SEEM to be ...".

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:42 am They are NOT the same thing at all. Never have been, as far as I am aware.

Perfect! Then if experience and existence are NOT the same thing, then surely you can experience non-existence.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:42 am If you WANT to PROVE me WRONG or INCORRECT anywhere, then you will need a bit more than just; "You SEEM to be ...".

I don't want to prove you wrong. We have already established that you are wrong. As am I.