Philosophy Now Forum

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:48 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:29 am There is no such thing as nonduality because nonduality is not a thing. Therefore, reality is nondual.

Which is apropos of or pertaining to what? Or are you just fond of repeating the obvious?

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:41 pm

stevie wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:27 am

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:22 pm ... I never said, "truth is an assertion." It is not, it is an attribute. A proposition is an assertion. It makes a difference.

Of course it doesn't. If I use the description of sulfur from the periodic table of the elements and say, "there is no other kind of sulfur," does that make it, "absolute sulfur?"

No but if you don't say that attributes are merely relative conventions the concept "there is no other kind of sulfur" in the context of the periodic table can't be differentiated from an assertion of an absolute truth which you purported to reject.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:22 pm As I pointed out earlier, "absolute truth," is redundant, a proposition is either true or it isn't, ...

A proposition may be called "true" or "false" depending on the convention the proposition maker follows.

You think truth is determined by consensus?

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:41 pm There is only one thing that determines the truth, reality, which is all there is the way it is whether anyone knows or is even aware of that reality or not. Any, "convention," that would base truth on anything other the observable evidence of reality is a lie.

The idea that anything is established by, "convention," is post-modernist nonsense, designed to take in the gullible.

stevie wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 3:05 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:41 pm

stevie wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:27 am
No but if you don't say that attributes are merely relative conventions the concept "there is no other kind of sulfur" in the context of the periodic table can't be differentiated from an assertion of an absolute truth which you purported to reject.


A proposition may be called "true" or "false" depending on the convention the proposition maker follows.

You think truth is determined by consensus?

No but the concept of "truth" itself is a concept of consensus.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:41 pm There is only one thing that determines the truth, reality, which is all there is the way it is whether anyone knows or is even aware of that reality or not. Any, "convention," that would base truth on anything other the observable evidence of reality is a lie.

The idea that anything is established by, "convention," is post-modernist nonsense, designed to take in the gullible.

I accept your metaphysical approach to "truth" and/or "reality" but I don't share it. So it seems you will never be in a position to solve the self contradiction caused by your use of words.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:28 pm No: they're still nonsense because they self-contradict. "I" contradicts with "not-exist," just as "true" contradicts with "nothing is true." They're merely self-defeating. They predicate, in the completion that which is the dead opposite of what is assumed in the subject.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:03 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:28 pm No: they're still nonsense because they self-contradict. "I" contradicts with "not-exist," just as "true" contradicts with "nothing is true." They're merely self-defeating. They predicate, in the completion that which is the dead opposite of what is assumed in the subject.

And yet, here I am - still standing. Undefeated.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 5:39 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:03 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:28 pm No: they're still nonsense because they self-contradict. "I" contradicts with "not-exist," just as "true" contradicts with "nothing is true." They're merely self-defeating. They predicate, in the completion that which is the dead opposite of what is assumed in the subject.

And yet, here I am - still standing. Undefeated.

You are. Still "standing," after a fashion...defiant and uninformed....just as always.

But your words are self-defeated. You cannot save them.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 5:43 pm anthromorphizing my words?...

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 6:10 pm It's you who isn't knowing the difference between "self-defeating claims" and "a man who realizes his argument is defeated."

I'm quite clear on the difference.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 6:39 pm ...self-defeat is impossible while the "defeated" entity continues to exist.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:01 pm No, you get it. You're just trolling.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:09 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:01 pm No, you get it. You're just trolling.

I am not trolling. You just don't get it.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:11 pm Just trolling.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:09 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:01 pm No, you get it. You're just trolling.

I am not trolling. You just don't get it.

stevie wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:14 pm That's actually a statement based on metaphysical speculation. Why? Because saying "You just don't get it" implies a reality beyond human consciousness with the expression "it".

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:16 pm

stevie wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 9:14 pm That's actually a statement based on metaphysical speculation. Why? Because saying "You just don't get it" implies a reality beyond human consciousness with the expression "it".

Except when you are mistaken.

Do you get it?
Do you get metaphysics?

If you fancy yourself a solipsist the term "it" is not forbidden to you.