The Philosophy Discussion Forum

LuckyR wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 7:46 am

Did you say "yes" vs "no" to saying 6? And 7? And 8? Etc. Probably not. If not, then among an infinite number of integers, you decided to consider 5 (not binary). After that non binary decision, you made a second binary decision to, in fact select 5.

I’ve heard about this so called “secondary overlaying phenomenon” where a random thought comes to one’s mind. It seems thoughts arise spontaneously, no one chooses them to appear. No one is controlling, being author, or being the ultimate decision maker as to which thought is going to arise in one’s mind. Thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order.

So who ultimately decides to say yes or no to a thought? The answer is, the one aware of the thought decides.

There’s no thought known without someone to be aware of the thought. No thought without a thinker, no thinker without a thought < That’s known as epistemology processing.

While it may or may not be true that reality is a simulation or A.I.
Part of the whole program is to be a human being, making binary decisions, simply because a human being doesn’t make a particular thought arise. But a human being can say yes or no to a thought once it has arrived in cognition and then recognised.

This secondary phenomenon is why knowledge is a binary process of brain activity. There maybe many nuances swirling around, but ultimately all final decisions are binary.

Ultimately, to the sense of self, the separate I who is aware of thought. That’s the only reality known ‘to wit’ where knowing requires knowledge.While of course recognising the infinite spectrum of possibilities can lead to more informed,effective, better decision making. Ultimately a yes or a no is always the final answer. That’s the whole point of this thread, guys, come on now, let’s just be simple minded about this.Why complicate philosophy.Do you want to give yourself a headache, or not.

Yes or no?

Does it matter if reality is a simulation A.I. generated phenomena or not. The fact that reality is remarkably real to the senses is all that matters.

What does it matter that conscious decisions are unconsciously made, and only consciously recognised as a seemingly (secondary reality)
Duality is all that is known, after all < That right there indicates the binary nature of ultimate decision making.

The binary nature of existence is the unconscious made conscious.

What's the point of a simulation, if it's not going to appear realistic?

The sense of ( i ) making a decision is part of the matrix, that we're all a participant of.

If you do not want to play the matrix game, then stop informing yourself you have made a decision.
Stop telling yourself you have a free will to choose between a yes or a no.

How do you stop yourself or tell yourself you are not making a binary decision?
You simply, make the decision of either yes or no, and then after you have made it, you then say to yourself, I didn't make that decision, that decision was a non-binary decision, actually. No one actually made that binary decision.
That's how you know you've not only made a binary decision, you've also denied you have made a binary decision, making the binary non-binary. Or, was that the non-binary made binary.

Does all this nonsense make sense now?

Does the universe exist?

Yes or No ?

Fairy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 10, 2025 7:27 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 7:46 am

Did you say "yes" vs "no" to saying 6? And 7? And 8? Etc. Probably not. If not, then among an infinite number of integers, you decided to consider 5 (not binary). After that non binary decision, you made a second binary decision to, in fact select 5.

I’ve heard about this so called “secondary overlaying phenomenon” where a random thought comes to one’s mind. It seems thoughts arise spontaneously, no one chooses them to appear. No one is controlling, being author, or being the ultimate decision maker as to which thought is going to arise in one’s mind. Thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order.

So who ultimately decides to say yes or no to a thought? The answer is, the one aware of the thought decides.

There’s no thought known without someone to be aware of the thought. No thought without a thinker, no thinker without a thought < That’s known as epistemology processing.

While it may or may not be true that reality is a simulation or A.I.
Part of the whole program is to be a human being, making binary decisions, simply because a human being doesn’t make a particular thought arise. But a human being can say yes or no to a thought once it has arrived in cognition and then recognised.

This secondary phenomenon is why knowledge is a binary process of brain activity. There maybe many nuances swirling around, but ultimately all final decisions are binary.

Like I said before, you're right, all FINAL decisions are binary. If you want to believe that creating Hamlet was a series of "thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order" in Shakespeare's brain, that's your opinion. But by golly, his "final" decision to take the last manuscript to the publisher was "binary". Bravo, you're right! Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:26 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 10, 2025 7:27 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 7:46 am

Did you say "yes" vs "no" to saying 6? And 7? And 8? Etc. Probably not. If not, then among an infinite number of integers, you decided to consider 5 (not binary). After that non binary decision, you made a second binary decision to, in fact select 5.

I’ve heard about this so called “secondary overlaying phenomenon” where a random thought comes to one’s mind. It seems thoughts arise spontaneously, no one chooses them to appear. No one is controlling, being author, or being the ultimate decision maker as to which thought is going to arise in one’s mind. Thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order.

So who ultimately decides to say yes or no to a thought? The answer is, the one aware of the thought decides.

There’s no thought known without someone to be aware of the thought. No thought without a thinker, no thinker without a thought < That’s known as epistemology processing.

While it may or may not be true that reality is a simulation or A.I.
Part of the whole program is to be a human being, making binary decisions, simply because a human being doesn’t make a particular thought arise. But a human being can say yes or no to a thought once it has arrived in cognition and then recognised.

This secondary phenomenon is why knowledge is a binary process of brain activity. There maybe many nuances swirling around, but ultimately all final decisions are binary.

Like I said before, you're right, all FINAL decisions are binary. If you want to believe that creating Hamlet was a series of "thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order" in Shakespeare's brain, that's your opinion. But by golly, his "final" decision to take the last manuscript to the publisher was "binary". Bravo, you're right! Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Yes, that’s fine, I think it’s obvious to all and sundry that we have reached an accord. Every decision we make is binary.

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:40 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:26 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 10, 2025 7:27 am

I’ve heard about this so called “secondary overlaying phenomenon” where a random thought comes to one’s mind. It seems thoughts arise spontaneously, no one chooses them to appear. No one is controlling, being author, or being the ultimate decision maker as to which thought is going to arise in one’s mind. Thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order.

So who ultimately decides to say yes or no to a thought? The answer is, the one aware of the thought decides.

There’s no thought known without someone to be aware of the thought. No thought without a thinker, no thinker without a thought < That’s known as epistemology processing.

While it may or may not be true that reality is a simulation or A.I.
Part of the whole program is to be a human being, making binary decisions, simply because a human being doesn’t make a particular thought arise. But a human being can say yes or no to a thought once it has arrived in cognition and then recognised.

This secondary phenomenon is why knowledge is a binary process of brain activity. There maybe many nuances swirling around, but ultimately all final decisions are binary.

Like I said before, you're right, all FINAL decisions are binary. If you want to believe that creating Hamlet was a series of "thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order" in Shakespeare's brain, that's your opinion. But by golly, his "final" decision to take the last manuscript to the publisher was "binary". Bravo, you're right! Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Yes, that’s fine, I think it’s obvious to all and sundry that we have reached an accord. Every decision we make is binary.

Yup, every final decision.

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:48 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:40 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:26 am

Like I said before, you're right, all FINAL decisions are binary. If you want to believe that creating Hamlet was a series of "thoughts simply arise out of nowhere for no reason, purpose or order" in Shakespeare's brain, that's your opinion. But by golly, his "final" decision to take the last manuscript to the publisher was "binary". Bravo, you're right! Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Yes, that’s fine, I think it’s obvious to all and sundry that we have reached an accord. Every decision we make is binary.

Yup, every final decision.

You can only make a final decision.

Every decision made is final. There’s no Time Machine.

..well said.

LuckyR is confused by selection alternatives and the conscious actual decision one makes.

True atto.

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:54 am You can only make a final decision.

Every decision made is final. There’s no Time Machine.

Is that your final answer, or are you going to change it to a new final answer?

You are failing to differentiate between reversible and irreversible decisions.

Don't like your "final" decision on the t-shirt you are wearing? Change it.

Not all decisions have the same weight or permanence. Understanding which decisions are truly "final" versus which ones allow for adjustment is a most valuable thing for effective decision-making.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 7:21 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 6:54 am You can only make a final decision.

Every decision made is final. There’s no Time Machine.

Is that your final answer, or are you going to change it to a new final answer?

You are failing to differentiate between reversible and irreversible decisions.

Don't like your "final" decision on the t-shirt you are wearing? Change it.

Not all decisions have the same weight or permanence. Understanding which decisions are truly "final" versus which ones allow for adjustment is a most valuable thing for effective decision-making.

Final decisions are infinite in scope.

There’s no way to reverse or irreverse a final decision once it has been made. Decisions made happen only once.

Atto is right.

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 8:10 am Final decisions are infinite in scope.

There’s no way to reverse or irreverse a final decision once it has been made. Decisions made happen only once.

Shame. You've never undone a decision? Never decided that your previous decision needs to be vetoed?

Never changed your mind?

See next page.