Philosophy Now Forum

;;;;

Atla wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 1:48 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 1:45 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 1:36 pm
You could be wrong even if you're certain, obviously.

But why would YOU be certain of some thing, if it could be wrong, anyway?

You are the one who said that if you're certain of something, then that's not belief.

Is that what I actually said?

Or, did I instead say; If I am certain or sure of some thing or not, then that does NOT relate to belief, from my perspective?

Which, when LOOKED AT are two very different things.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 1:51 pm

Age wrote:
Obviously if the so called knowledge base that one has at any particular point could be WRONG then WHY use it at all

Because that is all there is at any given time and also because it may only be wrong in part not in whole

So, WHY do you use knowledge that could be wrong?

That was, by the way, my clarifying question.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 1:51 pmAnd any so called knowledge that is wrong will not be known to be so until it has actually been falsified

Obviously.

But this just detracts from the answer that I am seeking clarity, from you, for.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 1:51 pmKnowledge acquisition in science is therefore an ongoing process so it is important to keep an open mind

But the Mind is ALWAYS OPEN. You, human beings, are ONLY CLOSED because of the brain, which has the ability to THINK that it KNOWS what is true, right, and correct, even BEFORE it is KNOWN and even WHEN it could be totally and utterly WRONG anyway.

This THINKING, which ASSUMES and/or BELIEVES what is true, right, or correct BEFORE actual KNOWING has taken place is WHY you adult human beings are SO NARROW and CLOSED.

By the way, there is NO outside nor separate things 'science', which acquires its own 'knowledge'. Science does NOT have 'knowledge acquisition' in and of itself.

Through a scientific method there is an ongoing process. But this process is WHY human beings are so SLOW to learn and understand things.

There is NO need for science when the actual and real Truth of some thing has already been revealed, so people who say they do science HAVE TO assume and/or theorize things that they are, themselves, are not sure of yet. It is this assuming and/or theorizing things, which COULD BE, instead of just LOOKING AT, what IS, which is what is preventing and stopping people from discovering and learning as quickly as they CAN. Making assumptions about what COULD BE makes discoveries, learning and understanding far more complex and harder than it needs to be.

Making assumptions and theorizing about what COULD BE is NOT being OPEN.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pm

Age wrote:
Why not just always remain OPEN instead

I am open to anything that is actually possible but not to anything else

LOL Sounds like you have ALREADY KNOW and/or have decided what is actually possible and what is actually impossible.

Is, for example, an infinite and eternal Universe possible? Or, is that just an impossibility?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pmTo be completely open would mean accepting all types of contradictions

But WHY would you assume such a thing?

If you were Truly completely OPEN, then you would have ALREADY SEEN and UNDERSTOOD that that is NOT the case at all.

Being OPEN, contrary to popular belief, does NOT mean ACCEPTING every, or even, any thing that comes along.

If the Truth be KNOWN remaining completely OPEN provides the ability to SEE ALL contradictions, almost immediately.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pmFor example I am not open to the idea that I dont exist because I obviously do
Even if I am nothing more that just a brain in a vat then I still exist in that form

Okay.

So, do you BELIEVE that you do exist?

And, would any one even TRY TO tell 'you' that 'you' do NOT exist?

If yes, then 'you' can still remain completely OPEN and STILL listen to what they say, and still NOT 'HAVE TO' accept 'that' what they say.
If no, then no need to even mention this.
If you do not know, then why even assume such a thing?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pmAnd on a conceptual level I am not open to the idea that there are square circles for example

Again, would any one even TRY TO tell you that there are?

If yes, then what are you basing this presumption on?
If no, then there is no need to worry nor be concerned about it.
If I do not know, then why even assume such a thing?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pmBecause the physical description of a square and a circle require them to be mutually exclusive

So, it is POSSIBLE to KNOW the actual and real Truth of things, correct?

Now, the difference between 'you' and 'I' here is: 'you' have closed yourself off completely to "square circles" whereas because I am completely OPEN always I remain OPEN to the idea of "square circles".

'you' are NOT open to the fact that just maybe some one in the future might come along and be able explain how there could be or are in fact "square circles".

If, and when, that person comes along, then because I remain completely OPEN, then 'I' will LISTEN TO what that person has to say.

But, unfortunately, for both 'you' and that 'other person' because you are completely CLOSED, to this idea, 'you' will NOT listen to them.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pmYou can therefore remain open while at the same time rejecting anything that is demonstrably false such as the above

But how can you reject some thing that is demonstrably false BEFORE you LISTEN TO what has NOT yet been said?

You, obviously, are NOT remaining OPEN if you are REJECTING some thing BEFORE you have even heard it.

People were rejecting the sun revolving around the earth idea because, to them, it was demonstrably false.

People can and do also reject things like square circles and a non-expanding Universe BEFORE they even give another person a chance to speak because to them these things are demonstrably false.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pmBeing open doesnt mean you have to accept the possibility of absolutely everything being true as that is simply absurd

If you ASSUME that this is true, then you are NOT OPEN. If you are NOT OPEN, then you are CLOSED.

How can you be OPEN, but NOT accept the possibility of some thing being true?

If you do NOT accept the possibility that some thing could be true, then you are NOT OPEN. Unless, of course, you can SHOW otherwise.

Are you at all aware that there is a huge difference between accepting THE POSSIBILITY OF absolutely every thing BEING true FROM accepting absolutely every thing IS true?

Accepting the POSSIBILITY OF some thing BEING true is vastly different from accepting some thing AS true.
Accepting the POSSIBILITY THAT some thing COULD BE true is ALSO vastly different from accepting some thing IS true.

You ARE OPEN when accepting the POSSIBILITY some thing COULD BE true, or false.
You ARE NOT OPEN when NOT accepting the POSSIBILITY some thing COULD BE true, or false.

You ARE OPEN when accepting that some thing COULD BE true, or false.
You are NOT OPEN when accepting that some thing IS true, or false.

Being OPEN means that you have to accept the possibility of every and any thing being true as this is simply the case.

Are you OPEN to the idea that there could be square circles or are you CLOSED to the idea that there could be square circles?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:21 pm

Age wrote:
An inability to answer clarifying questions can show just how little actual evidence one has for their position
as well as show just how little they actually know about the position that they are trying so hard to hold onto

I am not holding onto anything at all though am I ?

Was the question mark because you are asking me a question? Or, is it because you are CONSIDERING if you are actually holding onto some thing? Or was it, or could have been, a parapraxis, or some thing else?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:21 pm I think the observable Universe is expanding based on the available evidence but if it isnt and new evidence demonstrates this then I will accept that position instead when it becomes knowledge.

What do you mean by 'when it becomes knowledge'?

Some might infer that this sounds like how those people who were being told that 'actually the earth revolves around the sun' and 'not the other way around', would have sounded (internally).

Most adult human beings, unfortunately, do NOT think for themselves, and usually wait for "some thing" to become 'knowledge' before they start to accept it, themselves.

Adult human beings have this tendency to NOT LOOK AT things from the Truly OPEN perspective, but instead LOOK FROM the knowledge that they ALREADY HAVE, and ONLY WHEN "others" start accepting 'new knowledge', then that is when they, themselves, will CHANGE their POSITION, and start to SEE things differently.

I could VERY EASILY provide the actual evidence that shows that the observable Universe is NOT expanding in the way you human beings THINK/BELIEVE it is.

But OBVIOUSLY I NEED to find a human being who is Truly able to accept the possibility of this being true FIRST.
Secondly, I NEED to find a human being who is Truly curious to find out if this is actually true or not.
Third, I NEED to find a human being is who is Truly honest when I ask them clarifying questions.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:21 pmThe expansion of the Universe is therefore not a position I am trying so hard to hold onto as you claim.

But have I singled out 'you' surreptitous57 as doing this?

You have, after all, told me that you do NOT do beliefs. Therefore, if you really do NOT do belief in relation to the Universe IS expanding assumption also, then that infers, to me anyway, that you are somewhat OPEN to the possibility that the Universe COULD BE not expanding at all.

But in saying that, when you change from using terms like; 'I think the observable universe is expanding' TO 'the expansion of the Universe is not a position that I [you] hold', then it makes it harder for me to know whether or not to discuss this issue with you.

Thinking that the observable universe is expanding AND the Universe expanding is NOT even a position you hold, then what is there to discuss.

Obviously, if one is going to use 'redshift' as EVIDENCE that objects are moving away from one another, and they ACCEPT that redshift IS 100% fact that things move apart from each other, then, on first LOOK, then most will naturally tend to THINK that the observable universe is expanding.

Also, if one does NOT even have a position either way if the Universe, Itself, is expanding or not, then there really is nothing to discuss. Unless, of course, they are curious to learn WHY the observable universe MIGHT NOT BE expanding, as it APPEARS to be.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:21 pm I am simply going where the evidence goes.

But is there ANY ACTUAL evidence? Or, is there just REPEATEDLY said: "there is evidence", which is what is written in a book, and which people accept, follow, and/or believe is true?

If ANY one says: 'There IS evidence', then surely they WOULD be able to provide that evidence.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:21 pm If that evidence is wrong I dont actually know it is

Thank you.

As I have been asking people here, in this forum, what is the ACTUAL evidence that the Universe is expanding/getting bigger?

Redshift, by itself, is NOT actual evidence that the Universe, Itself, is expanding/getting bigger. After all it is not even evidence that the observable universe is expanding/getting bigger

An observed redness, which is labelled redshift, is ASSUMED to be an indication of things moving away from "us" on earth, which is, as far as I can tell, based solely on what sound waves do.

Now, I am NOT saying that the redshift of objects does NOT indict an appearance of things moving away from earth, as this could be absolutely True. But, that in of itself, does NOT mean that the Universe is expanding at all.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:21 pm- which is why until I do I will carry on accepting it - this is how science actually works

Science, by itself, does NOT do any thing.

'Science' is just an activity, which ALL human beings, do involving studying the "world"/Universe that they are in, through observation and experiment. All just do things in different ways, including 'science'. Some do 'science' in a more rigorous way than "others" find at all necessary.

To me, if "evidence" COULD BE WRONG, then that gives me MORE decision to NOT hold it up as any thing.

If some thing IS, said to be, true but it is based on so called "evidence", which itself could be WRONG, then I would question any one about WHY they would use such a thing?

If people are going to say some thing IS true, because it is based on "evidence", which itself COULD BE wrong, then how do they KNOW 'it' IS even true to begin with?

Also, you can NOT accurately describe some thing IS happening based solely on "evidence" which could be WRONG anyway.

By the way, if 'evidence' could be wrong, like 'knowledge' could be wrong, and you do NOT know this either way, then out of curiosity I will have to ask: WHY accept them and/or use them?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:56 pm

Age wrote:
Remember it is I who has answered just about EVERY clarifying question asked to me. And if anyone cares to go back through my writings and SEE just how many of clarifying questions asked to me that I have answered compared to any of you human beings and how many clarifying questions
of mine asked to you have answered then who is afraid and fearful and who is NOT can and will be CLEARLY SEEN

I dont answer most of your clarifying questions because I just dont have the energy to
It has therefore got absolutely nothing to do with being afraid - whatever that means

SEE how EASILY and QUICKLY the Truth can be found.

I did NOT ask a clarifying question, but when an Honest response is given either way, the Truth of things come to light.

So, you are NOT one of the ones who are afraid and fearful.

The Truth really is that SIMPLE and EASY to discover, learn, AND KNOW.

Would you like to KNOW what 'being afraid' means, or you really just do NOT care?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:38 pm

Age wrote:
It is like your so called paradoxes which you human beings go on about When LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN perspective there is NOT even
an issue there as it is usually just the mis / placement of a few words that has tricked you ALL into seeing some thing which is NOT really there

I agree with this now even though I previously gave a false denifition of what a paradox actually was

I would NOT say that you gave a 'false' definition. I would just say that it was NOT false, but just a definition that you had at that moment from the knowledge that you already had.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 2:38 pmSo anyone that exists in relation to physical reality is no more than an ambiguously worded definition

Just out of clarity I have a completely different definition from the one that you appear to be alluding to here now.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 3:15 pm

Age wrote:
The same goes with ALL so called problems. There are NO real problems in Life as ALL of them can be very quickly resolved that is once again once you have the KNOW HOW of HOW to do it Again it is ALL very simple and easy to learn when you are Truly OPEN Honest and Want to change for the better. Until that time comes for you you will all just continue on doing what you are doing now

Not all problems are automatically going to be solved any easier simply by being truly open

Do you have any examples of any problems that can NOT be easily and simply solved by being Truly OPEN?

To me EVERY problem can be VERY EASILY and SIMPLY solved. In fact, to me, there for EVERY problem there is a (very simple and easy) solution.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 3:15 pmHaving an open mind does help but one also needs understanding of problems to solve them

But one does NOT have "an open mind". There is, however, a Mind (which is ALWAYS OPEN) that can be used.

This Mind ALREADY UNDERSTANDS and KNOWS HOW to solve ALL problems.

If you would like to provide what you see as problems, and then see if these can be solved, then feel free to.

Or, maybe you are curious to learn HOW it is possible to solve ALL problems, then feel free also to ask clarifying questions.

The amount of questioning one has provides insight into just how much or how little curiosity one has.
The amount of curiosity one has provides insight into just how inquisitive or not one is.
Being inquisitive leads to learning.
Learning leads to becoming wiser.
Questioning is the sign of a True Philosopher.

Phil-o-sophy is the Love-of-learning, which is how one becomes wiser.
The more one questions then the wiser they can become.
The more one questions, from the Truly OPEN perspective, then the wiser they do become.
The wise LOVE-TO-LEARN.

The True inquisitors and questioners in Life are the wisest.
Who are the most inquisitive and question the most in Life?
Children.
If you want to UNDERSTAND how to solve ALL problems in Life, then seek if from the wisest.

Age wrote:
Sounds like you have ALREADY KNOW and / or have decided what is actually possible and what is actually impossible

Is for example an infinite and eternal Universe possible ? Or is that just an impossibility ?

I have only provisionally decided what is actually possible or impossible based upon my very limited knowledge
So if at some future point I have been shown to be wrong then I will accept my error and correct it immediately

I think that the Universe is infinite and eternal and therefore obviously think that it is possible
But I do not know if it is as I do not have the evidence to show it is so I must keep an open mind

Age wrote:
So do you BELIEVE that you do exist ?

No because I do not do believe anything at all as there is no reason for me to
I am certain that I exist and so it is something I know not something I believe

Age wrote:
maybe some one in the future might come along and be able explain how there could be or are in fact square circles

when that person comes along then because I remain completely OPEN then I will LISTEN TO what that person has to say

But unfortunately for both you and that other person because you are completely CLOSED to this idea you will NOT listen to them

I do not accept at this point in time that there are such things as square circles as that is a logical contradiction
But if someone at a future point in time can demonstrate that they actually exist then I will accept that they do

I will therefore be open by both listening to and accepting what they have to say about square circles
And so you are therefore wrong to say I am completely closed to the idea because that is just not true
I just require the evidence or proof to demonstrate that it is true but till then I will think the opposite

Whenever new knowledge becomes known to me then I accept it for what it is and so change my mind when required to

Age wrote:
there is a huge difference between accepting THE POSSIBILITY OF absolutely every thing BEING true FROM accepting absolutely every thing IS true

I accept and fully understand the difference between these two entirely different scenarios
So obviously dont accept that absolutely everything is true as some things are actually false

Age wrote:
But one does NOT have an open mind . There is however a Mind ( which is ALWAYS OPEN ) that can be used

This Mind ALREADY UNDERSTANDS and KNOWS HOW to solve ALL problems

I am not aware of the existence of this Mind though you have mentioned it many times
And so therefore I am not able to access it in order to see it solve all of our problems

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2019 4:27 am

Age wrote:
Sounds like you have ALREADY KNOW and / or have decided what is actually possible and what is actually impossible

Is for example an infinite and eternal Universe possible ? Or is that just an impossibility ?

I have only provisionally decided what is actually possible or impossible based upon my very limited knowledge
So if at some future point I have been shown to be wrong then I will accept my error and correct it immediately

But if you have already 'provisionally' decided what is actually impossible, then you are NOT fully and completely OPEN to the possibility of that being possible.

I find that when am LOOKING from and with the VIEW that absolutely ANY and EVERY thing as BEING possible, then I am far MORE OPEN.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2019 4:27 amI think that the Universe is infinite and eternal and therefore obviously think that it is possible

Well that is great if you only THINK some thing, as that is a sign that you COULD BE far more OPEN than if you ASSUMED or BELIEVED some thing.

Now, if you REALLY WANT to discover or learn if the Universe is infinite and eternal, or not, then we just need to LOOK AT what "evidence" you have and/or use for either way.

If we LOOK AT the observations that you have made, and can make, which makes you THINK either way, then we could decide which 'evidence' best stands up to the Truth of things.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2019 4:27 amBut I do not know if it is as I do not have the evidence to show it is so I must keep an open mind

There is NO 'must'. You, human beings, either want to stay OPEN. Or, you, human beings, either want to assume and/or believe things, and thus be somewhat or completely CLOSED. You, surreptitious57, do NOT want to believe things, so now you just have to choose if you want to remain OPEN or if you want to assume some thing either way.

If you just stay with the, 'I THINK some thing', or with the, 'This is how I view some thing', then you could NOT ask for much more. For the time being you are as about as OPEN as you are going to be.

Now, we KNOW you have no ACTUAL evidence that SHOWS that the Universe is eternal and infinite, but do you have any ACTUAL evidence that SHOWS that the Universe is NOT eternal and/or NOT infinite?

If yes, then I would love to SEE it, so that my VIEW, also, will change for the BETTER.
If no, then you, EQUALLY, have NO actual evidence for the Universe being infinite and eternal as well as for being finite and beginning. Therefore, you really have NO choice other than to BE, and remain, OPEN.

Age wrote:
Now we KNOW you have no ACTUAL evidence that SHOWS that the Universe is eternal and infinite but do you have
any ACTUAL evidence that SHOWS that the Universe is NOT eternal and / or NOT infinite ?

I have no actual evidence either way but I still think it is more likely that the Universe is eternal and infinite
So unless or until there is any evidence to suggest otherwise then that will be my position with regard to this