For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Bill Wiltrack wrote:The complete arbitrary happenings of life.
Each of our moments is but a well constructed series of accidents. ...
If we have no conception of it how do you think your words have any relationship to what you claim?
Bill Wiltrack wrote:By well constructed I mean our reality follows well constructed sets of rules or laws. From the movement of solar systems to the tracks of what we now call quarks.
There are laws. What we may refer to them as scientific laws but laws none the less.
And yet your Physics says its all only probably true?
You'd have to say what you mean by 'our future'? As in a large part we make 'our future' all the time.Yet, you and I do not know what the next moment may bring. We are literally blind to our own future.
Rewwritten for subtext:More along the lines of the essence of this thread:
Outward or outer accomplishments mean nothing. The relationship we have with our perception of ourselves, our self-consciousness means everything. It's a different world that we, as philosophers, can possibly step into.
More of your cod-psychology in an effort to ignore the contradictions in your thoughts.
Just hearing an actual reply to a philosophical objection to your statements would be nice.Bill Wiltrack wrote:Not sure where you are trying to go with this. ...
I have represented myself and I have openly expressed myself here at the Philosophy Now Forums and I will continue to do so.
No-one is saying you shouldn't.I stretched the boundaries. I have crossed the line many times and I have been rightfully reprimanded by the site's Owner or his incredibility benevolent Moderators.
I will continue to express myself as a living philosopher.
Get over yourself.In this 'evolution' and 'honesty' do you think you'll get time to reply to questions that point out philosophical problems with your thoughts?By doing this, this simple but honest act, I have become better. I have evolved.
Since you've never read any I find this assertion groundless.By contrast, I am becoming better able to see your rather static approach to me, to fellow members here, and to most philosophical thought in general.
Of what?You seem lost, confused and continually frightened.
You'd know this how?You've had a bumpy road.
It's like you relish the fact that you have never had the guts to express yourself as your self.
I do this all the time upon this forum. You mean because I don't have a cod-metaphysics or wish to be a gnu like you?Since you claim no understanding of words or language I'm amazed you think you can think this.And it's NOT the format. It's you.
And Logic and clarity is another, so when faced with an obvious contradiction your reply is what?Philosophy is made-up of many pillars. One of those pillars is the respect for truth.
Once again the gnu speaks for all does he? And once again I'll remind you that, so far, your opinions and feelings are immaterial to me.I'm really coming,... slooowly coming, to disrespect what you represent to all of us here.
At yet you appear to dislike it intensely.Challenging each others thoughts and concepts is important.
From what? Your gnu agenda?Just attacking each line of a post from the shadow of the rock you hide behind is incongruous and distracting.
Gnu speaking for all again is he? Once again, save your cod-psychology for yourself, you appear to need it.You disrespect your self and painfully, you are repeatedly expressing that disregard to your self and to all of us here at the forum.
Aww! Boo-boos.It's painful to watch.
And it's becoming more difficult to resist agreement with you.
You may want to re-read this!
True, but on analysis I think the conjunction false but the latter conjunct true and something you should start to follow.Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
May want to re-visit my prior post.
Think you missed the concept of the last part.