Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:20 am
Here is something for Philosophical Exploration;
I have argued 'God is an Impossibility' to be real.
Setting this aside,
And, other people have "argued" 'God is possibly real' also.
So, let us set this aside also.
Unless of course we want to look at what the actual and real Truth IS here. That is; ALL of you, human beings, have NOT REALLY 'ARGUED' either way, from the perspective of 'argue' meaning
logical reasoning, that is.
I agree you have ALL 'argued' from the
disputing, disagreeing, and fighting for a side, perspective, and that you ALL have TRIED TO or have ATTEMPTED TO 'argue' from the
logical reasoning, perspective, but the Truth IS NONE of you have successfully formed a sound AND valid argument either way, nor in reality ANY way whatsoever.
To PROVE once and for all if God is Real or NOT is an EXTREMELY quick, simple, and easy thing to do, once you KNOW what God IS, and thus able to define It correctly and accurately.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:20 amWhat do you think is impossible unconditionally?
Unconditionally meant such a thing is not conditioned by any Framework and System.
i think that there is NOTHING that is impossible.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:20 amNote 1 + 1 = 5 is an impossibility but it is not unconditional but conditioned within the Mathematics Framework and System.
So such a conditional impossibility do not count.
Contradiction don't count, e.g. a square-circle is an impossibility within the law of logic.
Can you think of something that is impossible unconditionally?
No.
Absolutely EVERY thing is relative to, or conditional upon, or by, the observer.
So, even EVERY framework and system that you, human beings, have created and use is conditional, and also conditioned, too. This conditioning is done by YOU, from the way you define things, and also, on a deeper subliminal level, from the meaning you have put into, or behind, that definition.
For example, HOW YOU define the word 'people' and 'kill', and from the actual meaning that you have put into, or behind, those two words, from those definitions that you have and know only, will effect if it is actually POSSIBLE or IMPOSSIBLE to be able to 'kill' 'people' without even having to touch the human body, or not. Some of YOU BELIEVE that it is IMPOSSIBLE to kill a person without killing the human body while some of YOU BELIEVE the opposite and that it is very POSSIBLE to kill a person without killing the human body, nor even having to touch the body.
Even the definitions and the meanings behind those definitions of other words in that example NEED to be fully explained BEFORE the actual FULL meaning of what is being said here is fully understood. There are two ways to be able to fully understand ANY and ALL things, from another('s) perspective;
1. Allow the other to express fully, but that can take forever. (Just to explain fully, just that one example, and have it fully understood, could take countless pages and pages of writings.) Or,
2. Just LOOK, and ask clarifying questions, FROM a truly OPEN perspective. (TRUE
understanding, of ALL things can then gained, and also almost immediately).
ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing is relative to the observer, and HOW they SEE things, including what is possible or NOT possible. Absolutely ANY and EVERY thing depends on WHAT perspective one is LOOKING FROM.
To be clearly UNDERSTOOD yourself, and to have a CLEAR UNDERSTANDING yourself, of absolutely EVERY thing, YOU just need to be absolutely clear about from what definition, and from what meaning behind that definition, OR from WHAT perspective, YOU are coming FROM.
There IS an 'observer' and then there IS an 'Observer'. Absolutely EVERY thing NEEDS to be fully understood BEFORE one can grasp what the "other" One is REALLY SAYING, and MEANING.