Philosophy Now Forum

There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 31, 2025 3:01 pm There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

Thanks for trying to relate this to others.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 8:47 am

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 31, 2025 3:01 pm There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

Thanks for trying to relate this to others.

The foundation of all of reasoning is based on the Law of Reciprocity, and thus can be tested in common grammar easily,
Judge not by appearance, but by righteous judgment, The Book opens with that test. So, when people do not see the unity in the different stories of creation, and claim that they all differ, they do not see what is actually done.
The Serpent spoke in the name of the Lord
What he said came to pass
God confirmed his words, etc.
By Mosaic Law, by the Law of Reciprocity, Who was the Serpent, other than a prophet sent by God to test the heart of man.

Now, ask yourself this.
If it is clear that the Book starts by testing the mind of man.
And the Book ends by testing the mind of man.

Do you imagine, that nothing at all was watching the results of the testing?

Is guided evolution guided by a pooka? Or something real, something you already know has be observed, but will not talk openly to mankind at this time?

Do you believe that any sane species would engage in conversation with another species that cannot even master the first principle of grammar?

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 1:11 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 8:47 am

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 31, 2025 3:01 pm There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

Thanks for trying to relate this to others.

The foundation of all of reasoning is based on the Law of Reciprocity, and thus can be tested in common grammar easily,
Judge not by appearance, but by righteous judgment, The Book opens with that test. So, when people do not see the unity in the different stories of creation, and claim that they all differ, they do not see what is actually done.
The Serpent spoke in the name of the Lord
What he said came to pass
God confirmed his words, etc.
By Mosaic Law, by the Law of Reciprocity, Who was the Serpent, other than a prophet sent by God to test the heart of man.

And the law of reciprocity is founded on what law, and what law is that law founded on, so on an so forth?

What foundational law is there other than occurence?

I do not answer people who are really thick, and obviously have never studied anyone of worth.

How stupid do you have to be to ask for a law of a law of a law. Never even studied Aristotle have you? Or is your reading comprehension completely in the gutter?

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 31, 2025 3:01 pm There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

What are you trying to argue.

You should at least define the terms 'truth' and 'relative'.

Relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. -WIKI

Truth or verity is the property of being in accord with fact or reality.[1] In everyday language, it is typically ascribed to things that aim to represent reality or otherwise correspond to it, such as beliefs, propositions, and declarative sentences, WIKI

Reality is a concept that varies with context and culture. Reality may be viewed as the sum or aggregate of all objects in existence within the universe, as opposed to that which is only imaginary, nonexistent or nonactual. The term is also used to refer to the ontological status of things, indicating their existence.[1] In physical terms, reality is the totality of a system, known and unknown.[2] -WIKI

Now show me what reality and truth of reality that is not contingent or relative to context and the human conditions.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 31, 2025 3:01 pm There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

So, if this is true, then your INABILITY TO SHOW, in ANY way, how to solve some so-called 'puzzle', here, PROVES that you can NOT express standards of human behavior AT ALL. And, LOL the ONLY one who has ASKED you to express standards of human behavior is your OWN DELUSIONAL IMAGINATION.

Will you SHOW, step-by-step, HOW to 'solve' the, ALLEGED and SUPPOSED, 'child's puzzle', here?

And, REMEMBER, if you do NOT, then your ABILITY IS PROVING what it IS, EXACTLY.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 1:11 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 8:47 am

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 31, 2025 3:01 pm There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

Thanks for trying to relate this to others.

The foundation of all of reasoning is based on the Law of Reciprocity, and thus can be tested in common grammar easily,
Judge not by appearance, but by righteous judgment, The Book opens with that test. So, when people do not see the unity in the different stories of creation, and claim that they all differ, they do not see what is actually done.
The Serpent spoke in the name of the Lord
What he said came to pass
God confirmed his words, etc.
By Mosaic Law, by the Law of Reciprocity, Who was the Serpent, other than a prophet sent by God to test the heart of man.

By ASKING QUESTIONS, here, which you are NOT ANSWERING, and ARE PROVING you ARE NOT ABLE TO ANSWER, you ARE PROVING that you DO NOT YET KNOW the ANSWERS, "yourself".

Who was the Serpent?

SHOW and PROVE that you ACTUALLY DO KNOW the ANSWER.

If you DO NOT 'now' PROVIDE the ANSWER, you are PROVING to be a VERY 'self-centered' individual with a VERY HIGH 'superiority complex' and an ABSOLUTE 'dunning-kruger effect'.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 1:29 pm Now, ask yourself this.
If it is clear that the Book starts by testing the mind of man.

LOL
LOL
LOL

Ask "yourself" this "phil8659", 'Have you EVER SAID what 'the book' even IS, YET?

Also, and by the way, ask "yourself", 'What even is the mind of man, EXACTLY?'

THEN, get back to 'us' WHEN you are ABLE TO ANSWER these QUESTIONS.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 1:29 pm And the Book ends by testing the mind of man.

Do you imagine, that nothing at all was watching the results of the testing?

Is guided evolution guided by a pooka? Or something real, something you already know has be observed, but will not talk openly to mankind at this time?

Do you believe that any sane species would engage in conversation with another species that cannot even master the first principle of grammar?

you ASK QUESTIONS, but TO NO one.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 01, 2025 6:00 pm I do not answer people who are really thick, and obviously have never studied anyone of worth.

How stupid do you have to be to ask for a law of a law of a law. Never even studied Aristotle have you? Or is your reading comprehension completely in the gutter?

Do you HAVE ANY COMPREHENSION, AT ALL, HOW, EXACTLY, 'you' COME ACROSS, here, "phil8659"?

If you do, then HOW is 'that', EXACTLY?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 5:46 am

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 31, 2025 3:01 pm There are a number of people on this forum, and in the whole world in general, who claim that truth is relative, that a noun is a verb.
By their own words, all that they are saying is that they cannot even master the principle of upon which reasoning is based, the Law of Identity, often called the Law of Reciprocity. Even put into metaphor, "For they cannot buy or sell unless they have the Mark of the Beast." which really scares the hell out of simpletons.

For those people who find the saying hard.

Are not animals bread to work for humanity, called beasts of burden? What is the burden of mankind, for man is an animal? Truth and honesty.

Maybe you will start to understand, quicker than I did, why I was asked to express standards of human behavior, provable by my ability to show, step by step, how to solve the puzzle, "What is the name of the Beast 666" it is a child's puzzle.

What are you trying to argue.

You should at least define the terms 'truth' and 'relative'.

Relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. -WIKI

Truth or verity is the property of being in accord with fact or reality.[1] In everyday language, it is typically ascribed to things that aim to represent reality or otherwise correspond to it, such as beliefs, propositions, and declarative sentences, WIKI

Reality is a concept that varies with context and culture. Reality may be viewed as the sum or aggregate of all objects in existence within the universe, as opposed to that which is only imaginary, nonexistent or nonactual. The term is also used to refer to the ontological status of things, indicating their existence.[1] In physical terms, reality is the totality of a system, known and unknown.[2] -WIKI

Now show me what reality and truth of reality that is not contingent or relative to context and the human conditions.

What does, 'Show me what reality of reality is not ..., MEAN, EXACTLY?

Having, written a paper on Genesis 3.3, the serpent appears in the book of Revelation, again, this is Satan. A Documentary Hypothesis of oral tradition written into form. Julius Willhausen, CE 1844 - 1918, suggesting the sources of the Pentateuch. With no documents found, scholars suggested a singular author Moses of the Torah. Possible for Moses to be the main author challenged. Mosaic authorship is found in the historical record, the Book of Moses.

puto wrote: ↑Mon Apr 07, 2025 4:47 am Having, written a paper on Genesis 3.3, the serpent appears in the book of Revelation, again, this is Satan. A Documentary Hypothesis of oral tradition written into form. Julius Willhausen, CE 1844 - 1918, suggesting the sources of the Pentateuch. With no documents found, scholars suggested a singular author Moses of the Torah. Possible for Moses to be the main author challenged. Mosaic authorship is found in the historical record, the Book of Moses.

And the Book itself, tells you he is the Son of God, sent to test the heart of man. So who needs a documentary?

What you asked, I responded with an academic answer. Doubting, what is my question, The Morning Star? The books test nothing, they only reinforce free will. Knowing, not what your interpretation of the books are only that they test what? You are the one that needs to explain your thesis. Jesus died on the Cross for our Sins: To miss the mark according to Paul. Your feelings are that you cannot be wrong and that is subjectivity. Objectivity seems to suggest that it is impossible to conceive of its being false. You want to play the Academic Sceptic, yet you are Dogmatic in your responses to your questions. I am being sufficient in my conditions, and yes it is possible that I am wrong that anybody is wrong. Descartes' explains it easier than Plato. Plato lets hope was just joking as The Republic is very concerning. According, to Descartes', " ... Logic which teaches the right conduct of reason .... " The GCB, as I am sure you know in Descartes' version: (C1) We humans could not be the cause of our GCB-concept. So, that makes us a theist, as you know the Bible, as I am sure you write as if you have studied it. Choose wisely.