100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Proof | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
funch, again it applies only to you or those who agree with you - it is not a absolute truth such as gravity. yes hold it as your own, but dont call it a absolute, it is only those who see it your way that can claim it for themselves as "A" truth for them. which so far is you and JB -  i'll keep looking for truth that is equally appiable to all, not just to some - even if the majority thinks it as truth, i look for core truths not just what someone accepts for themselves as truths, i already have plenty of those.
ok "Tribo" to help you comprehend my concept simply answer this simple question ... do you believe you exist or do you know you exist it doesn't matter what i think funch, its whether or not everybody can comprehend it and all cant, especially all the time in all ways. what i believe, at this point, is that we have no way of knowing if were real or not in this thing we call reality, that is all of us don't know, you think you do, and thats fine, i will defend your right to be wrong. but will not include myself a beleiver in your take on it. as i say i will keep my eyes and ears open to other ways that smell of absolute truths for all . Tribo, You said "we" have no way of knowing if were real or not.." Did you mean we have no way of knowing if "we are" real or not? How do you define "real" and reality? Why did you use "we" instead of "I?" I know I exist. Do you doubt if you exist? i mean that we only assume were real, what are we judging that reality by? other's beliefs, the commonality of what we sense or think? no, i think we are having a like expierence that we call reality but it proves nothing. only when we know for sure what reality truly is can we say with full assurance - yes this is or is not reality, it seems like reality but that is based upon or perception as it is that were in. who knows what lies behind the curtains we are not aware of, that we can't see. our whole lives are seen through and expierienced by "limited" observational, emotional, and deductionable tools. if i were to give you new, better, or different equipment, you may very well be able to see there is much more to this than you now know. so to make statements such as funch does is only limiting what could possibly be true reality. Reality to me is not having any blanks to fill in period. the "we" was only used becuase of talking with other's here at my house, not on the forum. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funch, again it applies only to you or those who agree with you - it is not a absolute truth such as gravity. yes hold it as your own, but dont call it a absolute, it is only those who see it your way that can claim it for themselves as "A" truth for them. which so far is you and JB - i'll keep looking for truth that is equally appiable to all, not just to some - even if the majority thinks it as truth, i look for core truths not just what someone accepts for themselves as truths, i already have plenty of those.
ok "Tribo" to help you comprehend my concept simply answer this simple question ... do you believe you exist or do you know you exist it doesn't matter what i think funch, its whether or not everybody can comprehend it and all cant, especially all the time in all ways. what i believe, at this point, is that we have no way of knowing if were real or not in this thing we call reality, that is all of us don't know, you think you do, and thats fine, i will defend your right to be wrong. but will not include myself a beleiver in your take on it. as i say i will keep my eyes and ears open to other ways that smell of absolute truths for all . Tribo, You said "we" have no way of knowing if were real or not.." Did you mean we have no way of knowing if "we are" real or not? How do you define "real" and reality? Why did you use "we" instead of "I?" I know I exist. Do you doubt if you exist? i mean that we only assume were real, what are we judging that reality by? other's beliefs, the commonality of what we sense or think? no, i think we are having a like expierence that we call reality but it proves nothing. only when we know for sure what reality truly is can we say with full assurance - yes this is or is not reality, it seems like reality but that is based upon or perception as it is that were in. who knows what lies behind the curtains we are not aware of, that we can't see. our whole lives are seen through and expierienced by "limited" observational, emotional, and deductionable tools. if i were to give you new, better, or different equipment, you may very well be able to see there is much more to this than you now know. so to make statements such as funch does is only limiting what could possibly be true reality. Reality to me is not having any blanks to fill in period. the "we" was only used becuase of talking with other's here at my house, not on the forum. But the question was directed at YOU not the others there at your house. It looks to me like you need to define what (or who) YOU are and what "REALITY" is. Are you defining YOU as your physical body? Are you defining REALITY as this environment you see and touch? I define myself as the observer and the one who decides. The "I am" that I sense inside of this body which I inhabit. I define reality by what I experience in whatever dream reality I find myself. You either KNOW you exist or you don't. If you don't know you exist then you don't exist. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funch, again it applies only to you or those who agree with you - it is not a absolute truth such as gravity. yes hold it as your own, but dont call it a absolute, it is only those who see it your way that can claim it for themselves as "A" truth for them. which so far is you and JB - i'll keep looking for truth that is equally appiable to all, not just to some - even if the majority thinks it as truth, i look for core truths not just what someone accepts for themselves as truths, i already have plenty of those.
ok "Tribo" to help you comprehend my concept simply answer this simple question ... do you believe you exist or do you know you exist it doesn't matter what i think funch, its whether or not everybody can comprehend it and all cant, especially all the time in all ways. what i believe, at this point, is that we have no way of knowing if were real or not in this thing we call reality, that is all of us don't know, you think you do, and thats fine, i will defend your right to be wrong. but will not include myself a beleiver in your take on it. as i say i will keep my eyes and ears open to other ways that smell of absolute truths for all . Tribo, You said "we" have no way of knowing if were real or not.." Did you mean we have no way of knowing if "we are" real or not? How do you define "real" and reality? Why did you use "we" instead of "I?" I know I exist. Do you doubt if you exist? i mean that we only assume were real, what are we judging that reality by? other's beliefs, the commonality of what we sense or think? no, i think we are having a like expierence that we call reality but it proves nothing. only when we know for sure what reality truly is can we say with full assurance - yes this is or is not reality, it seems like reality but that is based upon or perception as it is that were in. who knows what lies behind the curtains we are not aware of, that we can't see. our whole lives are seen through and expierienced by "limited" observational, emotional, and deductionable tools. if i were to give you new, better, or different equipment, you may very well be able to see there is much more to this than you now know. so to make statements such as funch does is only limiting what could possibly be true reality. Reality to me is not having any blanks to fill in period. the "we" was only used becuase of talking with other's here at my house, not on the forum. But the question was directed at YOU not the others there at your house. It looks to me like you need to define what (or who) YOU are and what "REALITY" is. Are you defining YOU as your physical body? Are you defining REALITY as this environment you see and touch? I define myself as the observer and the one who decides. The "I am" that I sense inside of this body which I inhabit. I define reality by what I experience in whatever dream reality I find myself. You either KNOW you exist or you don't. If you don't know you exist then you don't exist. no you can only assume that you exist by what evidence your able to gleen from this expierience your going thru - so you can only know that it seems real and that you and others are in it expieriencing like things [pain, suffering, happiness, love etc..] This is not proof, it's assumption. your basing it on the idea that "you are" and putting that on others who also think "they are". to try and validate it. you or i maybe no more than a program, that includes the idea of believeing we are or do exist with a heavy dose of self/ego plugged into it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i believe that i exist in this thing we call reality - this moment by moment experience, but that is not proof that its truly real, only that I'm experiencing "something". i only have my mind. and emotions and sensory perceptions to go by, and this only Tell's ""some"" of what all could possibly be. i exist as much as you or others - but that's no proof of it being reality, only that we exist within this same plane for now and experience like things that we can communicate about. what will be true reality is when "all" the curtains are pulled back and the secrets that lie behind them are revealed, then i will know for sure what is/was real and what is/was illusion. Till then i will continue to live in an world of impaired logic and reason as we all do. "Tribo" how can you believe that you exist if you don't exist ....the mere fact you ponder about your existence infact proves your existence to yourself ...even if you believe that the reality you exist in is not real only proves that your existence to yourself is real as I stated...it is impossible to prove that you don't exist to yourself because by doing so you actually prove your existence if you say that you are a "Truist" how can you not stand by that logic ... as Shakespear wrote....to thine ownself be true ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no you can only assume that you exist by what evidence your able to gleen from this expierience your going thru - so you can only know that it seems real and that you and others are in it expieriencing like things [pain, suffering, happiness, love etc..] This is not proof, it's assumption. your basing it on the idea that "you are" and putting that on others who also think "they are". to try and validate it. you or i maybe no more than a program, that includes the idea of believeing we are or do exist with a heavy dose of self/ego plugged into it.
No, I don't assume that I exist. I know I exist. I exist because I am aware that I am. Even if I were surrounded by darkness, and had no senses what ever I would know that I exist if I am aware that I am. This environment may be a program. My body may be a program, my brain may be a hologram, this so called reality may be a dream or a hologram. I don't know the nature of reality. But dear Tribo, I do know that I exist. Of that I am certain. JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no you can only assume that you exist by what evidence your able to gleen from this expierience your going thru - so you can only know that it seems real and that you and others are in it expieriencing like things [pain, suffering, happiness, love etc..] This is not proof, it's assumption. your basing it on the idea that "you are" and putting that on others who also think "they are". to try and validate it. you or i maybe no more than a program, that includes the idea of believeing we are or do exist with a heavy dose of self/ego plugged into it.
No, I don't assume that I exist. I know I exist. I exist because I am aware that I am. Even if I were surrounded by darkness, and had no senses what ever I would know that I exist if I am aware that I am. This environment may be a program. My body may be a program, my brain may be a hologram, this so called reality may be a dream or a hologram. I don't know the nature of reality. But dear Tribo, I do know that I exist. Of that I am certain. JB The sign of good programming, let them believe they exist. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no you can only assume that you exist by what evidence your able to gleen from this expierience your going thru - so you can only know that it seems real and that you and others are in it expieriencing like things [pain, suffering, happiness, love etc..] This is not proof, it's assumption. your basing it on the idea that "you are" and putting that on others who also think "they are". to try and validate it. you or i maybe no more than a program, that includes the idea of believeing we are or do exist with a heavy dose of self/ego plugged into it.
No, I don't assume that I exist. I know I exist. I exist because I am aware that I am. Even if I were surrounded by darkness, and had no senses what ever I would know that I exist if I am aware that I am. This environment may be a program. My body may be a program, my brain may be a hologram, this so called reality may be a dream or a hologram. I don't know the nature of reality. But dear Tribo, I do know that I exist. Of that I am certain. JB The sign of good programming, let them believe they exist. If your statement means to imply that I don't exist or even means that I should have any doubts about my own existence, then you have sorely failed Tribo. I don't "believe" I exist, I "KNOW" I exist. There is no room for doubt in "knowing," there is only room for doubt in "believing." People say "I believe" when they are not sure. People say "I know" when they know. You may imply that I don't exist but you can never prove that. You may "believe" that I don't exist but you cannot know that because you can only "believe" it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
tribo
on
Sat 11/01/08 12:44 PM
|
|
ue
no you can only assume that you exist by what evidence your able to gleen from this expierience your going thru - so you can only know that it seems real and that you and others are in it expieriencing like things [pain, suffering, happiness, love etc..] This is not proof, it's assumption. your basing it on the idea that "you are" and putting that on others who also think "they are". to try and validate it. you or i maybe no more than a program, that includes the idea of believeing we are or do exist with a heavy dose of self/ego plugged into it.
No, I don't assume that I exist. I know I exist. I exist because I am aware that I am. Even if I were surrounded by darkness, and had no senses what ever I would know that I exist if I am aware that I am. This environment may be a program. My body may be a program, my brain may be a hologram, this so called reality may be a dream or a hologram. I don't know the nature of reality. But dear Tribo, I do know that I exist. Of that I am certain. JB The sign of good programming, let them believe they exist. If your statement means to imply that I don't exist or even means that I should have any doubts about my own existence, then you have sorely failed Tribo. I don't "believe" I exist, I "KNOW" I exist. There is no room for doubt in "knowing," there is only room for doubt in "believing." People say "I believe" when they are not sure. People say "I know" when they know. You may imply that I don't exist but you can never prove that. You may "believe" that I don't exist but you cannot know that because you can only "believe" it. 
like i said - excellent programming, see how well it's worked - 
you'll get over the nouveau flat earth syndrome some time. -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ue no you can only assume that you exist by what evidence your able to gleen from this expierience your going thru - so you can only know that it seems real and that you and others are in it expieriencing like things [pain, suffering, happiness, love etc..] This is not proof, it's assumption. your basing it on the idea that "you are" and putting that on others who also think "they are". to try and validate it. you or i maybe no more than a program, that includes the idea of believeing we are or do exist with a heavy dose of self/ego plugged into it.
No, I don't assume that I exist. I know I exist. I exist because I am aware that I am. Even if I were surrounded by darkness, and had no senses what ever I would know that I exist if I am aware that I am. This environment may be a program. My body may be a program, my brain may be a hologram, this so called reality may be a dream or a hologram. I don't know the nature of reality. But dear Tribo, I do know that I exist. Of that I am certain. JB The sign of good programming, let them believe they exist. If your statement means to imply that I don't exist or even means that I should have any doubts about my own existence, then you have sorely failed Tribo. I don't "believe" I exist, I "KNOW" I exist. There is no room for doubt in "knowing," there is only room for doubt in "believing." People say "I believe" when they are not sure. People say "I know" when they know. You may imply that I don't exist but you can never prove that. You may "believe" that I don't exist but you cannot know that because you can only "believe" it.
like i said - excellent programming, see how well it's worked -
you'll get over the nouveau flat earth syndrome some time. -
You loose Tribo, admit it when you are wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If your statement means to imply that I don't exist or even means that I should have any doubts about my own existence, then you have sorely failed Tribo.
I don't "believe" I exist, I "KNOW" I exist. There is no room for doubt in "knowing," there is only room for doubt in "believing." People say "I believe" when they are not sure. People say "I know" when they know. You may imply that I don't exist but you can never prove that. You may "believe" that I don't exist but you cannot know that because you can only "believe" it. AND you base this on what? descartes ""I think therefore i am""? explain to me how you "know " you exist. can the "Knower" not know wrongly? i find that once you come to an absolute in your thinking on something, is when your usually furthest from the truth. of course i'm sure you will dis-agree seeing as you KNOW. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AND you base this on what? descartes ""I think therefore i am""? explain to me how you "know " you exist. can the "Knower" not know wrongly? i find that once you come to an absolute in your thinking on something, is when your usually furthest from the truth. of course i'm sure you will dis-agree seeing as you KNOW.
I know I exist because I feel. I don't know if I will exist forever. I don't know if I have always existed. I don't know if you exist. I don't know what I am or how I exist. I don't know if this reality exists. I don't know anything for sure except I do know that I exist. I know I exist because I am. There is no other way to explain that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AND you base this on what? descartes ""I think therefore i am""? explain to me how you "know " you exist. can the "Knower" not know wrongly? i find that once you come to an absolute in your thinking on something, is when your usually furthest from the truth. of course i'm sure you will dis-agree seeing as you KNOW.
I know I exist because I feel. I don't know if I will exist forever. I don't know if I have always existed. I don't know if you exist. I don't know what I am or how I exist. I don't know if this reality exists. I don't know anything for sure except I do know that I exist. I know I exist because I am. There is no other way to explain that. "JennieBean" got the concept down pack..not to many people can grasp that concept or because of their sunday school programming try their best not admit to it ....if I had emotions I would be so proud of JennieBean |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
tribo
on
Sat 11/01/08 02:09 PM
|
|
so your take on it is:
" I feel therfore i am" " - correct? so your trusting your feelings for recognition of your existance?? are your feelings always correct? are they absolutely reliable? why would anyone base their existance on "feelings"? thats more rediculous than that of "i think" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so your take on it is: " I feel therfore i am" " - correct? so your trusting your feelings for recognition of your existance?? are your feelings always correct? are they absolutely reliable? why would anyone base their existance on "feelings"? thats more rediculous than that of "i think" "Tribo".....er..can you explain how you have feelings if you don't exist |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so your take on it is: " I feel therfore i am" " - correct? so your trusting your feelings for recognition of your existance?? are your feelings always correct? are they absolutely reliable? why would anyone base their existance on "feelings"? thats more rediculous than that of "i think" "Tribo".....er..can you explain how you have feelings if you don't exist Exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so your take on it is: " I feel therfore i am" " - correct? Correct. so your trusting your feelings for recognition of your existance?? Absolutely. I feel therefore I am. are your feelings always correct? Correct according to whom? are they absolutely reliable? Reliable according to whom? why would anyone base their existance on "feelings"? I feel, therefore I am. thats more rediculous than that of "i think" You think too much. You should try feeling. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so your take on it is: " I feel therfore i am" " - correct? so your trusting your feelings for recognition of your existance?? are your feelings always correct? are they absolutely reliable? why would anyone base their existance on "feelings"? thats more rediculous than that of "i think" "Tribo".....er..can you explain how you have feelings if you don't exist can someone exist without having feelings? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i said your feeleing so it would have to be according to you - are your feelings always correct?
the same with reliability? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so your take on it is: " I feel therfore i am" " - correct? so your trusting your feelings for recognition of your existance?? are your feelings always correct? are they absolutely reliable? why would anyone base their existance on "feelings"? thats more rediculous than that of "i think" "Tribo".....er..can you explain how you have feelings if you don't exist can someone exist without having feelings? you ever heard of sociopaths |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so your take on it is: " I feel therfore i am" " - correct? so your trusting your feelings for recognition of your existance?? are your feelings always correct? are they absolutely reliable? why would anyone base their existance on "feelings"? thats more rediculous than that of "i think" "Tribo".....er..can you explain how you have feelings if you don't exist can someone exist without having feelings? you ever heard of sociopaths my point funch, there are many people who have no feelings as others so why base your existance on feelings, they prove nothing! that's like saying someone in an insane asylum or other not capable of feelings is not real, which disproves the point. feelings are the last thing i would base anthing on especially my existance. |
|
|
|
|
