NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
And what is this 'magical thinking' exactly, which you frequently talk about?
-Assuming ontological entities beyond our observations.
We do not want to know what you imagine is taking place.
We want to know EXACTLY what these "assumed ontological entities beyond your observations" ARE, which you continually accuse me of having?
See, what the 'obvious truth' IS, all of this "magical thinking" is in your own head only.
If you do not provide any actual thing, then all of this is in your own imagination.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
Unless you know the absolute truth of things, only then you would know the so called 'pseudo philosophy' around things.
You keep demonstrating that you don't understand the difference between an irrational or pseudo philosophical claim vs a true or correct claim.
And you have yet to even discuss the topic of this thread and answer my questions about what really occurs.
But you have not stopped making accusations of me and about me, continually trying to discredit me 'before' I even get a chance to propose anything.
You are so 'stuck' in your own beliefs that if absolutely anyone says anything in contradiction to what you believe is true, right, or correct, then they are irrational, magical, pseudo, or idealistic thinking.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
Your claims could be correct, but they are irrational since they deny observable facts.
Seriously?
This is your "logic" here. The earth revolves around the sun claim could be correct, but it is irrational since it denies "observable facts". Therefore, I am NOT going to listen to a word you say, and will just try to discredit you with whatever words I can use against you, and I will keep deflecting away from your ideas, and be distracting so that you are never able to express your views fully. I believe the current observable facts are true, right, or correct, and so you are not even worth listening, to nor are you even worth being given the time nor the respect to be able to express your self.
What is "irrational" to a person has absolutely no bearing at all on what is actually true, right, and correct.
If a person believes some sort of "observable facts", then of course if what another one says contradicts those beliefs, then they will "appear" "irrational". But, only when is not believe and thus is truly open, then they can see with 100% what is truly irrational and what is not.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
You appear to love to use the term 'pseudo philosophy' as you can distinguish the actual absolute truth from that what is false. Yet, from the words you use, you actually do not seem to have this ability at all.
-What I appear to love or not is irrelevant. Pseudo philosophy is a term used to demarcate honest inquiry based on facts from unfounded metaphysical speculations. And again those speculations could be by accident correct, so Pseudo philosophy doesn't address truth, it addresses logic and honesty in the method.
Use whatever terms you like to use, to describe whatever you want to describe.
But if you cannot or will not just answer questions logically, reasonably, honestly and directly, then this speaks volumes for itself. You do not have to say anything.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
And your beliefs are strikingly obvious.
There are knowledge based beliefs and faith based beliefs. As you can see, I am basing mine on the former.
LOL that is what everyone says in regards to their beliefs. They all believe that there beliefs are based on knowledge. They just do not consider if that so called "knowledge" is actually true, right, and correct to start with.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
"Also, the actual real, true, right, accurate, and correct definition of 'mind' and 'consciousness' is very different than that one inconsistent, even within scientific terms, definition of the mind property of consciousness. "
The scientific definition is the only one that describes the actual phenomenon and doesn't introduce ontological speculations outside an observable mechanism.
Once again the religious and/or belief faculty of you is shining bright as can be.
I do not think you could be more biased and one sided even if you tried to be.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
"Is the 'process of matter' different for everyone?
-You will need to make your research on that.
Once again when challenged and question you appear to not even know a single thing about what it is that you have been trying to say.
I point out the contradiction, through a series of clarifying question, which you inability to answer reveals the contradiction strongly.
I have already done the research and know what the true, right and correct answers are already, that is why I know what questions to ask you that will completely stump you.
You not being able to answer my clarifying questions, logically, reasonably, honestly and directly shows that what you say is contradiction and obviously false and wrong.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
"Or, is the 'process of matter' the same, but everyone just have different concepts of this process?""
-I can answer you if you don't give me your concept or other examples.
This answer does not make sense in and of itself. Where you meant to say something else?
You wrote:
Processes of matter create our concepts of time and space.
I then asked:
Why then do we all have different concepts of time and space?
Are the 'processes of matter' different to everyone?
Absolute any concept will do as an example.
You were trying to make out 'processes of matter' is a one and only truly objective thing, which could not get misinterpreted, and so it is 'processes of matter', which our concepts of time and space come from.
But obviously everyone has different concepts, about anything. Therefore, IF 'processes of matter' create our concepts:
Why then do we all have different concepts of time and space? And,
Are the 'processes of matter' different to everyone?
Are you clear now, or do you still need me to give you more of my concept or more examples?
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
"Are you even able to explain the very reason why everyone has different concepts? "
Sure, its a problem that Wittgenstein and Searle have pointed in their work....language and fallacious reasoning.
That is at one level, but what is the reason why people like yourself have and use confusing language and fallacious reasoning?
Are you even able to explain the very why everyone uses confusing language and fallacious reasoning?
The answer by the way is very simple and easy to get to and understand, that is; when you are truly open and honest. The answer is also the very thing, which will prevent confusing language and fallacious reasoning from happening and occurring in the future.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
"Are you even aware of how the Mind and the brain actually work?"
-I follow the literature of the field really close. (by field I am referring to Cognitive science which is an interdisciplinary effort). What do you want to know.
You will not find the answer through already obtained current knowledge from science. That will only lead you further astray.
Also, did you not understand my very simple clarifying question?
Here I will repeat it, see if you can understand it this time;
Are you even aware of how the Mind and the brain actually works?
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
"When you do, then you might actually know what the actual truth is about time, and how it works."
-you keep reproducing the words "truth, correct and wrong" showing that you don't understand our limits when it comes to make absolute statements about the truth value of our propositions.
And just maybe, I know far more than what you will even know about just how you are limited, because of and from that limited thinking, looking, seeing, and understanding limited brain you are looking at and seeing this?
But, obviously, if you already knew how the Mind and the brain worked, then you would already know this fact. And, know what the actual truth IS as well.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 28th, 2020, 8:04 am
That is a text book pseudo philosophical approach!
Who cares?
Not me.
The earth revolves around the sun was also a text book "pseudo philosophical and pseudo scientific approach".
You are stuck so far in your own distorted and wrong beliefs that if you never change, then you will never understand this.