Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
Have you forgotten that it is you making a claim here about what I am actually meaning, in what I am saying?
It seems that you have forgotten that by the same token, you cannot know what I'm actually meaning, therefore you cannot make a claim about my claim.
But I can KNOW what you are meaning. That is; when you tell me.
For example when you told me;
you will say something and with the tricky 'to me' phrase will try to shield it from any criticism., which, and correct me if I am wrong here, means that when I say the 'to me' phrase you think or believe that I am trying to shield what I am saying from criticism.
This is what you did mean, right?
If no, then what did you actually mean?
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
I am the One who KNOWS what I actually mean, in what I say. Therefore, I am thee ONLY One who can tell you if what you are ASSUMING here is correct or NOT. And, I am telling you that what you have ASSUMED here is completely and utterly INCORRECT.
Sure, but since I'm also the one who knows what I actually mean in what I say, you cannot say what I'm really assuming, nor whether I'm correct or not in my assumption.
But I can KNOW what you are really assuming. That is; when you tell me.
And, when you tell me what your ASSUMPTION is, in regards to what I actually mean in what I say, then I can tell you, 100% correctly, whether YOUR ASSUMPTION is correct, or not.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
When I write some thing, then I KNOW EXACTLY what 'it' (X) CERTAINLY MEANS.
You can also do this.
Therefore, I CAN say that something 'certainly means X'.
Not if X is said by me.
But I have NEVER even TRIED to do that here.
I have NEVER even THOUGHT about doing that here.
In fact, I would NEVER even CONSIDER doing that, anywhere.
SEE, it is me who is consistently going on about if any one wants to learn more, or gain a better understanding, then just ask CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. Which, OBVIOUSLY, means NEVER assume what another means in what they say, and just ask CLARIFYING QUESTIONS instead, and FIRST.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
I mean, you can say whatever you want, but it will not be true that you know what X means said by me.
I have NEVER even thought that it would be. let alone suggested this ANY where. In fact, I have been the one saying otherwise.
Also, just to correct you, some times it is true that I know what X means said by you or by any one else. BUT, I will only ever KNOW this, through CLARIFICATION. Which, by the way, comes from CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, which are better asked without absolutely ANY assumptions at all being made.
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
And, what I have been pointing out, and SHOWING, is that you are FREE to ASSUME whatever you like in regards to what I am meaning, in what I have said, but it is ONLY I who KNOWS, EXACTLY, what is CERTAINLY MEANT.
By the same token, whatever I say about whatever you said, it is ONLY I who KNOWS, EXACTLY, what is CERTAINLY MEANT in what I said.[/quote]
OF COURSE. This is WHAT I HAVE BEEN POINTING OUT.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
So, you are disqualified to provide any knowledge from your side about what I said.
I have ONLY done this when you have been INCORRECT or WRONG.
Also, and just to correct you again, I am qualified to provide some knowledge from my perspective in regards to what you have actually said. But, it is ONLY through CLARIFYING QUESTIONS can I accurately obtain the knowledge of what you ACTUALLY MEANT, in what you have said.
See, what you have said, or what words you have written, can NOT be disputed. HOWEVER, what you ACTUALLY MEAN can ONLY be Truly KNOWN, by 'you'.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
I have been telling you that what you were ASSUMING is just PLAIN WRONG.
But that's of course, just about what you're assuming that I'm assuming.
Not necessarily so.
If, for example, you write what you are ASSUMING, and then I CLARIFY with you in regards to what you actually meant, FIRST, and you explain what you meant, in what you are ASSUMING, and through CLARIFYING you say that is correct, then I have NOT assumed ANY thing at all. I have gained a better understanding of 'you', and what you actually mean, and therefore, I can tell you whether what you were ASSUMING about what I actually said, AND MEANT, is actually correct or not.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
And I'm completely entitled to say that you're plain wrong.
As a human being you are entitled to say absolutely ANY thing you like. But, I suggest BEFORE you say ANY thing, or make a claim, then you have, at least, some thing that you can use to back up and support your statement, proposition, or claim.
Now, if you want to tell me that I am plain wrong in regards to absolutely ANY thing I say, then I would be most appreciative if you do do this, when you can SEE absolutely ANY thing plainly wrong, in what I say.
But I will just CLARIFY whereabouts EXACTLY in what I have said, and more importantly CLARIFY, with you, WHY.
So, PLEASE correct me when I am WRONG, in what I say.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
Again, you appear to have COMPLETELY MISSED, or MISUNDERSTOOD, the point that I have been making.
Or so you think, but of course you cannot know, for only I can know what point I'm making.
But, as explained earlier, I CAN KNOW. That is; when you inform me of the ACTUAL point you are making.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
The point I have been making is; When I write some thing, then ONLY I KNOW what I mean by that.
But so, the point I will be making is that when I write something about what you have written, then ONLY I KNOW what I mean by that.
And so, when you write some thing about what I have written, then I will ask you some CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, in regards to what you ACTUALLY MEAN.
There, OBVIOUSLY, is NO real point at all in writing some thing if you are NOT prepared to be OPEN and Honest and explain in detail what you ACTUALLY MEANT in what you wrote, especially in a philosophy forum of all places.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
So, you can either ask me a clarifying question, so that then you learn, and thus understand, what I actually mean, OR, you can do what you have been, and that is; Continue to make ASSUMPTIONS, which may or may not be true and correct.
But you have said emphatically that only you know what it is meant in what you say,
Yes, this is correct.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
so if you continue saying things to answer any question, by your own confession it is only you who can know what those new statements mean.
But, OBVIOUSLY, IF very specific questions were asked, then very specific answers will be provided. And so, IF ANY one is Truly interested and Truly wants to KNOW what another is ACTUALLY MEANING in what they say, then I suggest just asking CLARIFYING QUESTIONS as specifically as can be, and from a Truly OPEN perspective.
But what can be CLEARLY OBSERVED and SEEN throughout the last few millennia, before these writings were being written, most adult human beings are not really that interested in what "another" is Truly MEANING in what they say. Just LOOK AT the writings within this philosophy forum to NOTICE just how much people want to express their OWN thoughts and ideas, without every really considering what the "other" is thinking, and actually MEANING.
Adult human beings, especially in the days of when this is being written, are NOT at all really that interested in the ideas of "others". Adult are to busy in expressing their own ideas and thoughts, and are far more interested in learning how to be heard and listened to themselves, rather than being at all concerned or interest in the thoughts and ideas of "others".
This way of misbehaving can be CLEARLY SEEN throughout these writings and in the way they do debate. A PRIME EXAMPLE of this type of misbehavior can be CLEARLY SEEN in the way the, so called, "leaders" talk to each other.
If the way the "leaders" of the, so called, "free world" talk 'to' each other is any example to go by, which 'examples' is, exactly, what "leaders" are supposed to be, then no wonder adult human beings go on the way they do, when this is being written, if the "leaders" of your planet go on the way they do in a, so called, "presidential debate".
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
Of course, we can apply the same to my statements.
We 'could', but if we did, then we 'would' be incorrect.
To correct your statement here; It is NOT 'only' the one who makes new statements who can KNOW what is MEANT in those statements. Absolutely ANY one else can ALSO KNOW. But that is; ONLY if they are Truly interested in KNOWING.
And, to KNOW if ANY one 'else' is Truly interested in KNOWING what another one is saying, then this can be CLEARLY RECOGNIZED and SEEN in and by the way CLARIFYING QUESTIONS are being asked, or not.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
If you continue to do the latter, then I will continue to tell you when you are WRONG.
You will always be free to say whatever you want to say. The issue is that, when referring to my statements, you will be talking about something that you CANNOT know what is meant, and therefore cannot know that is right or wrong.
But, as I have been explaining. I CAN KNOW what is meant, by what you, or another, says.
But, OBVIOUSLY, you, or the other, would HAVE TO BE prepared to be OPEN, and Honest, FIRST, for this to occur.
And, in the times of when this is being written most adult human beings have NOT YET been prepared to be Truly OPEN, nor Honest.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
See, I KNOW I can back up and support each and EVERY one of my views. That is; of course, unless I am PROVEN otherwise.
Surely, you can only support and prove your views to yourself.
LOL No.
I, OBVIOUSLY, can support AND prove my views to ANY one. But, just as OBVIOUS, is the fact that they would HAVE TO BE Truly interested FIRST.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
Remember your emphatic statement that only you can know what you mean.
That was in regards to when another is making ASSUMPTIONS.
If another is making ASSUMPTIONS, then ONLY I can KNOW what I mean. BUT, if the other is Truly interested in KNOWING what I actually mean, then they ALSO CAN KNOW what I mean.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
By the same token, what my statements actually mean would only be accessible to myself, so you are not able to qualify them as true or false.
Hopefully, you have already gained the understanding and knowing that what ANY one actually means is actually accessible to others. And, hopefully, you have already also gained the understanding and knowing of HOW this accessibility can be actually shared, and gained.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
I have found your views, which have been based on your ASSUMPTIONS here, VERY available for discussion.
You mean assuming for yourself what you think my views are,
But you have already told us what some of your views, correct?
If yes, then NO assuming was necessary.
But, if no, then WHY NOT?
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
but those remain as your views and your assumptions, not my actual views, which belong only to myself, apparently.
If you HAD ALREADY CLARIFIED with me FIRST, in regards to this, then you would NOT have been making this WRONG ASSUMPTION here that I am saying that your actual views belong ONLY to yourself.
If you HAD CLARIFIED EARLIER, then you would ALREADY KNOW that my statement regarding only the one with the views KNOWS what the actual views are, that is; UNTIL what they actually are are CLARIFIED with others, correctly.
And, this can only be done correctly and successfully through CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, which I have been POINTING OUT, ALREADY.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
evolution wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 9:38 am
I MEAN we will have to LOOK AT, and DISCUSS, what the 'you' actually means to BOTH OF US, in order to SEE if we come to an agreement, and then, depending if we do or not, THEN that will determine if you could and would understand my answer to your question here, or not.
Such proposition would imply that your views are not yours only.
That proposition does NOT imply that at all. In fact that proposition does NOT imply either way.
That proposition is making the OBVIOUS CLAIM that we will NOT know if any one's views are not theirs only, UNTIL CLARIFICATION is made, FIRST.
LOOK AT, just how EASILY and just how QUICKLY your ASSUMPTIONS can lead to you astray.
SEE, if you had CLARIFIED with me FIRST, what I ACTUALLY MEANT, BEFORE you made the ASSUMPTION that my proposition was 'implying' any such thing here, then you would NOT have diverted and strayed so far off track, now.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
It would be a blatant contradiction to your emphatic position so far.
BUT, what you ASSUMED is my "emphatic position" is NOT what you have ASSUMED it is, exactly. And, what you have ALSO ASSUMED here is NOT correct either. So, ONCE AGAIN, we are BACK TO the ASSUMPTIONS you are making here are WRONG, AGAIN.
ONCE AGAIN, I think you MISSING or MISUNDERSTANDING the POINT I have been making. That is; IF you STOPPED ASSUMING and instead asked me some CLARIFYING QUESTIONS FIRST, then you would NOT be as WRONG as you are, as OFTEN as you are.
Now, you might like to tell me that what I am ASSUMING in regards to what you have been writing is WRONG or is NOT CORRECT. But, if you TRIED TO DO THIS now, then you will HAVE TO contradict what you, "your" 'self', have been writing, AND ACTUALLY SAYING.
If you WANT to 'try to' PROVE me WRONG here, then START by EXPLAINING what you ACTUALLY MEANT in what you have ACTUALLY BEEN SAYING so far.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
But of course, you can always resort again to saying that this is only my assumption of what your view means, that only you can know.
Well this IS an OBVIOUS FACT. Especially considering you did NOT ask me one CLARIFYING QUESTION, but instead went on to inform us what you SEE as being what I actually meant.
And, obviously, if you are telling another what they actually meant but NEVER bothered to CLARIFY with them FIRST, then OBVIOUSLY you are only MAKING ASSUMPTIONS.
Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2020, 10:58 pm
That will make the contradiction even more obvious.
Some are saying the opposite is ACTUALLY thee Truth here.
SEE, what you have ONLY ASSUMED my views meant, was OBVIOUSLY WRONG, as explained and SHOWN in detail above.
So, the ONLY contradictions here have been on your part.
Unless, of course, you can PROVE me WRONG here now.
We will WAIT, and SEE.