New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:12 am

Ecmandu wrote:
My spiritual teachers have taken me to the sentencing of infinite hells to teach

Its not amenable to text or spoken word to explain this

How convenient that you cannot describe these infinite hells that really only exist within the confines of your mind
Its not amenable to explanation as it is so much easier to say nothing as that conveniently avoids any contradiction
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Artimas » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:12 am

I'm going to use a different analogy here.

So long as you have the luxury to have it not be your job to send people and satellites to space, you have the luxury to believe in flat earth.

In this way, you are not in hell forever, so you have the luxury to state that consent is an illusion holding everyone back.

The problem is: you're wrong


But the pain is existence itself as well through decay. So isn’t it also a constant, the pain can be lessened or heightened through ones conscious choices but never truly fully eliminated.

Do you believe it can be fully eliminated?

What if I am in hell as well as you and I perceive it differently?

But the flat earthers perspective can change to one who values choosing to begin working on how to become one who does send people to satellites, but only through struggle and acceptance or knowledge.

Even nothing, is something.
If one is to live balanced with expectations, then one must learn to appreciate the negative as well, to respect darkness in its own home.

All smoke fades, as do all delicate mirrors shatter.

"My ancestors are smiling on me, Imperials. Can you say the same?"

"Science Fiction today ~ Science Fact tomorrow"

Change is inevitable, it can only be delayed or sped up. Choose wisely.

Truth is pain, and pain is gain.


Image Image
User avatar
Artimas
Emancipator of ignorance and also Chameleon upon the stars
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:47 pm
Location: Earth, Milky Way

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:21 am

Ecmandu wrote:
surreptitious75 wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:
I am going to use a different analogy here

So long as you have the luxury to have it not be your job to send people and satellites to space you have the luxury to believe in flat earth

Avoid using analogies especially ones as bad as this

You dont need to send satellites into space to know that Earth is a sphere - Newton calculated this over three centuries ago
But there are still Flat Earthers today despite Newton and even more convincingly the satellite evidence that is undeniable

So you disagree with me by agreeing with me

No because the analogy is still wrong anyway

There is no way that you can provide evidence for something which only exists in your mind
You cannot photograph an imaginary concept from space like you can photograph the Earth
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:27 am

Surreptitious,

Umm... wow dude.

You're off your game here.

I literally argued that people who's job it is to send stuff to space have zero luxury to believe the earth is flat.

And your responses ???

Honestly! They're almost gibberish.

You're flinging mud only for the sake of flinging mud.

This is not a response to what I wrote
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:28 am

Hell does exist but only as a psychological or a philosophical aspect of the human condition
It does not therefore exist in a metaphysical sense - its a state of mind not an actual place
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:29 am

Artimas wrote:
I'm going to use a different analogy here.

So long as you have the luxury to have it not be your job to send people and satellites to space, you have the luxury to believe in flat earth.

In this way, you are not in hell forever, so you have the luxury to state that consent is an illusion holding everyone back.

The problem is: you're wrong


But the pain is existence itself as well through decay. So isn’t it also a constant, the pain can be lessened or heightened through ones conscious choices but never truly fully eliminated.

Do you believe it can be fully eliminated?

What if I am in hell as well as you and I perceive it differently?

But the flat earthers perspective can change to one who values choosing to begin working on how to become one who does send people to satellites, but only through struggle and acceptance or knowledge.


Yes. Here's where we're bumping heads. I 100% agree that it can be fully eliminated
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Artimas » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:33 am

Ecmandu wrote:
Artimas wrote:
I'm going to use a different analogy here.

So long as you have the luxury to have it not be your job to send people and satellites to space, you have the luxury to believe in flat earth.

In this way, you are not in hell forever, so you have the luxury to state that consent is an illusion holding everyone back.

The problem is: you're wrong


But the pain is existence itself as well through decay. So isn’t it also a constant, the pain can be lessened or heightened through ones conscious choices but never truly fully eliminated.

Do you believe it can be fully eliminated?

What if I am in hell as well as you and I perceive it differently?

But the flat earthers perspective can change to one who values choosing to begin working on how to become one who does send people to satellites, but only through struggle and acceptance or knowledge.


Yes. Here's where we're bumping heads. I 100% agree that it can be fully eliminated


How? By never letting it manifest? Cutting the snakes head before it becomes dangerous?

Even nothing, is something.
If one is to live balanced with expectations, then one must learn to appreciate the negative as well, to respect darkness in its own home.

All smoke fades, as do all delicate mirrors shatter.

"My ancestors are smiling on me, Imperials. Can you say the same?"

"Science Fiction today ~ Science Fact tomorrow"

Change is inevitable, it can only be delayed or sped up. Choose wisely.

Truth is pain, and pain is gain.


Image Image
User avatar
Artimas
Emancipator of ignorance and also Chameleon upon the stars
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:47 pm
Location: Earth, Milky Way

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:34 am

Human beings can very easily convince themselves of anything if they really want to
So they are under no obligation to accept anything if it contradicts their world view
Denying reality is very easy for some while for others like myself its really impossible
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:59 am

You guys,

This isn't going anywhere.

I have two people arguing just to argue, that they have signed an agreed contract to have their consent violated ---

Good luck with that shit
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:02 am

Ecmandu wrote:
I agree that it can be fully eliminated

You cannot fully eliminate suffering in whatever form it takes
Suffering is part of existence and a fundamental law of Nature

The most obvious manifestation of this is that all living things eventually die
While it is impossible to avoid death it is however possible to avoid the suffering caused by fear of death
This is one way in which psychological / philosophical suffering can be reduced - although not eliminated

Controlling suffering - wherever possible - is how to contain it because it is going to be present in some form or another - always
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:05 am

surreptitious75 wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:
I agree that it can be fully eliminated

You cannot fully eliminate suffering in whatever form it takes
Suffering is part of existence and a fundamental law of Nature

The most obvious manifestation of this is that all living things eventually die
While it is impossible to avoid death it is however possible to avoid the suffering caused by fear of death
This is one way in which psychological / philosophical suffering can be reduced - although not eliminated

Controlling suffering - wherever possible - is how to contain it because it is going to be present in some form or another - always


You quoted me out of context.

Suffering cannot be eliminated in a reality where more than one person is sentient in that reality.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:11 am

Ecmandu wrote:
This isnt going anywhere

I have two people arguing just to argue that they have signed an agreed contract to have their consent violated

I signed no contract I was born into this reality and have no choice but to accept its rules
Whereas you introduce concepts that are not a part of this reality such as imaginary hells
They only exist within your mind and nowhere else as does your notion of consent violation
This is the reason why this isnt going anywhere because you are not making any sense at all
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:16 am

Ecmandu wrote:
Suffering cannot be eliminated in a reality where more than one person is sentient in that reality

This is absolutely true but I would also say that it cannot be eliminated at all
The goal should be to accept it while trying to contain it as much as possible
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:27 am

I am leaving this thread Ecmandu as its too frustrating engaging you man
You make zero sense and its just not going anywhere so I am out of here
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:45 am

surreptitious75 wrote:I was actually referring to evolution not slavery
I wasn't saying that you were, apologies for any lack of clarity on my part. I simply used a different example to show that it was a category error.

For life to exist physics had to transform into chemistry and chemistry had to transform into biology
It was Nature that suffered first in order to create us - our own suffering came much later after this
Let assume right here that this was suffering and that is was necessary. This does not preclude wanting suffering to end or entail that this is irrational or impossible.

Again, back to the slave child...
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2501
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:53 am

Artimas wrote: The way out is through an unbiased attribution of value.

You gave reasons why you were leaving the thread. These reasons included blame aimed at Ecmandu. IOW you had a biased attribution of value aimed at his posts/behavior in the thread, and used this to justify leaving. And you are implicitly judging others who do not have an unbiased attribution of value. Those who see suffering, for example, as negative.

And this is a good metaphor for what I see in neo-Buddistish positions. They leave reality while staying in their bodies. Or to put it another way, instead of judging outwardly, they cut off portions of themselves and without openly saying they are negative, treat them that way. Then look at others and judge them for not doing the same, while denying that they attribute negativeness to anything.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2501
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:08 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Artimas wrote: The way out is through an unbiased attribution of value.

You gave reasons why you were leaving the thread. These reasons included blame aimed at Ecmandu. IOW you had a biased attribution of value aimed at his posts/behavior in the thread, and used this to justify leaving. And you are implicitly judging others who do not have an unbiased attribution of value. Those who see suffering, for example, as negative.

And this is a good metaphor for what I see in neo-Buddistish positions. They leave reality while staying in their bodies. Or to put it another way, instead of judging outwardly, they cut off portions of themselves and without openly saying they are negative, treat them that way. Then look at others and judge them for not doing the same, while denying that they attribute negativeness to anything.


Karpel, I did say this in the thread... you worded it better than me.

I was also making an additional point as well..

They are consenting to pain and suffering, they're consenting to be kidnapped and tortured.

This is why I was using the rocket to space analogy.

In the absence of actually being kidnapped and tortured, and not believing it's going to happen to them because they consented to it, they have the luxury to appear badass and wise with false beliefs.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Artimas » Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:13 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Artimas wrote: The way out is through an unbiased attribution of value.

You gave reasons why you were leaving the thread. These reasons included blame aimed at Ecmandu. IOW you had a biased attribution of value aimed at his posts/behavior in the thread, and used this to justify leaving. And you are implicitly judging others who do not have an unbiased attribution of value. Those who see suffering, for example, as negative.

And this is a good metaphor for what I see in neo-Buddistish positions. They leave reality while staying in their bodies. Or to put it another way, instead of judging outwardly, they cut off portions of themselves and without openly saying they are negative, treat them that way. Then look at others and judge them for not doing the same, while denying that they attribute negativeness to anything.


I’m not judging anyone, I am stating the fact of the matter that suffering is attributed value by the individual who suffers.

Value changes, suffering doesn’t. So why would you /choose/ to be trapped in a cycle of determining higher value to suffering than of attributing value to growing and not giving the suffering power over you?

Are you arguing against common sense?

I stated I was leaving the thread because it’s a matter of perspective. You consent to being alive by being alive, if you don’t consent, suicide is an option. Therefore you consent compelled by a likely fear of death. So then right there you can see the value attribution of value upon ones life instead of suicide, which the attribution of value is the consent.

If you never knew there was bad and good in this world and don't consent to such everyday walking out of your house then that would simply make you naive, ignorant.. of which I would urge you to understand this world better before going out.

There is a reason for knowledge, to consent properly and attribute value reasonably/logically. It’s as simple as that.

I don’t blame anyone. I said the value of me leaving this thread is higher than not since I have other topics to focus on, it has no blame in or for Ec.

Also, I am not judging others for not killing suffering rather than let it fester, I am showing how the extra suffering and not finding a way out is an individuals fault, since they /let/ it fester rather than kill its value. There’s a difference.

The attribution of value to being correct instead of value attributed to trying to understand/humility. Is an act out of ego observable psychologically. Being correct is blinding because reality doesn’t focus based off our /want/ to be correct. That is why I stated I was leaving the thread. I don’t care to be “correct”, i only care to reveal reality for what it is.

The whole “you’re wrong I’m right” sounds like cognitive dissonance, even when I have demonstrated that the consent lies within the value and also consent being ones staying alive. How is that not true? Pain is forever no doubt but what one does with it is ultimately up to them. It isn’t good and it isn’t evil, that’s ones own misconception of their attributing value to it in their own manner they deem.

If I get my hand chopped off, sure it would fucking suck wouldn’t it? But my consent to that horror is despite being a now broken man, is the attribution of value upon my life which is the very consent of staying alive despite the pain of my hand now missing. Otherwise if one doesn’t value their life and doesn’t consent, what’s suicide? What’s death?

Every man has negative aspects and traits, don’t try to paint me in a light of where I am assuming I don’t, when I know and can openly state that I do. Do I let them have power over me and others? No and that comes with a sacrifice sure. But i can handle the pain, can others? I don’t know, let’s take a look at the world, what would you say?

If I also didn’t experience negativity or have negativity, how could I be unbiased when a state of being unbiased is through experience in or of both or all sides, understanding lies in the same path, a position of experience/observance of contrasts in a whole. Are you implying I have no positives?

Oh and by the way, the only way one can be unbiased is by a willing choice to experience both sides or observe both sides of bias. There is no unbiased without first experiencing bias. That’s the point. It doesn’t mean one has to /stay/ biased, therein is where the issue lies, /staying/ biased instead of seeing contrasts and understanding both.

I am saying to experience all sides just don’t bounce to the extreme. Which staying between is balance. After an understanding one can /choose/ to stay balanced.

Even nothing, is something.
If one is to live balanced with expectations, then one must learn to appreciate the negative as well, to respect darkness in its own home.

All smoke fades, as do all delicate mirrors shatter.

"My ancestors are smiling on me, Imperials. Can you say the same?"

"Science Fiction today ~ Science Fact tomorrow"

Change is inevitable, it can only be delayed or sped up. Choose wisely.

Truth is pain, and pain is gain.


Image Image
User avatar
Artimas
Emancipator of ignorance and also Chameleon upon the stars
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:47 pm
Location: Earth, Milky Way

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby iambiguous » Sun Apr 21, 2019 7:11 pm

Trust me: In the throes of waiting for godot, I'm called upon [by myself] to do any number of utterly futile tasks. In this case, setting the record straight regarding ecmandu's la la land claims about me.

Iambiguous states that he has no sense of self and can't find moral answers to every question...


Like everyone else, I have a sense of self rooted in the hundreds and hundreds of factors that are embedded in my actual existence out in the either/or world. The things about me that are, in fact, true. True for everyone. Things able to be readly demonstrated and confirmed.

Only in regard to my value judgments out in the is/ought world am "I" down in my "hole" "fractured and fragmented". And for all of the reasons I have noted here over and over and over and over and over again. Right?

And I have never argued that I cannot find moral answers. Instead, I make a distinction between having found them once as an objectivist in the past and not finding them here and now as a moral nihilist.

My argument is that any particular individual's moral and political values are embedded existentially at the intersection of dasein, conflicting goods and political economy.

And, in turn, that the "consent" we embody in our interactions with others is, as well, largely an existential contraption; and, thus, beyond the reach of those who employ the tools of philosophy.

Unless of course I am wrong. In other words, that someone here is able to note how their own value judgments in a particular context are such that they are able to convince me that the components of my own argument are less reasonable.

Then I go further and state that if his problem is impossible to solve, we can declare reality as inherently evil, bad.


I'm not arguing that my problem is impossible to solve. Instead I note two things that seem to be applicable to all of us:

1] that how we understand any of this is necessarily rooted in whatever explains the existence of existence itself
2] that we are unable to determine definitively whether this exchange itself is only as it ever could have been in a wholly determined universe

And, sure, short of that, there is still the possibility that someone is in fact able to solve problems like this. It's just not me. Or [from my frame of mind here and now] any of you.

And, as well, we can "declare" reality as "inherently" anything that we are able to "think up" in our head. But asserting it and actually demonstrating it is a task that [in my view] minds like ecmandu seem not in the least bit concerned about.

They just blurt out any number of things that they insist are true by, among other things, definition.

And five will get you ten it's their own.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33056
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:21 pm

iambiguous wrote:Trust me: In the throes of waiting for godot, I'm called upon [by myself] to do any number of utterly futile tasks. In this case, setting the record straight regarding ecmandu's la la land claims about me.

Iambiguous states that he has no sense of self and can't find moral answers to every question...


Like everyone else, I have a sense of self rooted in the hundreds and hundreds of factors that are embedded in my actual existence out in the either/or world. The things about me that are, in fact, true. True for everyone. Things able to be readly demonstrated and confirmed.

Only in regard to my value judgments out in the is/ought world am "I" down in my "hole" "fractured and fragmented". And for all of the reasons I have noted here over and over and over and over and over again. Right?

And I have never argued that I cannot find moral answers. Instead, I make a distinction between having found them once as an objectivist in the past and not finding them here and now as a moral nihilist.

My argument is that any particular individual's moral and political values are embedded existentially at the intersection of dasein, conflicting goods and political economy.

And, in turn, that the "consent" we embody in our interactions with others is, as well, largely an existential contraption; and, thus, beyond the reach of those who employ the tools of philosophy.

Unless of course I am wrong. In other words, that someone here is able to note how their own value judgments in a particular context are such that they are able to convince me that the components of my own argument are less reasonable.

Then I go further and state that if his problem is impossible to solve, we can declare reality as inherently evil, bad.


I'm not arguing that my problem is impossible to solve. Instead I note two things that seem to be applicable to all of us:

1] that how we understand any of this is necessarily rooted in whatever explains the existence of existence itself
2] that we are unable to determine definitively whether this exchange itself is only as it ever could have been in a wholly determined universe

And, sure, short of that, there is still the possibility that someone is in fact able to solve problems like this. It's just not me. Or [from my frame of mind here and now] any of you.

And, as well, we can "declare" reality as "inherently" anything that we are able to "think up" in our head. But asserting it and actually demonstrating it is a task that [in my view] minds like ecmandu seem not in the least bit concerned about.

They just blurt out any number of things that they insist are true by, among other things, definition.

And five will get you ten it's their own.


I solved three of your common examples on this board.

Definition: words used to describe discoveries that are delineated in a self evident way.

Proof: that which has to be true, otherwise the self evident delineation must fail

The three proof I have in this manner:

Pro choice is the correct answer
Liberal democracy is the correct answer
Why existence exists instead of not existing

I fulfilled your request.

Debate me on my proofs instead of waving your hands and saying (I disagree, but I won't tell you why)
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:37 pm

Read the above post:

Also, iambiguous, I wanted to add:

Do it in formal debates.

I have no idea why you wouldn't want to debate me on this... from your perspective it would be an unprecedented miracle if I won.

That's making history iambiguous!

We can work out the details with carleas
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby iambiguous » Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:53 pm

Ecmandu wrote:Read the above post:

Also, iambiguous, I wanted to add:

Do it in formal debates.

I have no idea why you wouldn't want to debate me on this... from your perspective it would be an unprecedented miracle if I won.

That's making history iambiguous!

We can work out the details with carleas


Anyone else?

:banana-linedance: :lol: :banana-linedance:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33056
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:01 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Read the above post:

Also, iambiguous, I wanted to add:

Do it in formal debates.

I have no idea why you wouldn't want to debate me on this... from your perspective it would be an unprecedented miracle if I won.

That's making history iambiguous!

We can work out the details with carleas


Anyone else?

:banana-linedance: :lol: :banana-linedance:


So, are you confessing to being a shameless troll of ILP here ?

I guarantee you, in debates, my debates won't disappoint - think about it - unprecedented miracle if you lose - shaming me if I lose.

What do you have to lose?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Artimas » Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:19 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Read the above post:

Also, iambiguous, I wanted to add:

Do it in formal debates.

I have no idea why you wouldn't want to debate me on this... from your perspective it would be an unprecedented miracle if I won.

That's making history iambiguous!

We can work out the details with carleas


Anyone else?

:banana-linedance: :lol: :banana-linedance:


So, are you confessing to being a shameless troll of ILP here ?

I guarantee you, in debates, my debates won't disappoint - think about it - unprecedented miracle if you lose - shaming me if I lose.

What do you have to lose?


Time man. It’s a matter of perspective Ec. You have to attribute value more justly if you want to see justly. If that makes sense. We can’t tell you how to live or be because then you attribute us to an extreme which is not true. We can only state what reality is or isn’t based on our viewing of it.

Even nothing, is something.
If one is to live balanced with expectations, then one must learn to appreciate the negative as well, to respect darkness in its own home.

All smoke fades, as do all delicate mirrors shatter.

"My ancestors are smiling on me, Imperials. Can you say the same?"

"Science Fiction today ~ Science Fact tomorrow"

Change is inevitable, it can only be delayed or sped up. Choose wisely.

Truth is pain, and pain is gain.


Image Image
User avatar
Artimas
Emancipator of ignorance and also Chameleon upon the stars
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:47 pm
Location: Earth, Milky Way

Re: New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:42 pm

@artimas,

That's the whole point of my consent argument.

Everyone can check reality on a self evident FOR THEM, falsification at any time.

So here's the rub. Abusers of people hate self evident, self empowering falsifications of abuse.

Arguments through non contradiction also apply to all of us, it is the higher power of all existence.

The problem is, with you and iambiguous, people want the power instead of logic having the power.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9025
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users