How is this definition of "belief"?

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

Good point, but can't he claim that Reality is an objective mystery?
After all, with his absolute agnosticism, i.e., that he knows nothing for sure, he at least frees himself from "confusion" as a subjective problem regarding Reality.
Is that right, Frank?

I'll stick with what I have already said.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

I had to laugh when you wrote,
Quote:
that he knows nothing for sure
.

Frank argues HPOV veciferously - as if he knows for sure! LOL
This is the same guy who doesn't have beliefs.

I'm glad you are getting a laugh out of it. Anything to bring enjoyment into a life.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I'll stick with what I have already said.

Why am I not suprised? Smile

0 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:
One does not have to know what the REALITY is...to know that it is objective, Cyracuz. I have explained that several times.

No, Frank. Not EXPLAINED. You have SAID it many times. But apparently not enough times that you can see how foolish that statement is.

And regarding the unpleasantness... It is always unpleasant to get called on your bullshit, Frank. I can only imagine what it must be like to think yourself free of beliefs, only to discover that they are alive and well and making you say retarded things on an internet forum.

Explained!

Not foolish at all!

Absolutely do not do beliefs.

And unnecessary unpleasantness on your part..

0 Replies

@FBM,

People seem to be ignoring your question, FBM, so i thought i'd remind them.

FBM wrote:

I'm not taking sides in this, and I hope to say this without stepping on any toes, but if all experience is subjective, doesn't it require something of a leap, however small, to say anything at all about the qualities of whatever - if anything - is unavailable to said experience?

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

I'm not taking sides in this, and I hope to say this without stepping on any toes, but if all experience is subjective, doesn't it require something of a leap, however small, to say anything at all about the qualities of whatever - if anything - is unavailable to said experience?

The REALITY of what is...may be unavailable to our experience. We really do not know, because what we sense may be an illusion of some sort.

But we can say something about it without making any kind of leaps of the sort you are suggesting.

We can, for instance, say: Whatever the REALITY is (even if it is that there is no reality)...whatever it IS...it IS.

That is a tautology...but it is something. It is something being said about a thing which may be unavailable to our experience.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I don't have any particular beef about that, but I was referring to the word "objective."

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

I don't have any particular beef about that, but I was referring to the word "objective."

What about the word "objective."

REALITY is whatever it is.

That means REALITY must be objective. Even if it is "subjective"...it is objectively subjective.

The argument that it is not, considering the fact that it IS whatever it IS...is impossible.

1 Reply

First step is to acknowledge THERE ARE phenomena going around and thus that there MUST be a reality !

Second step is to acknowledge that REALITY by definition refers to the SET of the SUM of ALL things, that that IT IS.

Third step to conclude that the SET of ALL of that that IT IS cannot justify, create, or observe itself without first need being itself. (Would imply a contradiction)

Thus Reality is BY NECESSITY OBJECTIVE, as the sum of all things cannot be justified by anything else (because there is no anything else if being the sum of all things) Reality is nothing other but that that IT IS ! (the sentence, it implies objectivity)

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Third step to conclude that the SET of ALL of that that IT IS cannot justify, create, or observe itself without first need being itself. (Would imply a contradiction)

Just a question Fil... How does reality observe itself?

1 Reply

@igm,

It doesn't as a group it can't...the old problem of uncertainty just shows this...things in reality can only show aspects of reality, parts of reality, phenomena, but can never show the ALL base of reality because that would require reality to grow out of itself to show itself as a subset, compute itself...that is like asking a full glass of water to fit "compute" another glass of water on top, but the glass is already full...it is not justifiable, if everything it cannot be reproduced ! (Knowledge tries to reproduce reality by describing it, but as you know any subset cannot compute the master set, a master set is uncomputable)

From Wiki on Russell's paradox:

Quote:

The reason why a function cannot be its own argument is that the sign for a function already contains the prototype of its argument, and it cannot contain itself. For let us suppose that the function F(fx) could be its own argument: in that case there would be a proposition 'F(F(fx))', in which the outer function F and the inner function F must have different meanings, since the inner one has the form O(f(x)) and the outer one has the form Y(O(fx)). Only the letter 'F' is common to the two functions, but the letter by itself signifies nothing. This immediately becomes clear if instead of 'F(Fu)' we write '(do) : F(Ou) . Ou = Fu'. That disposes of Russell's paradox.

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

It doesn't as a group it can't...the old problem of uncertainty just shows this...things in reality can only show aspects of reality, parts of reality, phenomena, but can never show the ALL base of reality because that would require reality to grow out of itself to show itself as a subset, compute itself...that is like asking a full glass of water to fit "compute" another glass of water on top, but the glass is already full...it is not justifiable !

Surely, that's a problem for your thesis then isn't it?

1 Reply

@igm,

Not at all it is just the opposite it proves reality IS just once it cannot be reproduced...therefore an object ! OBJECTIVE not relative to something else ! There is no something else...I already explain a thousand times things cannot create itself s ! They need first exist before existing its a contradiction that something creates itself, thus it cannot observe itself !

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Their belief system does not allow them to even acknowledge the possiblity of their being wrong.

Asking some of the questions you are asking...making some of the arguments you are making...are like asking a devote theist, "But isn't there at least a possibility that there is no GOD?"

I guess I could give you your own advice to me: Drop it; it's pointless. But I am pretty sure you would disregard it as I did.

It IS a religion with them. There is no "self"...REALITY is subjective. It is a religion...albeit without structures.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I was actually in the middle of a reply to FBM when I got a call and had to go out for a bit.

As far as I can tell, FBM's question here speaks directly to what I have been saying all along.

If all we have is subjective experience, we cannot say anything for sure about reality outside of subjective experience.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Note please when we say Reality is reality we ad nothing to reality which is exactly what we should do ! There is nothing to be added if everything ! Automatically as a whole is an object non relative to nothing else ! Time space energy motion everything is a subset emerging in it...itself it does NOT MOVE, thus IT IS NOT RELATIVE ! A ONE THING !!!

That's what objective MEANS, something to be what IT IS, and not relative to A or B or C...there is NO OUTSIDE of ALL...ALL is ALL !!! OBJEEEEEECTIVE !

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

If you're talking about me Frank... you read a lot into my two questions to Fil... wrong as usual...

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

I was actually in the middle of a reply to FBM when I got a call and had to go out for a bit.

As far as I can tell, FBM's question here speaks directly to what I have been saying all along.

If all we have is subjective experience, we cannot say anything for sure about reality outside of subjective experience.

That is absurd, Cyracuz. Of course we can.

We can, for instance, say: REALITY...IS whatever IS. Whatever the reality of existence IS...that is what it IS.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil... don't read anything into my two questions other than... I asked you two questions... Wink

0 Replies

@igm,

igm wrote:

If you're talking about me Frank... you read a lot into my two questions to Fil... wrong as usual...

If you are among the people arguing as I suggested...then I am talking about you, igm. And I am far from "wrong" in what I said.

2 Replies

How is this definition of "belief"?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know