I don't think there is anything that's an absolute truth
Now I could be wrong so then my statement isn't an absolute truth

what future? There is only now and the "future" is just in the imagination
Now sometimes we can predict how the "now" will be in a this imaginary place called the future and when this imaginary place aligns with the now we then say if it was an accurate prediction or not but just because a prediction comes true no more makes the future real than it does just prove that you know how to predict how the now will be eventually

physicists are day dreamers that somehow get paid to daydream, like you said they believe in time which is different then knowing

And like you said we can't detect time and so we have to believe that it exists, but why? Why believe in something that you can't find? Especially when you go looking for it and instead find something else? (Change) why does science have such a stubborn dogma about itself that it will be so skeptical and cautious about new hypotheses and only accepting only those things which can be properly predicted and repeatedly controlled multiple times being so cautious as to not add something that doesn't appear to be true and controllable,

and yet at the very same time uphold beliefs that can't be confirmed but are assumed till Kingdom come and create the very backbone of its entire ontology?

It's nonsensical it looks dishonest and it appears to be agenda driven because I don't see any other reason why anyone would blindly believe in something that they fail time again to prove

Now I'm saying that directed towards science as a whole not the individuals within it because I highly doubt anybody has that kind of tyrannical agenda and perspective very rarely does somebody actually have that form of personality .

what do you mean when you say that space is real? And intuitive is by no means some kind of end all form of knowing, not even close in fact often times people's intuitive beliefs are wrong and or part of some kind of indoctrination.

So do you think that one day we will be able to time travel?

Can you mail me a chunk of yesterday?, No?, Then how about next week? That way it doesn't go bad before it gets here.

You can't and that's because time only exists as a concept and an imposter using change as it's body to trick people into believing in it .

(Obviously that last part I was speaking metaphorically)

We need technology to keep track of time because we can't (depending on the level of detail one chooses to observe it at that is)

And things don't all change as the same speed and yet there is just 1 time that we say governs everything

But yet a person can get healthy and look and feel and by every measurable way possible be younger

Did they somehow break out of this thing that science says rules and governs all physicality?, Did they become equal to a god?

I mean they look and feel 15yrs younger and they have the blood work that says the same thing so they must be a god if they have the power to spin the clock the other direction

Or the reality is that there is no time but there is change and everything is changing and doing so at different rates and a person can slow down there rate of change or turn there change from a falling apart less effective less efficient form into a healthier more abundant lively form IE a healthy lifestyle

So change is just a concept that uses pre-existing things that actually do exist as its body but we don't realize this and were told that time is real by the people before us and likewise the people before them and so on forth

no we are not moving through time because time isn't real
So then what is this that we are all experiencing that we were told us called time then?

Well it is called change, change is how we define time because time can't define itself because time is a concept that has been overlaid covering up the truth which is change the only actual thing that can be observed and experienced

language is the material that the matrix is made out of and that we are all trapped within,

because instead of you personally experiencing something inorder to know it
I can instead tell you about it and when I tell you about it I am building a copy of that experience that I had inside your mind so that your mind can experience it without the body and without the limitations of linearity in time
The main drawback however is that no matter how I tell it to you you will never have the same exact copy of that "thing" in your mind that I do

And this is what makes us different then every other living creature and it's also the reason why we lose sleep wondering these philosophical questions that don't seem to bother other living creatures

Because are minds are so developed around language it has unfortunately created a kind of lie so to speak because using language we make things like the concept of time and the past and the future and so many other concepts that aren't in the now right now and Infront of your face literally

And they require you to use your imagination inorder to see and understand them

Whereas other animals they only deal with what's real
And what's real is what's right in front of your face and happening right now and nothing else

So much of what we know is because of language and not because we literally experienced it for ourselves
So 95% of what we know is a fake kind of knowledge of existence and the route of why we have these questions about life and why we feel like the world is an illusion AKA Maya because to us it is a false world because most of us have never actually experienced the world that we know of in our heads we've only talked about it whereas animals have much less knowledge than we do but all of the knowledge that they have is of the real world because they literally experienced it and so this is why language is the material the glue and the string that holds the matrix together

what exactly are you referring to as "real" exactly? I mean you say you are experiencing the "right now" and that it feels real to you while others say it's not real
So I guess my question is by what means are you determining that your experience is actually real?

bam! You hit the nail on the head! That's what I was trying to ask and you answered it very well I might add.

So now hmmmmm... So then whats the next essay? I'm dying to see how this all ties into the next part not that I'm smart enough to know how to do anything with it LOL but nonetheless I'll pretend like I am lol

why are they beyond the scope?

And with my bicycle analogy I totally agree with your reply on it and how we would conclude that he is nowhere near the fastest bicycle rider in the world that's the same way I would have come the same conclusion I agree with you on that however my point to that was that based on their limited abilities being young kids let's assume this was before cell phones in the internet being the people that they are (adolescents) they do not have all the same tools at their fingertips that adults and modern times have and so their perspective and their way of testing the hypothesis is a very limited small barbaric kids version

and that was the point that I was trying to use to compare is that you're giving parameters and limitations and within those parameters and limitations the tools appear to be real and do work in the manner that they need to because when we question them we're questioning them within the parameters you've set and when we do that they are rendered as real and usable and good but is that only because we're stuck within that narrow parameter? If we were to expand further past would we find something else? That was the point in my analogy of that

Now I'm by no means calling your essay limited stupid youthful barbaric or any of those other things by any means it's actually way more complex than my brain is used to dealing with but I was simply using the analogy in comparison of limitations not of complexity by any means.


But regardless you're still not getting the point that I'm trying to convey and I'm having hard time trying to figure out how to convey it so bear with me while I try to gather my thoughts

you wouldn't say that if you were in the same car with me when I'm driving lol

Well I know that I am aware and yet I'm not aware of how my body is staying alive and yet it is

It seems like a very small percentage of existence is actually aware or "conscious" as they say

As for why? I'm not sure but I'm dieing to know.

I feel like you're going to get a lot of pessimistic kickback for this topic because there seems to be a lot of bitter narcissistic intellectuals that are into philosophy and the average want to be philosopher only will accept things that have been peer reviewed and are in accordance with the scientific method

which is a limited scope of reality and there's much more to life than what the scientific method can measure so I find it a bit nonsensical for people to only acknowledge things that fit within that particular parameter of testing but to each his own they want to limit their understanding like that that's their business

however I don't remember exactly where the paper is I'll try to find it but there was a study done by Stanford a while back where they took housemates that work for a cleaning company and they asked them if they were fit or active and most of them said no one said that they're pretty sedentary and didn't live a very active life despite the fact that their job was extremely physically demanding

So then they took half of them and explain to them how actually their job is extremely physical and they are very active throughout the day and they explained to them how so and the repetitive things they do throughout the day how it activates certain muscles of the body and how it actually was very good for them

and then they came back and reevaluated them a few months later and found that just changing their mindset in perspective on their job by explaining to them how fit it was to be doing that job made positive improvements across the board in just the participants that they explained it to

and they're physical health literally changed just based off of their perspective on their job on average they lost a little bit of weight their vitals were better just all around general health improved just because their opinion and perspective on their job improved.

And yes it's peer-reviewed and it's from Stanford I'll see if I can find it and link it

This topic is the main focus of my attention and has been for years
And how the human body works has been a question that I have been working on pretty much ever since I was 14 yrs old do to health problem stemming from birth I was intrigued at how the human body works because being born with a weak heart caused me lots of problems up until one doctor I was referred to recommended I exercise and exercising transformed my life to say the least

And I've been in the health industry for over 15yrs now working with post physical therapy rehab as well as sports and bodybuilding coaching so I've worked both sides of the health spectrum from can't walk to elite physical shape

And what kind of mental condition said persons are in and how that correlates to their physical well-being

I think that the mind can control the body far more then we realize especially here in Western society

One of the most important things a person has to do when getting ready for a bodybuilding competition is stay away from negative thought and feelings because they will make a person look worse almost instantly

I can't tell you how many times Ive had a client send me progress pictures and I ask them if they had a stressful day and they always tell me I'm dead on accurate

I remember when my best friends mom was going through a divorce it was hard but so was that last 10yrs of marriage

And she looked like a normal 45yr old mom nothing to write home about
But after the divorce she had a family member pass away that she didn't even know about so there passing didn't emotionally affected however they left her a substantial chunk of money which took care of her and on her financial problems being on her own so this enabled her to focus on whatever she wanted to and that happened to be herself

And I say all of this because when she realized she had a new start at life and had hope again
It was less then 6 months since I had seen her and she showed up one day and no one recognized her she had changed so much
She lost about 30lb and looked 20yrs younger less wrinkles I mean literally look like you rewound the time clock

She was 100% milf lol no one could believe it it was so much so that people thought her and her daughter were sisters

And all that change was a manifestation of the mental change, she changed within and so the outside followed suit

And in today's world we externalize everything even our religions are externalized now when originally they were meant to be external allegorical explanations for internal things
Take Christianity for example, people are waiting for a physical God to come back physically and destroy the world physically and then rule the world physically

Despite their very scriptures saying things like the temple of god is within

I have many other examples of how set effects reality but I'll leave it at that before I get too excited LOL but yes I like what you're saying and I agree with where you're going

So add to my previous statement that I'm also trying to see why we aren't investigating if these things are even possible to know in the sense that they claim to be example being

Let's say there are two kids playing with their bicycles one kid does this cool stunt going really really fast totally impresses the other kid so when they go to school the other kid is bragging about his friend and how fast he was and says he's the fastest bicycle rider in the world now when other kids hear this they want to test him so they go out and have a little competition and he beats all of them

now does that mean he's the fastest bicycle in the world?
No not hardly however saying he's the fastest bicycle in the world is an easy thing to say and testing it it seems to be proven to be true according to their limited understanding and resources however fundamentally speaking or from a big picture standpoint it's not in the slightest bit

and accurate statement to make despite the fact it very well could be true it's most likely not for many reasons but that doesn't matter because to those kids the phrase is easy to say and the tests prove it to be true according to their limited perspective


Likewise why aren't we questioning if that is in fact what is happening with the things presented in your original essay?

I believe you answered this and you replied to me saying that that was beyond the scope of this essay which is fine if that's the case but my question is why?

Me personally I tend not to waste my time with things that aren't as true as possibly can be and I don't find interest in exercising my brain with exercises that don't actually reflect a bigger picture usability and only work within the scope of their intended use because I feel like that can create bad habits and or give a person a false sense of reality kind of like playing video games too much makes you less sociable with people because it's not a good representation of actual reality likewise I only entertain things that are as real as can be

I'm not saying I'm judging your essay by any means in a negative way I understand people like to do mental exercises for various reasons and that's totally cool I was just stating my personal preference

yes that's pretty much exactly what Im trying to say

You said it more precise than I'm capable of formulating

Like you were saying this entire essay in subsequent essays might work under the rules established in the original essay and everything might function perfectly fine but like you said how do we know that it's real beyond the confinements of the essay itself like you said if we take the essay and throw it away what are we left with how does it affect other things because although it might function the way it says it will function within the essay does it actually function that way in the real world or is it just a mirage

And kudos to Bob for being so patient with us he truly has a virtuous personality LOL it's like a single daycare worker working overtime by themself with a room full of 3-year-old brats that their parents forgot to pick up from school and somehow in the midst of this he remains calm if that ain't zin then I don't know what is LOL

forget everything I said, let's try this a different way.

Ok so you have all of these things tools whatever you want to call them for simplistic speediness of referencing sake that way I don't have to elaborate on each individual one let's just call a tool like for instance your wrench is a "sine qua non"

Or any one of the other things you pointed out and explained

So with that said everybody's got their tool belt on that you laid out in detail ready for the next essay to arrive for us to then use our tool belt on to work out whatever that essay is talking about

But my question is even though we can use these tools do they actually exist in the sense that it's possible to even have a tool that is what it says it is?

The one that's on the top of my head is the tool called "sine qua non" is it even possible to know a sine qua non? I know it's easy to say that something could be a sine qua non but are we even capable of knowing something like that can even exist there's so many variables in the world so many possibilities for things so much information that one person cannot know so then to say something like something is a
sine qua non seems to be stating something that is impossible to actually know if it really is a sine qua non or not

So my question is why don't we question if these tools can actually truly exist or if we're just pretending that they exist

>>>I apologize my friend! I honestly could not tell, but I see now that it was most certainly in good faith! With that being said, let me address your questions.<<<

It's perfectly fine I can kind of see how it might have looked a little bit like some sarcastic narcissism so all in good faith no harm.



>>>Before I can adequately respond, I would like to inquire exactly what you mean by “semantic metaphysical concepts” and “tools”? Are you saying that the essay defined terminology but yet didn’t elaborate why they weren’t simply semantically defined differently?<<<

I mean for example "Prima facea" would be one of them it would be a "tool" and by tool /semantic / metaphysical concept I'm just sticking labels on the same thing over and over again to try to make sure I cover the whole thing in stickers because I don't know exactly what the preferred thing to call it is but I'll call it a tool because it's something you utilize



>>>If you could give me an example, then that would be appreciated—as I don’t think I am quite following. Are inquiring why an in toto and in total were defined the way they were? As opposed to simply defining them differently?<<<
Hmmm I'll try , so what I mean is that how do we know that the "tool" is even the very thing that it's name claims it to be

I realize you explain each one of them in great detail about how to use it specifically as well as its nature however we never question if that's a facade and we only think that that's its nature and we're not actually tackling the root of it because we're using fixed parameters by which we are allowed to examine it because we're allowed to examine it a certain way but what if it shouldn't exist in the first place because it's impossible for a human being to invoke that tool or even impossible for the human brain to know if something like that existed being the only one of its kind and things of that matter

An example being my personal view on time we use this concept called time or "tool" called time and according to the parameters we're told we're allowed to judge Time by it works and according to the parameters we're told to use time it works and usually we never question it because it works however I view time as just a concept that has been overlaid on an action that actually exists to make it look as if time is the thing that actually exists when it's not it's like a facade

I believe that there's change change happens to different things at different speeds and this happens in space so you could say SpaceTime but actual time linear the one that pseudoscience says eventually we'll be able to go back in time or hop to the Future in as if there's a version of us waiting somewhere in a filing cabinet to be messed with that concept called time does not exist yet it's easily usable and works in most scenarios and most people go their whole life without questioning it so that's the kind of situation I'm wondering could occur with these other tools.



>>>The essay doesn’t invoke the term “tool”: what exactly do you mean by that term? I am not attempting to ban its use but, rather, just wondering what exactly you are referring to?<<<

Things like time is a tool the theory of gravity is a tool things of that nature the segments of your essay are discussing the mechanics of a tool I just don't have a better word to use so I'm confusing everybody using my weird bucket of random words LOL my apologies




>>>The essay concedes that anyone can reject it; however, a sufficient proof has been established for it being true regardless of whether it is affirmed by any particular human being. Again, if you could elaborate, then that would be appreciated.<<<

What I mean is there's so many steps in so many guidelines I think it's impossible for somebody to put down all their bad habits and all their good habits for that matter and use the format laid before us in this essay in its entirety I think there's too much to it too many steps I think that not only are people going to forget how to use the tool the way you said to use it but I think we're just going to revert back to our old habits when reading your next essay because your first one was so complex

I'm not even sure if that's possible I don't know if anybody could remember that many methods of how to use that many tools and properly utilize them without their old habits kicking in people just reverting back to their normal way of doing things and judging things

>>>Prima facea, I think this is a different contention than the validity of the actual content of the essay. As far as I am understanding you (and correct me if I am wrong), it seems as though the entirety of the essay (and subsequent essays) could be true and yet there is still the contention that people may not be able to remember it. Is that correct?<<<

Yes you are right they very well would be but I guess what I'm trying to say is that a person can make almost anything logically look true and be usable so long as you control what is considered to be true and how people use it

this is one of the fundamental building blocks of how cult leaders control their people is it might look illogical to everybody outside of the cult but to the people inside the cult they're only allowed to judge things a certain way and do things a certain way and as long as they stay within that framework things seem logical and they seem like they work but the moment you step out of that framework it crumbles

so in that same nature (although I don't think your essay is anything like a cult )but by in that same nature I mean that the same unrealization of something that might be there that we are not aware of

For instance the "tool" called "sine qua non"

It's easy to use and it works when used but are we actually using it properly? , Can we actually really know if a situation qualifies the use of the term "sine qua non"? How can re really know if there's no other option for a thing or situation I can we really know?

That's that kind of I'm talking about that I'm saying is not being done or at least I don't see it being done But I could be wrong

I wasn't trying to troll you I was being sincere lol

But perhaps its my over powering ADHD that has me not holding my attention long enough to grasp the body of what you are building linguistically because I am confused about something,

You said "The primary purpose of this essay is a meticulous investigation of the foundation(s) of all derivation; that is, the consideration of the derivation of derivation and, subsequently, its abstraction towards a recursive utilization"

But then you go on to explain the perspective that we should have on several different semantic metaphysical concepts and tools yet not one time question if any of those tools should even be considered to actually be what they came to be?

You tell us how we should view and use and judge each of these semantic tools but once again not once question if they should be tools or if it's even possible to know if they actually are what they say they are before contemplating if they should be added into the tool belt or not

And as far as my understanding goes when you investigate something you investigate it is far down to the root core as you can which in my eyes means investigating if we should even consider it a tool if it's possible to call it a tool and if it could ever actually be what it says is before then learning how to utilize it

And lastly you touched on so many different tools and in such great depth on each one of those tools do you really expect people to do what you said? Or should I say do you think it's possible that a person can sat their tool belt down and pick up that one you just laid out in your essay? Do you think a person can remember that many new tools?, and utilize only those tools in the exact way you explained in your next essay that you write?

I'm not even sure if that's possible I don't know if anybody could remember that many methods of how to use that many tools and properly utilize them without their old habits kicking up causing them to judge things the way they're used to


Or am I just completely missing the entire boat on this one? Let me know please

I'm excited I can't wait I'm about to read it and my slow mine will masticate on it for a couple of days most likely before I reply so consider this broken rule and a friendly hello

and your jacked up self will probably not procreate do to your utter lack of understanding of how life is and is not.. natural selection I guess

To me I don't think that existence is ultimately worth it
I think we can add meaning to life and I think we can have a purpose but ultimately I don't see to pros out weighing the cons .

So you had a good paying job and you accomplished a lot in your time , let's say you had a great wife and kids too

But evidently what you did in the work world will be out did or done away with or forgotten and so will you and the things you did

And you might of had the beautiful wife but you had no choice but to watch that beauty leaver her along with her youth as she aged and because a frail old woman and the pain of watching that happen,

And yes you had the joy of raising your kids and seeing them learn as they grow up but you also had to watch them go through all the pain and suffering that is inevitable as a person becomes an adult and then you have only memories of when they were innocent little babies that thought the world of you and your lucky if they don't hate you for some reason once they're an adult

And then you are forgotten about and not included in your grand kids lives because your just to old and eventually you have to see your love and other half die then your alone ,

Then you die

And for what ? How is that justified?

There's no god and no mission for you to do for said God

Life is just life .

omg ok that last one made me laugh I'm not going to lie!

I was not taking praxi's history into consideration I was simply responding to his negitive smart ass comment because the world has enough negative fighting going on everywhere and I didn't come here for that crap I came here to have a productive conversation and not feed dopamine to a narcissist, I'm sure he's a nice guy at times just like we all can be .

my phone apparently saved the comment I tried to post last night but I didn't have service so it apparently didn't post and so today I went to reply to that little shit head and I didn't see the tag for you on there so I edited it soon as it posted but apparently not fast enough but that wasn't meant for you in any way shape or form my apologies

a half a point is better then nothing! , I wonder how many pine points or who's line is it anyways points I can get with it? We need a forX for points lol

Hey brat a little tip, try showing some kind of maturity and mutual respect that way you can get the other person to actually have a conversation with you so that you might actually learn something for a change, the keyboard has been saving the smart mouth a brats for almost 30yrs now so it's to be expected, is all I ask is that you try to talk to others over the internet the same way your mother makes you talk to people in real life , if you keep talking like a little shithead you will end up creating a bad habit and might accidently smart off in real life and get a spanking for it. Just trying to help you but take it or leave it IDGF

well no I wouldn't say it's a monkey see monkey do kind of a situation because morphogenesis doesn't require the mammal having any knowledge of the thing or the task at all for it to still improve the new groups ability to complete the task
It's as if there is a force that subconsciously connects all mammals and allows us to share a kind of "intuition" for lack of a better word.

if I did then there would be no need for you to build it like I previously explained, I bet your teachers loved your not paying attention azz in school huh?

well build one and see

I yes I've heard of it infact it is a common thing from what my friends that live in tel Aviv have told me ,

They said people will take a 20$ ride to all the popular spots then on the way back say they just had some revelation from God that they are God and then the next day you will see them out by one of the tourist spots trying to evangelize everybody.

I chalk it up to the sweet potato phenomenon. I don't know if that's actually what it's called or not in fact I think it's actually called morphogenesis and basically in a nutshell people do a pattern in an action throughout history and time

and what that seems to do is create a kind of groove in this kind of shared psychological realm where other humans can then pick that same habit up faster and easier without having ever met the people before them that had done the action or thing and this is observable in all types of mammals from what I've been told so that's my blaming donkey if you're looking for something to whip

build one and find out

I think that when we seek to know the world as separate from our selves, we’re not going to know if this is correct unless we also know our selves

I couldn't agree more such wise words rarely are spoken

what do you mean exactly? I was metaphorically comparing something metaphorically. So what if you didn't ever experience my metaphorical experience? that's not really something I would expect anybody to reply with that's like making a big deal out of the tape used to hold the box together that had the present inside it only cats and retarded kids do that, I thought I was here to talk to Honey Badgers

what are saying exactly?

no they only think that it brings them some form of enlightenment is all it does is impress them kind of like a kid on a roller coaster ride

and the reason I confidently say this is because you can reach the same knowledge and the same enlightenment without any narcotics

and the only way to truly "enlighten" (which I hate using that term but oh well I'll use it for now)

Is to do the work and you are the only one that can do it and it has to be done.
An example being if somebody walks by your front yard and sees a hand built Tower that's like 100 ft tall in your front yard and it just appeared there overnight and they say wow where did that come from and you say oh I built it myself
That doesn't speak for if you telling the truth or not, and let's say that you actually believe that you built in in just 1 night and you truly believe that you did

But in reality you couldn't have and you didn't , well this will become obvious as you won't know anything about 100 ft tall towers having just red a brochure you might be able to pass as pretending to be a person that knows how to build towers because to a person that doesn't know how to build towers they won't be able to tell the difference because your fancy brochure answered all their questions

however to a tower builder you won't know nearly as much and they know things about towers that brochures don't talk about they know things about towers but you don't know about unless you've built towers yourself and so unfortunately 99% of people don't build towers

and a lot of people are getting interested in this whole enlightenment thing and they'll ask questions to be supposed overnight Tower builders and they'll get fancy answers that impress them so they all assume that these overnight Tower builders are authentic but to real Tower builders they know it's a sham

the downside is though is that a real Tower builder can't convey to these regular non-tower building people what is necessary in order to spot authenticity from fake because unfortunately the only way to know is to become a tower builder by building your own tower hence why real Tower builders don't have pamphlets

Drugs won't get you to unlightenment any faster then sober will , it will however impress you and surprise you then if your prone to it then you will develop a mental condition called "the Messiah complex" and start thinking that you gained some special kind of information from whatever it is that you just slammed in the bathroom.

All or nothing fallacy maybe?

I'm assuming your talking about the Christian God which in that case no because Lucifer was the light holder chick that like all hoes got pissed and God was the one that threw shade first which is why and commemoration for that first time event all pimps throw shade on crazy ass hoes

we seem to have the same belief