50/50=1?

What would you do if, you would know nothing, like that so called Socrates did? Would you use your shield of omnipatience in defence of the weak or not?
Should I Ask you, how did Socrates corrupted the youth? -Or not, because you dont' know?
Perhaps these things are irrelevant, hm what do you think?

Is ther anything like nothing? :)

What was the original idea of free will?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X_2IdybTV0

I can not belive neither in anything and nothing.

You will find it out When you get there.

You will find Nothing.

I See, so others Ideas are irrelevant for your arguments, (I am assuming this because you can not see Ideas just like Unicorns) therefore this conversation just like your other conversasttions are pointless.
Thank you.

So you saying that, things what you can not see are not determining you arguments?

Invisible? :)

Arrivederci!

Arrivederci!

I only know that I can not belive neither in anything or nothing because a voice told this to me.
But I can Imagine the voice to telling peoples different things just as we read it From Plato´s Dialogues.

You can not agree with eveything he wrote, or just with everything! he wrote?

So it is as possible that Socrates corrupted you trhogh Platon´s writings, as much as he did not.

But is that really your own reason what you going to give, or is it belong to someone else who pointed you into this direction?

I do not know, i do not live with it.

Could you explain time trough Zenon´s paradox of the stone?

I think Time is an illusion made up by mankind to put happenings in casual order, or something like that.

What was first mankind or time?

So what is going to left after time destroyed everything?
Something what you can not belive in?

An other illusion

When I was born I´ve heard a voice, it sad:"Nem hihetsz semmiben"(Hungarian) It means You can not belive in nothing, and it also means You can not belive in anyhing.
Then there was a huge blow. I could not belive it, so I started to laugh, and i was laughing while I was born. What do you think, what should I nominee as an opposite for God? Mankind?!

It Depend what do you think/mean about God.

Yet.

If there is one, then there is a way to make an other one.

I think this should be the Origo of this topic, becuse this statment allows everybodey to think whatever they want to think.

It does not say, that x or y omnipotence can do this and that, and x or y can not to his and that, it says bot of them is possible. Perhaps not necessary yet, but still...

Because of the cause.

Imagine Socrates playing chess with God, whos going to win?
The One who knows everything, or the one who knows nothing?
What does the winner get? Everything? Nothing?

(Is it easier to imagine Socrates rather then God because of the writings, paintings, sculptures, etc or you do not belive that those items serves as proofs of his existence?)

If there is one, then there is a way to make an other one.

Stop chasing the shadows and check out the Sun outside of the Cave.

No, not realy.
I writed that it is impossible for me to leave Plato‘s Cave, because I have never been there.( I know I did not defined it in my previous comment, but I did it now)
It is also impossible for You to leave the cave because You are in its deepest room trying to figure out the meaning of the shadows.

I don‘t know, perhaps if I could leave the cave, I‘ve could tell you. Oh wait that is impossible!
(Refering to Plato‘s Cave)
If you know how I mean.

I don‘t know if the meaning of meaning is meaning, or not. Perhaps there is an other meaning, perhaps not! I don‘t know if the writings on this wall of the Cave are Sophisticated or not, do You?

Do I know if I argue or not?

Did he knew how to argue or not?! :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DohRa9lsx0Q

It is the same thing, isn‘t it? :)

Is there any difference to know, or not to know? I'm sure I don't know.

Intressting, but
- I did writed once, but it has been deleted from the forum, now i try it again. Of course none of you need to belive me.
Before I was born, I‘ve heard a voice it sad: ‘‘ Nem hihetsz semmiben‘‘ (Hungarian) transleted to English it means:
1. You can not belive in anything.
2. You can not belive in nothing.
When I heard it, I started to laugh, and I was laughing while I was born.
Now according to Plato‘s Socrates I think i may have just convinced that ‘‘Daimon‘‘ because I didn‘t heard any voice since that.
But to reply to your point, I did know that I know nothing even before I read Plato‘s dialogues.
Now let me ask you, If I can listen to someone who is reading the dialogues loudly, or to listen the dialogues on Audiobook, isn‘t that just another way to think, that you know! Socrates views on the object?
Althoght I think you made a good point here, because there is only a few of the dialogues in audio format, so it is hard to see the picture, without letting Plato into our mind.
By the when i writed ‘‘Socrates may would argue with that.‘‘ I presumed, that he actually did it, like hi did the same thing with the ‘‘shadows‘‘ in his defence, but instead of writing it down he decided to make you think about it, and he sad: ‘‘The invention of writing will produce forgetfulness in the minds of those who learn to use it, because they will not practice their memory. Their trust in writing, produced by external characters which are no part of themselves, will discourage the use of their own memory within them. You have invented an elixir not of memory, but of reminding; and you offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom.‘‘