Summary:

I disagree people can believe in a thing if it is made 'crystal clear' that it is wrong, lest they specifically follow the belief in wrongness(not the same belief).

I would like to highlight how I said belief is a spring occuring around the sin (ethereal within) of man.

I may be wrong by a margin in my original post but what was not in margin of error...

If we stop pursuing knowledge, we succumb to believing in what we know, at least. This means belief isn't always bad, it is a natural mechanism that has use other than to delude each other.

Someone said to me 'Beliefs cannot be proven/disproven. Hume argues.'

It's a shame you still see yourself as a child. I didn't realise you were trying to 'entrap' adults. Paranoia is treatable, you don't have to suffer in silence. You are correct that the masks you wear are obvious but if you keep reading posts on TPF and contribute now and again when you feel you have grown up a little more then I am sure there will be many here who will show some pity for you and interact with you, even with your obvious social inadequacy issues. — universeness

You are quite right. As i suspected, your post, even after my "bye bye", is certainly a testament to your adequacy.

Not only to your adequacy but also to your originality, and your intelligence, to be able to come up with what you have said. It is quite astonishing.

Particularly enlightening was the part where you talk about me seeking "interaction". This is definitely a revelation. Had no idea, with my history in TPF, is that of one seeking “interaction”. This tells me my social inadequacy issues aren't up to the mark. Which means i might have to take it up a notch (which will be of course under my discretion). Hopefully that way i will never need your (or your kind) pity.

But thank you for the offerings of your "shame" and your "pity". It is not often one comes across a person of your immense adequacy. Bye for now. *cough"

You are quite right. As i suspected, your post, even after my "bye bye", is certainly a testament to your adequacy.
Not only to your adequacy but also to your originality, and your intelligence, to be able to come up with what you have said. It is quite astonishing. — skyblack

It bodes well for you that you are so easily astonished. Perhaps this will aid you in your search for enlightenment.

Particularly enlightening was the part where you talk about me seeking "interaction". This is definitely a revelation. Had no idea, with my history in TPF, is that of one seeking “interaction”. — skyblack

If I have provided you with enlightenment, astonishment and revelation in my few responses to you so far then that's great. If you had no idea that interaction with other members on TPF is foundational then I am glad I was able to increase your awareness and grasp of the concept.

This tells me my social inadequacy issues aren't up to the mark. Which means i might have to take it up a notch (which will be of course under my discretion). Hopefully that way i will never need your (or your kind) pity. — skyblack

Well, I hope that you can maintain your own personal confidence that one day you will 'overcome' these shortfalls that you recognise in yourself.

But thank you for the offerings of your "shame" and your "pity". It is not often one comes across a person of your immense adequacy. Bye for now. *cough — skyblack

You're welcome! That cough sounds bad, perhaps you should get yourself tested! :death: :flower:

Right. I am agreeing with you when you say “that interaction with other members on TPF is foundational”. I was/am aware of it. Even though you haven’t included the ‘socks’ (both old and new) I will also go ahead and include them in the group you call “members”. So yes, we are in agreement.

Which is why one was astonished when you said what you said. Like I said earlier, if anything, evidence consistently points to me refusing interactions (But I suppose facts or evidence wouldn’t mean much to you, since you claim to be so “adequate”) ,- not seeking it. Here I am trying to perfect my social inadequacy skills (as you call it), and you’re telling me it is having the opposite effect. Well, what do you know!

I refer you back to your unprovoked, irrational, arrogant earlier typings such as:

However don't let that stop you from looking deeper into this topic, either on your own or with others. GL.

Right. The idea was to hit the spot. Glad it did. Better luck next time. — skyblack

and what reads like conflated nonsense such as:

Re the questions: an error of perception (2nd line), or specially; compulsive erroneous attribution, is not a valid excuse for confusion. In that case an urgent need for freedom arises. Absence of such an effort demonstrates insincerity and lack of seriousness — skyblack

Which you then arrogantly refuse to explain further.

Like I said earlier, if anything, evidence consistently points to me refusing interactions — skyblack

So which is it? You refuse interactions because you are an arrogant ***** who only interacts with those YOU delusionally decide are worthy of you or you refuse interaction because you are scared to throw stones whilst inside your glasshouse?

Here I am trying to perfect my social inadequacy skills (as you call it), and you’re telling me it is having the opposite effect. Well, what do you know! — skyblack

I suggest you try to defeat your social inadequacy not 'try to perfect it.'
What I know is that you need to learn how to interact with others like a grown-up, instead of as a petulant child.

Well, not sure why you would have to refer me back to anything since the progression is quite obvious and in print. Anyone having minimal understanding of English, and 2 brain cells in working condition can read and see what is going on. But naturally, it will take more than 2 brain cells to read between the lines, which I may take it upon myself to explain if they ask, i.e. if I feel so inclined.

Likewise, my take on the requisites for any reasonable interactions or discussions is also documented (several times) and anyone can verify that on my page, if they wish. There is never going to be a “discussion” unless you (or whoever) learn how to come to a discussion. With the right attitude and approach. As to “scared”, what can I say, let my posts and conduct speak for itself.

Regarding your suggestion, you know what they say about suggestions, don’t you? You can put them back into the same place you are pulling them out. I suspect it is the same place you are pulling out everything you have been spewing in the past few exchanges. But hey, I think I get it. You are having a hissy fit, what some may call a sissy fit). You (or your socks) aren’t the first and you won’t be the last. Don’t worry. I suspect you are going to be ok after this period. I am guessing it’s a regular period for you.

So, instead of reveling in your inadequacies, which is making you a fool right now (but perhaps y’all are used to it and want it, for a myriad of reasons that seem quite obvious), what would rather seem rational, is to understand what is going on with you. You wouldn’t be doing what you are doing if you had “grown up”, or not being disturbed by your inadequacies, and therefore be completely comfortable with your silly twists on the obvious, Instead of projecting your own inadequacies and your tantrums outside (or unto me), isn’t it a better idea to take a break, go out and smell the roses? Don’t worry, the forum will be here when you get back. Now stop this nonsense with the highlighted paragraphs/posts and the rest of your juvenile attempts. Your posts reek of desperation, among other character defects. See if you can defeat all this.

Is there a context where delusion isn't bad? — Varde

E.g. when conceiving the truth will cause you harm. 'Walk towards me very carefully and don't look down'

There's talk here as if beliefs are things in our heads. In a way that's ok, as far as it goes. But it can also be useful to see beliefs as instances of acting as if something is the case. I believe the shop is open although at no time internally or externally do I utter the sentence 'The shop is open' or 'I think the shop's open.' My going to the shop is often enough to evince my belief that it's open. Not always, but often.

I see you need to run to mommy for a reassuring hug. Run little boy, run to your mommy.
Your sky is quite dark isn't it!

You know what?......mommies all over the world are worth respecting, so, i am going to leave your mommy out of this. In fact, i don;t even need to go there. You are an easy one.

Yes “someone can believe something that has been proven false”. Here is the proof:

I believe “someone can believe something that has been proven false”. (Call this I believe S)

If “I believe S” is true, S is true

Or

If “I believe S” is false, S is true because I just demonstrated I can believe something that has been proven false.

You are an easy one. — skyblack

Unfortunately for your mommy, you are not!

See how easy you are? Hopefully your next response will have one or two of those 'rofl tear' emoticons you are known to use frequently while talking to others (but somehow they have disappeared in our exchanges), lest "members" (other than socks) might start doubting your "adequacy". *cough*

Very good. I completely agree. This was more of the response I was expecting...

Bar the usual TPF soap opera occurrence, this thread has been a victory- I am wiser than I was.

See how easy you are? — skyblack

Ok, you don't have to keep demonstrating how delusional you are, you have provided me with adequate evidence. Keep trying to find a light to help you with your dark sky. :sparkle:

Will do. :up:

Will so. :up: — skyblack

bye bye twinkle!

Bar the usual TPF soap opera occurrence, this thread has been a victory — Varde

I will react to characters like @skydark when I think it is required.
I understand that you might be annoyed by such exchanges but it is part of being human imo and it's a necessary part as far as I am concerned.

Ha! And what part of my post wasn't 'being'. *Winks*

Ha! And what part of me wasn't 'being'. — Varde

I'm glad you agree, your annoyance and my reaction to @skydark......unsurprisingly human.

I know X thus it's in my belief X, falsify it and it is no longer in my belief. True/False?

It then broadens to what's beneficent(on terms of what is belief X consisting of, what is true knowledge?).

I'm not sure why you can't believe something that's not true. There are enough atheist who do so.

'm not sure why you can't believe something that's not true. There are enough atheist who do so. — Frankly

That's what i had said in my initial post. However, i wasn't talking about atheists or theists. I was pointing to the fact that everyone believes at a very real fundamental and deep level in things that aren't true . The beliefs are very real with real life consequences. And to support that i had used examples all can relate to. Furthermore, as i was explaining to that dimwit-sissy (To be clear, I take the liberty once in while) the mechanisms of belief is beyond your conscious control (either cerebral or emotional), but rather universal, and an aspect of one's inherited conditioned consciousness.

Knowing is a time lapse event and not passive agility.

I believe X is true, because it is proven to be true. I know X is true at the moment I discover proof.

What's the point in knowing X is true again afterward?

After knowing something, it's then a belief in it's validity, because...

Not a matter of knowing deeply. Know is a verb/time lapse, believe is a verb/passivity. Know/Believe are are two ends and work together.

I've known this in the past, it's why I share the belief.

I know this now... It's validity is all around us.

I don't accidentally know in the passive sense anything.

There is no stock of knowledge, just parts/fragments of memories that stick in the belief spring.

There is stocking belief...

I know... Thus, I believe.

Furthermore, as i was explaining to that dimwit-sissy (To be clear, I take the liberty once in while) — skyblack

The dimwit-sissy? An unconscious belief we all share?

The dimwit-sissy? An unconscious belief we all share? — Frankly

No belief is required in observing the obvious. Especially if it comes with corroborating evidence.. Naturally it applies to all, including you. Bye Bye.

WTF...? You call me a dimwit-sissy? :rage:

WTF...? You call me a dimwit-sissy? — Frankly

No i didn't. I was pointing to

belief we — Frankly

the use of the pronoun "we" in your previous post.Essentially i was agreeing with the pronoun..

After all it isn't rocket science that out of all posters you decide to engage with me under a rather silly pretext, essentially reiterating what i had said, but with a slight twist. Attempting to make it about atheism and theism (perhaps fishing for my affiliation) when clearly the posts have nothing to do with that.

In regards to your question, hey, if the shoe fits don't let me stop you from wearing it...sock.

You know where to take your drama, don't you? Take it somewhere else. Again, Bye bye

Ah, I see. I thought you called everybody a dimwit-sissy, whatever that might be. My fault. You think we all share the same believes?