So were the expectations flawed or just overly optimistic?

wahhh wah :cry: its fine, ill be back to try again if the will for it exists then for now its gone with the wind, good as gone. carry on, pardon me please.

can it do that WITHOUT said sentient beings awareness of such observations occurring meaning avoiding any conscious awareness such attempts to remove determinants and constraints are taking place...observations when sentient beings are aware of them happening, risk unnatural behavior taking place misplaced real data when its bias was just aware and leaning in its favor. The sentient beings level of conscious awareness holds power over attempts, even if they know it or not. Its intuit.

"why are you being like that?" "like what" "rude" "i didnt realize i was being rude, i thought i was being clear..." "do you know what im supposed to be being like" "why are you acting like that or why are you doing these things" being (blank) acting and living life at the same time.......2 things at once.




hi im kizzy im wondering, "how so?" i am genuinely curious

hi leontiskos, im kizzy...feel free to ignore this comment but its relevance to the op comes full circle...spheres are 3d, are you ready for those levels at this 2d point? how do you know if you are?

INTRODUCTIONS COULD use work? INTRODUCTIONS to persuade might need work ,but chet doesnt need to do that here...you should consider all interactions to your OP, and be thankful that anyone acknowledges it at all.

do you know the functions that exist in order to determine something "needs work" implies knowing how to improve....not only can you not know, even with chet explaining himself clear enough, but also it(your defensive comment in weakness) implies that an end is knowable and known by you, and thats why you THINK you can justify "ignoring" but can you justify in your own words with good reason?....you ought to want to for your own sake. When did you start to "ignore" chets posts? Now?? Thats fair...but when You ignore views by seemingly how bothered you become by them, an opposition you never foresaw to begin with. Consider that a blessing... how many others do you ignore? seems like you only tolerate what you can handle...bob ross? HE has the patience of a SAINT for entertaining! Or he believes in you...fair as well.

My model helps me to understand. Fear, anger, and desire are all three consciousness. They are all three involved in choice. The choice to be, anger, is still a choice. The choice to comply with instantiated patterns, involuntary acts, as you just gave an example for, are indeed still choices.

The power of choice is effectively infinite. But a weak will (desire in general) is hard pressed to carry out 'deliberate' acts that violate the tendencies of the weak current state. We are slowly evolving into more capable moral agents. That is a law of the universe. It is happening everywhere and it is, from what we can determine so far, reasonably rare that what we call life happens. As mentioned, that is a misunderstanding. The call of desire, the existence of nothing but consciousness in the universe, empowers free will for every particle in existence. The STATE of that particle determines the difficulty of choice. So it is nigh unto impossible for a rock to play poker for example. But that is only nigh and not finally actually impossible. Understanding and accepting these extremely rare cases of truth delving is a better way than what most people have of being aware what is going on.

Most people will not be comfortable discussing rocks that choose. But any other assertion is more than just incoherent. Everything in this universe is choosing constantly. And moral scrutiny DOES apply to rocks as well as humans. I realize I am probably alone in this assertion. No worries. — Chet Hawkins

Kick rocks!!!
evidence as base, grounded in self, motivated by [blank](insert drive-example=passions), intentions verifiable and valued, ready to judge BY ONLY EQUAL STANDING GROUNDED POSITION TO JUDGE PROPERLY, RIGHTFUL IN/OF/FOR THE GOOD of the possible outcomes. The good will come out of immoral choice and choosing agents regardless, but in another form no matter what choices were made but until digested for worth, its not in a place or position to judge from/of YET

Which is every single act in the universe that has happened, is happening, or will happen. No narrowing down of the scope occurred here. If you think it did, you are only deluding yourself and those that believe you. — Chet Hawkins

no, literally!

What clearly stated to you determines a non-hypothetical state? I promise you there is not one. To any experience of any chooser, any act past or present is hypothetical only. — Chet Hawkins

thats wise of you, chet!....

....proof is in the pudding. Watch what you eat....what happens when you bypass your intentions?

Intentions show that the individual has thought

Intention shows when the individual has thought not fully through an idea but enough to justify actions in planning to act...plans to act, thoughts become intelligent in designing ideas that are justified in and of them selves? when... the justifications show distinction and/of or distance of the real reality of self and real reality from self...whether it was goal focused or desire oriented......how far you came? how much you grew?

the space for thought is and is found when and in using the brain silently within the minds limits, which the self can control as boundaries constraints etc for what it really is thats happening..e.g. ////I dont actually like the people I work with but I will go to the bar with them when we get off at 5 because its an excuse to go to the bar and get loose and see where the night takes me.. It makes "us" ME feel better justifying why,how,when,with "you" i was "were" there in the first place.
"you" into "us"......
*reason=goal or desire?
goal=body action towards is needed eventually (motion) not always present in decision making actions, or acting in general, aware of goal? -VS- desire=body action not needed..(no motion required)

Certain outcomes always will/are/is out of our human acting control....some stronger than others, since BIRTH! Innate abilities and capabilities are limiting to equality, meaning subject in the whole is required to see worth of entirety in any morality debate

So to us moral agents that are not perfectevery act is hypothetical even after decisions are made and a new state is formed. We do not know the past. We do not know the present state. We do not know the future. All of it is hypothetical. — Chet Hawkins

I think even if its knowable (chet assumes BELIEVES its NOT (with good enough reason) the part or answer to the question, begs the questioning...if unknowable (due to capabilities) how does TIME influence or constrain something that can be known only by observation of existence in reality and from there judged rightfully and agreed upon from the place of judgement with good reasons that warrant detailed explanations in the decision its self? The jury should explain consensus and how they got there should be examined, for cases that are harder or easier than others to get to an answer, those decision making moments in group setting vs individual beliefs how they affect or alter that timeline, convincing, and doubting, and power....willing...justice serves itself in all natures, at certain/specific times for us. What do we do with that intel? Ignore it? Thats your call...or Bobs....we cant see what time tells us now, then! How could we?

However, I am leaning on desire, manifesting in a special way as the driving of the movements to belief. Because I agree with you that we can't prove anything and that reality is unknowable (or at least as worded below), I am wondering whether, difficult as it is a pill to swallow, the nearest we get to truth or reality (both, so-called) or "knowledge " (presumably thereof) is how a "conlusion" functions. All the possibilities are driven or "desire" manifesting in experience. And belief is ineluctably tied into that movement too. Whether we care to admit it or not, we weigh (the) things (competing for expression as experience) (sometimes imperceptibly, other times seemingly deliberately) then settle upon a conclusion (believe), based on how that conclusion functions. For e.g, but not limited to, does it satisfy an emotion, a bond, an organic drive, reason, logic, convention, the law, etc. — ENOAH

YES! This implements a great point here (underlined) in your shared thinking...."And belief is ineluctably tied into that movement too. Whether we care to admit it or not, we weigh (the) things (competing for expression as experience) (sometimes imperceptibly, other times seemingly deliberately) then settle upon a conclusion (believe), based on how that conclusion functions." On what grounds??? Is time not a good enough drive to force a belief that was "weighed" (to what degree)? I think the grounds to weigh out the things you bring up, are judged stable or not, in motion. The movement, is time which is constraining in certain moments, like when a decision is needed to move forward in a project. I think intentions change in decision making moments, and can be re-purposed. See my comment here, [url=http://]https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/866500[/url].. im looking at linking goals or desires to ones purpose in life, the one that exists despite knowing it. Though knowable. Morals are justification itself. I propose, "you can have intention without a goal, i say yes..but can you without a desire? i say no..for now at least. Your intent though doesnt need its own purpose, because it doesnt mean you act on it according to how you imagined you would act...Once the act occurs, your purpose could be repurposed successfully... but how much it was planned, thought of or out vs imagined or believed? AND without parameters or constraints OR GOALS, intentions can change in decision making moments through that experience of choosing to act/acting on those intentions and how what you imagined vs what happened in reality played out was very different"

You keep using the word 'function'. To me, generically, that means 'proper use'. The only proper use of anything is morally, so for example, a Pragmatic win by any means is not really a win in truth. It's evil. Of course nothing is entirely evil. The win itself is indicative of achievement and that is some good. — Chet Hawkins

Proper use assumes there is one....are we users, consumers, creators? I believe we are both the creation and creators, the design and the consumers....


Do all good things must come to an END, or do good things just tend to LEAD to the end? Good things eventually can leak into THEE END. That LEADS to a discovery, which doesnt always translate perfectly into knowledge...but how can we speak on anything we claim to be "perfect" what do humans know about perfection?

What ended that is bad? What was bad that shouldnt of ended? When should endings see the bad through to its possible goodness or is it not bad until the worse arrives...what if that chance was never an idea in mind? IS it bad or could it just be better? Tailoring "an end" instead of "the end" to your liking means you may have a new unique vision, but how certain are you that your"ending" is less problematic then the one that was created, and not that easily, cheap, or without some sacrifice from the creator, the builder, the manufactor, the assembler, the consumer, and the consumer feedback considerations and accountability and acknowledging consumer, creator, and device relations....?

Well, probability is an issue. — Chet Hawkins

Its more of a non-issue, for me. I believe I am free from a will to worry about such issues you see that I dont yet. Maybe my view is obstructed on purpose. I'd like to believe. I'd also like to not worry. But trusting the fear is instinctive, letting the worry come and go is me being safe. being, feeling, in that i acknowledge, determine, doubt, value, verify, judge, confirm, care, consist, compare, believe, hope and love...resist, repeat! Yeah for me it is because its telling what we ought to not have to question...its confirmation, its useful, its helpful. Its power is weak though, i believe in the larger scheme of "things" Its issue for me is wondering how important it is to learn as a concept to think its serving its functional purposes to any end that I can do anything about, let alone begin to attempt to care. I can try if its necessary. I doubt it really is for me. I should care, I do when it matters. But overall its value, its own weight holds up but thats just what it is/was/could be. Its a piece, it matters but compared to what? Curious to see how you respond to the last question I proposed above given your similar curious nature to mine surrounding topics of function serving, "purposes". For my view to be obstructed "on purpose" that would mean the functions of probability ought to be known BY ME,for me, to have reason to believe that....and I think I do enough to show its functions are at least as DELUDED as my own beliefs backed by real accounts of my experience in a comparable reality....

Intent does not always reflect belief. Stated belief does not always reflect belief. Choice or action and consequences do not always reflect belief. So belief remains an implausible interpretation from every angle that it is viewed or considered. We all understand, unless we are being intentionally obtuse, that belief is something you fear is true, desire to be true, or that you reason is true based on sensory data and experience. These are the three paths of wisdom, fear, desire, and anger (being). It is more useful to approach belief that way than in any of the ways I read about on that link. — Chet Hawkins

sniffing this out, ill be back...release the hound dogs! Belief does not have to exist in the purpose on intentions, but the purpose of the individual with intentions linked to beliefs can be traced to a foreseeable outcome but that outcome itself is both cause and effect...the causality is also not grounding enough to be a base alone, perhaps it is when intentions are properly judged and considered along with the causality in a relevant realm of reality. But is this telling of ANY nature of the Universe? I dont think so.....you cant force the awareness you are not bound to obtain, thats your BLOOD...blame your ancestors for that lack or accept self in its own nature. Where do we belong to judge from rightfully?

It is the right thing to do, and KNOWING how to become aware of our place in the world only requires selfless self awareness. — Kizzy

ONLY that? Well then why are we all not in the Federation already? Free medical and career path investment for all! Where's my replicator? — Chet Hawkins

Yeah I think I got scrambled. It isnt only that, but only that as a stand alone attribute is not effortless in itself. So ONLY that does imply that work is within that. What is required of selfless self awareness? Its takes more or less, depends.

Finally, although I agree that what DOES grow us objectively is GOOD, what we believe grows us is subjective and always partially wrong and therefore not 'known'. We are left only with belief (and of course doubt). That is healthy. So, many people will judge that this or that belief will grow them and that this or that belief is too much an impediment to growth and these same people are very often wrong on BOTH counts. — Chet Hawkins

it did grow on me, see my previous comment if you dare. My comment was a response to the quote I lead with and didnt read from that point until after posting. I see you predicted this might happen! Upon further reading, I am pleased with the synchronicity. Can it convince wonderer1? Is that all we must do? Ha!

Well truth shown about a thing is not truth. That is a status, a state. So we get confused all the time into calling personal states or states of anything truth. If it can change it is a state. Truth does not change.

I agree that awareness has no seeming limit. It extends out into infinity and that is my point that kind of started this thread to some extent. The limit as x approaches infinity in math is a way to describe this relationship. We get the impression that arrival at knowledge is impossible, but that we can indeed always do better, as in earn more awareness.

It's just that you use the same word and words 'know', 'knowledge', and 'knowing' where I would ask for aware of, awareness, and being aware of; instead. I can do that

You can even say something more indirect and be right for me as in. 'try to know' or 'almost know'. But to just say 'know' partakes of the error.

Okay but not to soothe only because I respected and agree with the insight.

I to want to contribute to our awareness. Part of that is the discipline to make words and their colloquial use less ambiguous — Chet Hawkins

I got ya good looking out!!!

Doubt and questioning are not wastes of time. They are healthy. They are more a part of truth and wisdom than 'knowing' is at any stage. The delusion of 'knowing' without doubt is precisely the point I am speaking against. — Chet Hawkins

Delusion feels harsh, what about confusion? who am i trying to soothe? *cough* myself *cough* Confused on their place and misplaced confidence? My doubting causes me delayed action, thats what I meant by waste of time. I didnt intend to say that doubting is USELESS.

Except, in my case I made the claim earlier that I had no doubt the slack would get picked up...but I dont need to know anything else from that, i believe I meant it when i said it but do i give a shit if its true? No. I would be surprised if I was. But doubting for me brings up more doubting thoughts/thinking. I almost avoid doubtful thinking, but not out of righteousness. my humility is strong enough, I have the shielded shell of a hermit. I do, succumb to doubt without even having to claim anything, in the privacy of my mind. Its true you may be right, if I embraced the doubt my attitude would be enhancing for the best! Towards happiness again. Its a weird battle i guess for me...Especially in the moments of conquering it, the doubt, I use time and acts of proactive procrastination to hide my doubting dual. Try again tomorrow, you can be better then I say at 11:59 pm. Here we go again, lets do it! My hope is in that chance, time is wasting because I could of been believing instead. Doubting is strange now that I am thinking about it. Sometimes I know when to doubt automatically but nothing comes from it...dealing with doubt is intuitive and internally practiced for me.

I do doubt, a healthy portion i believe. How do you know I have not doubted in my mind, and decided to not agree with the doubt. I am glad you have your doubts, but I think you ought to! And you can choose when to doubt with more force some times over another. Or whenever you feel it inside!

Yeah what if i already doubted before I said what I said and its faced with another doubt? But with no intention behind "i have my doubts" clearly expressed. We have them, we dont use them as efficiently as others do. Its learning...we ought to. I believe the doubt lingers but not im my sight at times. Blinding, masking, and perhaps for good reason. NICE! (yikes) Blinded by the light!!! Springsteen style!

I think people are right for doubting, especially judgements. Im aware and was not lost at the idea of that what i assumed by me to be common sense. That place to judge from is real interesting..."who do you think you are?" WHO can speak on other peoples delusions without understanding? "You know what I meant" its not delusional until we take it to that level. Its more then statements, but yes to YOUR point that is why its important to have better ones. Statements. Fighting against them is still a dual, but I think some people in here want to fight. Like you said in the first response to Janus, about picking a bar fight and then getting beer after! Lets go! Were all just humans anyways...we dont know our full potential until we know our purpose. Some die before knowing but the purpose remains. Who wants to know lifes purpose? How can you? What is yours? Figure it out, if thats what we want to do that it is....anyways, we can decide.


I think if the NEED to know your own correctness of statements like mine,

Will it take some time and WORK, absolutely. Will others pick up that slack regardless? I have no doubt. — Kizzy

and turning it into a right vs wrong match on the spot, those who need to act like that, "I am right and YOU are wrong" and not only act, NEED that act its not about truth its about the answers chosen to accept while willing to lose chances to grow in return for the validation of self ONLY.

Im glad I commented, this is fun. Relishing.


You should know, I like your doubts. People should be questioned yes. They are also predictable. Maybe thats why my doubts seem not present but what if I doubted from the start? I disguise the doubt in the questioning, but is it a good thing? I dont know. But does it not show the interest is there and also that it can be followed to the intentions behind the questioning for both parties... You doubt, but come to what answer from doubt or because of doubt teamed with, balanced with what? A measured belief and/or knowing perhaps. Does that doubt just drift around your mind until you believe something has been doubted enough? Doubting isnt taking place in the backround of my mind, it jumps out at me! I am delusional but I am not seeing hallucinations....yet. Just actively engaging in some unhealthy but still GOOD screen time!

But I cant help think about now that doubting leads to questions from doubt and those answers can/may be tailored to any liking. Why you believe, trust, act like you agree, say you understand a certain persons words IS telling. What they share, and why and how is also. Behavior observable and verifiable. I consider or believe what is noted from behavior is information, not knowledge. I believe what I see, tell me what I am supposed to be seeing? We ought to know. I dont know what is going on sometimes, because my receptions was off not because I mean to. Thats fine, until I do?

Even saying "I have almost no doubt" seems like soothing or convincing an audience, to me. But your doubts would pick up on that wouldnt they??? AHHH I see what you mean NOW! They would! Dang those doubts are good! "Give me some," says the poorest beggar...as if you didnt work hard to have them. Pft! You have your doubts and you are valid in them. Valued.

I literally do not doubt or question certain statements in the act of making them. Maybe because my "knowing" that statements can be revised, rewritten and deleted and I could deny it ever occurred. BAD KIZZY! Easy way out, get back in there! That perhaps, is a personal delusion but if aware of delusions is it just a display of the will one has or hasnt. It can display the will and its alignments to beliefs through intentions. So people are delusional? Get them a shrink and some medicine then, doc! Whose paying for it though? Ha!!

Just to be better, please. you are saying to me in the crowd and I cant say more to that because we ought to be doing that anyways! Bravo :party: :flower:

BUT I wanna say more, for fun! :naughty:

I dont need to be right, I said this early...we know this, we dont believe it, we dont have to. Dont believe, fine with me. Believe! Not fine until verified. I dont know if I am delusional, I dont believe it. I feel it but I am sometimes at fault for being influenced by how I am perceived some times. Thats my flaw. I can jokingly agree that I appear to be delusional and some people here wouldnt BAT an EYE at that BUT that ground is only stable from the stance taken upon it. Surfaces and bases. Evidence is not the base, what is it upon makes the point. I believe I agree with my bias sometimes, its not limiting enough to prevent the ability to attempt to objectively moralize.

I think that morality is objective. Doubting does nothing for truth but everything if its linked to belief--doubting can lead people in a direction to or from the truth despite beliefs though. Dual it out, the strongest prevails. Or quits willingly. Or dies with honor. Witness the truth and do nothing about it. Shame!

Doubting is not required in my delusions, but i can understand what you mean by believing its "healthy" Its fine, its natural, its normal. Perhaps, doubt exists for me always a little under belief, it pushes it up when im leaning too far in my own right...its a balance. I guess it is healthy afterall, would you look at that. I take back my haste in correcting you use of "healthy" in place for normal. That is not better, you had it right and wise.

Healthy is better...I cant deny that. Good stuff, chet!

My belief is NOTHING BUT linked to my doubts. In other words there is no belief I have that is not doubted somewhat. I think that is healthy and that the alternative is not. — Chet Hawkins

its normal, but not necessary

edit:(above is original sent comment- this edit* is to explain my quick reaction vaguely claimed by ME. I will add the deets to this later, i must, but this immediate response is just that, nothing serious- im just reading and responding)

edit2: it was serious in fact...

I also don't think you need bivalence for realism. It's more of a metaphysical question as to whether all statements about the future have truth values, or if potentially/actuality and potency/act are required for an accounting of the world — Count Timothy von Icarus

I wonder how much in that attempt could be reduced from all statements? All statements broken down to some broken down to a few broken down to one? What if statements arent good for measuring truth values, what gestures still hold truth might suffice in its place? You have to assume statements might hold truth, but I think holding truth is not in only statements about the future. It travels with them, perhaps capturing sentiments could change the order of operations to get those answers... I think verification processes might be able to gather all statements without taking up the space, energy and time of inputting all statements about the future and still determine truth values. Why do you think (if you do) these truth values in statements about the future have anything to do with what is required for accounting of the world? Is the goal accounting of the world or finding the truth values in all statements of the future? and say that is doable, then to "have" them (the truth values) how do you input that to accounting. To do that, it requires something that knows how to explain truth from the statements and if one can know how to do that, how can it be understood for what its actually worth? Who do these answers help? I dont even think the proof that comes from this matters in account of the world. It matters for understanding humans of it. And its not so natural, im beginning to believe...good stuff!

Now we move on to a separate matter:
Second assertion: We cannot be certain of any justification applied to a belief that 'makes' it or transforms it into knowledge. — Chet Hawkins

I like this

It is the 'fact' or 'knowledge' or better as I mentioned, let's say it is the awareness of something that approaches objective knowing, BUT NEVER GETS THERE, that is the point. And it cannot get there. That is critical to understand. One is tempted to say or add, '... in finite time' — Chet Hawkins

:up:

The warning I am putting forth is to call into question the Pragmatic nonsense of soothing fools with lies about certainty. We all need to become more amenable to the idea of not knowing. Clearly the Yogi mentioned agrees with my general aim. It's a matter of respectful wise humility. — Chet Hawkins

great point and i feel drawn to point out how that initiative "to soothe" when it comes to the means of that situation. Its not just about the soothing others, the fools that are actually being soothed are themselves. I can admit I am a self soother and I like to believe I can justify my reasons to no end. It may be true, but it is not what is RIGHT. I take warnings seriously and I think some folk might miss the heart of the AND IN the message because they take your style as they can. "Thanks for the warning, big guy...i think ill be alright" but its not about that (even though that impression I assume is just that, an assumption but i believe it is not 100% incorrect, NOW WHAT?) Its just true, some times....in some cases dealing with some specific individual experience and all that comes with.

Anyways, it's now obvious to me reading your last reply in full that it's understandable to be to the point of brute honesty. You're feelings and beliefs about these fools are valid, I get that. I am looking past the personal zest in your tone, and the MEAT of your assertions will help correct this behavior. Will it take some time and WORK, absolutely. Will others pick up that slack regardless? I have no doubt. It is the right thing to do, and KNOWING how to become aware of our place in the world only requires selfless self awareness. Just by, like you go on to say, it can start with doing the work to write better. I definitely need to get moving in this department, but sometimes I slack off. But being better at communication using the right language and proper format DOES give my words better reach. When I post a discussion one of these days, it will be nothing shy of my best! I will do that for me, and more importantly it benefits all. I dont do it for others, that would be a white lie but not incorrect. I do things for ME and when I am better, I do things for others. Things I may never know, the impact the impression the inspiration (the frustration, even too lol). We all do that for each other. I like to call those moments out! I consider the last few points knowledge, self-knowledge is a knowing but its changing. I definitely believe in my self, but I have no system of belief that filters or limits my knowledge when it comes to admitting I am wrong, or taking corrections with stride and implementing the new information only helps my awareness. My belief is not linked to my doubts, and boy do I have them. I question myself when I am doubting, and waste time which is unfortunate. Beliefs can become your enemy if they are not growing and uplifting you, i feel. The balance is always earned and never given. The choices are given, and we figure it out from there. Navigate. I believe in my capabilities and self enough to be more than willing to be better, for my own sake at least. BUT on my time, of course :wink:

I know people and I believe in building awareness with NO LIMITS. Limitless knowledge, we can't literally know EVERYTHING. Can our brains handle it one day? Maybe. I would 100% donate my body to science to experience futuristic body mods. Thats just me though. But you'd think we could know now more then ever ALL types of things. But do we know the relationship we have with knowledge and how we obtain, use, share, interoperate etc it? How can we be better there? How good is knowledge really if lets say a person has bad memory? How does knowledge differ from thing to thing, person to person? How do we see knowledge. Our beliefs shine no matter what. Truth revealed.

It's interesting what sticks and what doesnt and WHY certain knowings come easy, NATURAL to certain people. The how isnt important, its a question of WHY are certain people picking up some things better than others (like concepts, sports, puzzles, music, charisma, math, logic, reading etc whatever) Everyone ought to question themselves into knowing, BELIEVING they have a place and do the best they can to position themselves to set the self up for success. I think foreseeable outcomes for individuals can be predicted easily if you observe with detail. Sometimes it doesnt take too long and sometimes YOU are right. Give credit where it's due, to self, to others.

I love it that people TRY to be objective. I love it that people try to justify their beliefs. But that is NOT the issue here. The issue is when any of us say we 'know' or that we are 'being objective' they are actually just simply wrong. We cannot know and we cannot be objective. We can believe and we can try to be objective and let's speak and write about that correctly, please. — Chet Hawkins

Since you asked nicely! Ha...its interesting how some people only respond to those requests when they are asked politely. The "good manners" and respect THEY DESERVE seems to hit them in that way without thinking deeper, the good manners WORKS in persuasion. A lot of things are verifible, like you mention with the grain of sand paradox, its the refusal and the tolerance I am also beyond frustrated seeing being repeated and regurgitated in the WRONG ways. The way that is right and true is knowable, I believe. Not for all though, thats up to the TIME!

There is no time in nothing therefore the creation from nothing is impossible. — MoK

i disagree with the stance taken in the op, i think it is possible. Time can tell, but not you or anyone living today perhaps.
no thing is still bound to time just not time alone...are you saying "nothing" is impossible to connect to any time? or a time? The clock is ticking, do you have a watch? can you count down from 100?....maybe The time can come , the time exists and is knowable in a moments time and it vanishes just as quick as it comes, or slow...time drags, flies, and moves. noticing that time is hard... I think time is WITH NOT IN nothing as long as things move in space. No thing vs some thing, no vs some....things. Within a creation (do you know this scope? i think its knowable only because of time) of no thing is not time, time made it possible or fit or suited to see or notice no thing because the motion or movement is/ can be a/the "thing" in itself. Time and motion are linked together. What do you know of stillness? Dark matter?

And although it may be tempting to say that time is required for change, it is perhaps more accurate to say that time is change, assuming that time is in fact a dimension of spacetime. — Michael

:up: or instead of time is change, time allows change to happen in many places, small and large degrees. It can be/is measurable assuming time is a dim of movement (or change) in spacetime.

Hot and cold...marco and polo

Circularity is not infinite regress, we are not always going back to new reasons, but looping. — Count Timothy von Icarus

:up: loop de loop, round and round.

The solution to this problem is to posit that something has always existed since nothing is impossible. That’s the only conclusion to be drawn from it. The obvious question is well where did this something come from and again we’re faced with the brute fact that it’s always been — kindred

:up: this is where i am at...

Always existed vs made existing by and from creation of something from nothing
innate vs taught
natural vs the nature
nothing is that thing so some thing can be created within and with time and motion is some thing knowable from nothing
materials vs backround or invisible plane
nothing is something with no time or space relevance? how is that possible?
nothing is no thing, until it is...tangibility from the transferring energy is possible i think?

so mathematical theorems are valid even if there is no man who could deduce or know them — MoK

valid? who cares if its valid...its not telling if time prevents any man from knowing...time helps the right man know.

A gifted gift giver gives gifts to the gifted, for both the gifted and non. A win-win.

This time there was no thing....next time could happen in no time, who is counting? who can? who can be in no time? where is no time?

I was thinking something similar, I believe.

My thought process was:

When we refer to "reality" or "the universe", we are referring to: the entire collection of objects (ultimately made up of quarks, leptons, etc.), space, and time.

However, what if these "things" had precursor, "things" that aren't like any of the "things" that we are familiar with as constituents of reality.

These original things can therefore be eternal - (like you say, perhaps fields) - and have existed always.
The only one of the original familiar elements that I take as having to also be an infinite precursor as well, would have to be time.

Maybe, like a chemical reaction, these original, always existing fields, could go for a long time before reacting. eventually, though, they do react, and space, and particles, etc. came to be, with time still existing from the original set — 013zen

eventually, though, they do react, and space, and particles, etc. came to be, with time still existing from the original set. — 013zen
— Arne

Good stuff. Infinite amount of forces X, Y and whatever in an infinitely small space and all at rest. The only finite element of the scenario is the at rest. — Arne

yes im with this, always was since i started typing here at least...
-I go full circle, as i typed in my first paragraph to MoK before I read the rest of the comments. I then see the last comment of the thread, where Arne mentions rest with delight....thats why I asked in the first paragraph of my reply to WHAT is known of stillness?

Everyone is both a teacher and a student. To deny the role of the teacher is avoiding responsibility. To deny the role of the student is arrogance and short-sightedness, both — Chet Hawkins

Chet, When I said I am no teacher it was sarcastic and almost like I was saying "im no teacher to YOU (whoever reads this) because I dont want to be" not because i couldnt and or dismiss that role in general. Its more than important, its how people learn! Everyone involved, yes! Learning styles and teaching styles vary for each and every one of us, and I think some can be most/more compatible with one and the other. A good match exists in this the teacher and student roles. I meant to highlight that importance by making it a starting "question" I was asking the audience, the readers, the peeps of TFP.

Teachers do it though all the time, influence students. The problem is, when they dont know how much or how in what ways.

I just think learning from another should be easily done by all. Accommodations can be made and should be if "learning" is the goal and if also "teaching" is the goal. I dont think its a problem, but problems can come when learning and teaching happen without the teacher and student knowing whats being taken, given, and used...its not always a problem, and if one at all nothing that communication cant clear up in minutes time...but When both happen sometimes without any goals to learn or teach ever even made or intended can cause problematic stances to be built from. Nothing majorly important or an issue im thinking of lately, education is a whole other topic for another thread...
but I agree with your statement that i quoted and the rest of your comment pretty much (i will add quotes if i find anything worth further discussion HERE)...

In my original comment in here, My tone was to be read with a bit of angst, and I remember being irritated while interested enough contribute the day I commented. You are right I should not judge the lady in the op but sometimes thats what happens when I put myself in position to understand her.

I was moved to respond, but its almost as if I just gave shady ass reaction rather than a response now that I re-read the post and my comment...ha! It was thoughtful but without much thought, I just remember replying to this upon first read. I have funny notes from that day actually, I was moved by this thread!

see below for my random notes from that day after reading and engaging in this post when it was originally shared...

"If a christian believes the bible commits them to believe god created the world [??? quote from philforum]


THE MAGICIAN DEC21

A magician shall never reveal his tricks. Yet, they eventually do. But whats so wrong with that? Is it actually a good thing not for any good reason a magician should disown the one sharing the tricks. If you teach someone to also perfect and perform a magic trick for an amused enough audience then awareness was gained in the new magician because he was too once an idiot in the crowd clapping, smiling, engaged and impressed at the skills this man has to deceive and now he holds the power to deceive and teach another the same tricks But we all know deep down that he, who cant really be magic for real thats crazy thats delusional. But If we are all magicians no one comes to the Magic Show. Is there no more delusion? Do you have tricks up your sleeve or rabbits in your hat? I dont like the word clairvoyant. That word to me is in a realm of those not having these feelings or shall i say reactions to feelings occur naturally because it isnt natural....but they maybe manifested or conjured the possibility of powers to take action through their body. For example the woman of the OP not being able to physically, psychically handle her "clairvoyant powers" makes sense because it cant be a normal occurrence that she experiences often, if she is so unfamiliar to her bodys reaction to these unexplainable feelings. If She wouldnt be anxious or scared of her natural clairvoyant powers if it were real. She isnt anxious because she cant understand whats happening to make her feel this? Thats like taking a pot brownie for the first or 15th time and end up calling an ambulance to take you to the er because you think you are passing away when its a panic attack. Or shall I say, a buzz kill. Ha ha..
Also, its not that she is necessarily dangerous but was she acting out of control in public? Otherwise why was she detained again? Fighting at that point is useless once in the hands of those legally in authority to do so. If running from people doing their job is reasonable, keep going. Who knows? I cant explain if shes dangerous if you cant either? I can make up a scenerio and let my mind take off with it, I dont need an answer really. There is a greater risk she could cause harm by not having control of what I think should be considered as instinctive actions. Why couldnt meds and therapy guide her to becoming familiar and not to be scared. Why is she running? Was she asking for something she could never receive and being taught a lesson? I dont think real clairvoyance is real here.. when the body the truth comes from is not in sync or aware of what is happening. You dont get taken over, you need to recieve not run. She wouldnt run from giver of such magic....Who is chasing her again? A clown?"

All in all, I think it makes for a waste of time to utter words without actually communicating. — baker

I see you now, and can admit that I still go back and forth with you on this one, baker.

on another note, worth grand discussion elsewhere but noting quick now, notice the female and male likeness in that choice of... art work / meme you chose to use here... :fire: :roll: :heart: what if she is burning the place down on purpose because bored or because mansplaining ? just a thought regarding intentions, who could be so bothered of them? (me... :snicker: ) i dont get how intentions and scientists agendas are clashing for you and yours and whats is displayed in this meme helps your take none. Try again, id like you to find a better picture.

Can one's own subjective experience have anything to do with the objective knowledge? — Corvus

well, how can a subjective experience be compared to another without being in accordance to a standard of some kind? I think every subjective experience has something to do with objective knowledge...does the knowledge itself become or is/can be subjective when used from/obtained from a single subjective experiences alone?

Good luck — baker

thanks :roll:

The thing is that in everyday life, we mostly have to deal with Oprah-type people, people who are 100% sure of things. — baker

the thing is... people arent asked a follow up or for a confirmation if they are 100% certain before people run off with what they accept to be wrong, rather than ignored or refused to be accepted as right (or wrong) Ignoring provides a way around, through without being seen yet, truth reveals though....No one cares to ask oprah if shes certain about those claims. AND those people that happen to care and exist, well, I can fully avoid and refuse their beliefs of certain claims, usually easily. I can see it coming, and confirm by simply asking a few questions. Because if I was bothered, i would have to admit a few different outcomes could happen, I like being bothered or if/when I want to become unbothered...That doesnt mean I am repelled from people who like or quote Oprah TO MAKE ANY POINT...Those Oprah-type people? Or just Oprah?

The thing is....these "people" and whatever insane claims they are making and "are sure completely sure of" are/is accepted, just as wrong or something "we (who is we?) mostly have to deal with")instead of just refusing to accept it (as right[orwrong?]) As anything! and its (its i mean they-those people you mean) [of bad opinions, disguised as bias-both non negotiable in general, how could they be certain of anything? you might know... ] you seem to be saying these certain people are simply tolerated by you MUCH to your own dismay AND loss? Can you prove, rather than letting the surety of acceptance you express in the comment you shared that you, if not you, people that were/are actually really bothered by Oprah-like people of certainty, and confirm that acknowledging it is your loss that you havent found a way in philosophy for dealing....you think one exists for you! that is to your loss and dismay. That seems to me like choosing to deal, not even accepting to DEAL with shit claims instead of attempting to understand or accepting the truth in those shit claims and why you dont want to understand shit claims...all that should be considered before making that judgement again, you dont have to deal with any insane claim of certainty...especially Oprah fans that do that.

Do you deal with things better from anything but when dealing from personal experience? (or close relation and clear understanding to/of that experience?)


"My kid is the cutest kid on the entire planet! You cant tell me otherwise"
Obvious this is dumb to say, bias or not. You'd have to get every kid lined up, in person, and confirm to be actually true. Their certainty should be taken with tone, and of course in context to what is exists to be so sure about anyways... what claims of certainty are you actually bothered with?

So far, I have not found — baker

So you looked, right? I believe you...Its clear you accept/tolerate instead of refuse or ignore and become susceptible to problems when examples are poor and used wrongly to build a weak stance upon already incredibly unstable grounds, bounds, and/or mounds. This is the mound I am talking about,

So far, I have not found a viable way in philosophy for dealing with such utterly and completely sure people, much to my dismay and loss. — baker

, what does this even mean?

chet vs oprah = you vs me

Hopefully all that was not too dreamworld in styling. I tried to write a page in your book, instead of mine. — Chet Hawkins

Ouch! Yeah, i see it now... Not quite there yet, ha ha! :smile: Enjoyable read nonetheless.

Kizzy
I am glad you find them interesting. The references include several different perspectives on the science. What I have presented in this forum is my synthesis of those perspectives.
Would you be interested in a thread here about the state of science about our moral sense and cultural moral norms? — Mark S

Sure would, Mark! Where are we starting from? I can lead if you want. Unless you have somewhere specific you want to get right into? I struggle seeing the bounds of this thread though in your synthesis I dont know if they are really set and how far we should push them. I can take direction and I have many thoughts tied into moral senses/cultural norms and the state of science around it. So, I'm excited!

(I'm bracketing this response as I don't want to derail the conversation about the OP. — Wayfarer

avoiding derailing again??? NOW i see.

Sorry...I see that it is actually my bad when I replied to you abruptly here https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/887904. I apologize for my comment to you earlier, in "on the matter of epistemology and ontology" thread...i didnt realize you are just being courteous. I will slow my roll now. I'm sorry for the blind sided comments, I am learning!

Enough for now. Thanks, kizzy

yup thats it, QM! :rofl: you mentioned QP doe :roll: and now apologizing kinda? Whyyyyy? At what cost? Like another thread cant be rebuilt after a derailing..THEE attempt...they are still being repeated over and over and again and again and again..i start to wonder, at what point is this an attempt anymore?! Attempts are attempts but until when? They fail for good? AT what cost??? Is their money in this thread? Clearly not, but this would actually cause more attention though and chaos...

*Chaos enters chat*
"my bad for mentioning chaos...lets just keep it, lame."
*Chaos leaves unbothered*

But go on, blame yourself for the mention of qm (is that right though??hmm i dont know if it was now) and if done so wrongly, saying because you did mention it, qm, for now it possibly can derailing this precious thread....why now? Not worth it, I feel.

Are your hopes high that this thread wont derail regardless? regardless OF ANYTHING ELSE?

thats fine, I see u!

We will see, cause WE can.

"Prove it"
...at what cost though?
"It is a bother but Cmon!"
fine, but only one more time

Of course, you are excused Wayfarer. That is lame though, i feel...carry on :zip:

" So, yes, I am presuming in that scenario, which I think is common, that something happens to us and yet we can't prove to others it did. I am very sure. As sure as I get. That happens. And if you live alone, it happens every day many times a day.
-- Whos fault is that? I cant ask the people in that scenario can I? Get the prove then...how about find a scene where they do have the proof, who could be bothered to care?

"Look at all this proof!!!!"
"No"
WHY?
[insert your reason, who cares? not me after this]

My questions and answers are answered [thank you, appreciate your time and respectfully and commenting to just make sure... i will not question your faith much further until i do but its not the faith I question just you....and if I do (highly unlikely almost positive) it will be you only to blame by then. It all boils down, only if it all could...maybe boiling isnt the only option here. One outcome still can exist.

Anyways, I am leaning towards a certain surety in what I said above, "i will not question you" and I trust that feeling for many reasons. Thats all from lil ole me, carry on then... :zip:

Extremely certain. I'm even very confident I can demonstrate it to most people — Bylaw

Ah,well then that is good news! some people DO STILL exist... with senses that are keen to them, specifically within, embedded and tended to and released when surety is sure enough to continue on...unbothered without getting to see that demonstration. Carry on, sounds like you are really getting somewhere with your demonstrations to THOSE other people...fun its fun right?

please, carry on :cheer:

but with something we would call ethics nowadays. — Pez

interesting....but i dont know why now

Hi, I like ur view I have come to notice. This didnt happen today, its been 2 years about...not important or relevant (a nonfactor even)

I want to question something here in a curious minded manner, no problems had as of now:

This error relies on the so-called 'view from nowhere', the conceit that one can rise above all particular acts of knowing to see material things as they are in themselves. It is a foundational error within empiricism, because particulars are not anything 'in themselves' in the sense that modern objectivism posits — Wayfarer

yes! right on. good!

Plato lives! :party: — Wayfarer

hm... :brow: yeah sure he does, whatever you say. YAY plato lets party :cheer: :razz:

... because particulars are not anything 'in themselves' in the sense that modern objectivism posits. They (what are they now? have no inherent reality, their reality is imputed to them (WHO) by the observer...

(This also shows up, needless to say, in quantum physics.) — Wayfarer

-well I Wonder why? Seems obvious to me, now but NEED MORE to act and you need to say more here! Interested yes its true...you already have the answers, i think...thats why i ask, just keep doing what you are doing, include everything you can and go for it!! Waiting and excited to learn and know something for sure, but again I am wondering... how bothered can I really be? A challenge? A competition perhaps? No, that is no fair. But is life anyways? I'm suspicious still...

. I struggle with unclear English. — Tom Storm

wahhhhhhh :cry:

I'm unclear — Tom Storm

wahhhhhhh :worry:

we cannot prove the exact instance happened. — Bylaw

Yeahhh that may be correct right now but TIME and position and grounds and forces may have tolerances of worthy strength to consider further...

I guess thats right and fine with me but thats if you are choosing to only look backwards...you said "happened" meaning you think it has? How sure are you here?

if you can only do that for this better look backwards closer and forwards wider and inwards...wiser. Its limiting this view or take you share that still seems to me right now to be short of something. We have a bit more room, space is available still. Go on! Take up the space. No rush. No harm, just a thought i had and felt moved enough to share. Thanks to you! I am with you though, no problems here. The direction is good and set in stone. Paint, clay, ink its dries quick...Cant we burn the evidence? Cant we hide things?

So what of it, no cost exists good enough to me to do that though...Why?!?! I ask then, is all i can do...


how certain are you here?

but we cannot prove the exact instance happened. But given that beliefs can form rationally from individual experiences, not all rational beliefs are going to be demonstrable to others. — Bylaw

Hi

we could consider a scientific position or train of thought — AmadeusD

WE? until when? say it becomes a scenticfic pos, can you still not chose to deny it? How can you or anyone at that be bothered then? How bad would that LOOK, if you were that? Bother...to pretend, perhaps!

Bother, i typed it in bing search bar, all lower case and found it defined right at the top of the page! per oxford lang. data, the recommended first glance definition at the top--i liked the examples they used, and know what it means but i just am including here now the example sentences that was chosen to be consumed. Seems,i mean, FEELS relevant and is amusing to me at least. Amusing. Amuse. Its A-muse to me, even-- maybe, but so it seems...

bother: "take the trouble to do something - "scientists rarely bother with such niceties""the driver didn't bother to ask why""nobody bothered locking the doors"

Maybe no one cared anyways... Damned if we do, not if we DONT. Who knows?? Who can?

We lack evidence to assert that our awareness of anything is truly awareness of anything with 100% certainty. — Echogem222

here we go, good stuff

But why do we have faith in anything if our faith in logic is correct? If we began with uncertainty, not knowing anything or even nothing at all (requiring faith), we could not have reached this point if we had free will. — Echogem222

keep going

Therefore, we must have been influenced to learn things not by our own will, in other words, to gain faith in things without free will. — Echogem222

hmmm close this needs more thought still fine no problems yet

So, how then would we conclude that it makes sense that we have free will when we didn't initially use free will to learn anything? It doesn't. The logic does not follow such a possibility — Echogem222

interested im listening and more....

In conclusion, for those who have faith in logic, my argument is that Socrates did not know that he knew nothing; he had faith that he knew nothing, whereas I have faith that he actually knew at least some things. — Echogem222

Make this conclusion stronger its important You have good stuff here it ought to go somewhere make the reach set that scope with purpose in mind perhaps even though your passion is evident to me

↪Echogem222
Once again I think you're misreading the intent and going down a path no one else is taking. — Philosophim

dead wrong would you like to be surprised or bothered?

I was kinda getting at this here with the delight of, Vaskane....https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/887319

While im at it, I couldnt help but notice that even though faith is heavily discussed here you used an interesting angle...using Socrates, and free will is smart and to slide in these questions about faith and certainty without religion. I am with you here...but not important now. Just figured id mention and its good to know that the title could have an impact...when I was in the thread linked above, I think tired thinker posted it, "Types of faith" a few days ago I was thinking, wondering about this, I was trying to think of how I could defend that thread to not go into Philosophy of Religion but i guess it makes sense and should remain there in this case because. But im looking out for ways to do that...we will see what happens. Still feeling suspicious about that for some reason, i like it.

↪Echogem222
Once again I think you're misreading the intent and going down a path no one else is taking. — Philosophim

Its right where it needs to be, at least you acknowledge a path at all.

:up: Some great references you included here! Cool

But many and most are too focused on survival. — Chet Hawkins

"too focused" I wouldnt even give that great effort and act "to focus" any credit where it isnt happening Focus is a skill one can polish to their liking...if they are too focused on surviving, I dont think that is really whats happening ...it is but no... its just what we all are doing. It just appears and also actually IS harder for some and vice versa. To say one should ought to want to put up a fight for others to be alive and tired is wild to me and I question if its any better than to let them be dead and well.

GONE but NEVER FORGOTTEN! Until it just is....

But they are out there in the world contributing to their passion when someone will DEIGN to let them in — Chet Hawkins

the "they" you are referring to is only the strong ones, you happen to see and believe exist and you are right they do..... but what about the others?

It has to appeal to its own internal and rarified structures to maintain credibility — Chet Hawkins

"It" (what) does that? It does nothing, people do things and are things and can be them. That happens though, not my problem.

Rather than 'boring', I would opt for well-integrated and well-adjusted. — Vera Mont

You are right, I wish I saw this sooner. Learning from it is good for me, though.

Funny I saw this right after saying "boring" to chet, ha! I mean no harm in it, but hmmm...The dreams of non-dreamers could be also interesting to compare to those dreaming dreamers...thoughts to wonder about.

.. REALLY! — Chet Hawkins

trust me i know it, im with you here

I mean of course, in general, after. They became lauded as inventors and then admitted humbly perhaps that the inspiration came to them in a dream. — Chet Hawkins

Boring haha Im kidding. I got ya, I see ya, I feel ya! A little dream is all ya need. Good night :yawn:

Are you willing to prove your credibility? Are you willing to lose time in order to gain something greater than knowledge, feels that come with that cant be felt without time being a factor, restraint, or issue, or even thought about... momentarily non-existent. Lose time, find something else. What are you willing to lose time for understanding, if work makes this task impossible, it isnt the time for gaining this understanding, its not the time yet. When you find yourself engaging in something, where you lose track of time...that is what im talking about. That is a potential gold mine...keep following that thing, whatever it is. We know this though.

For me its people.......understanding people. I discredit my own self, but I would love to prove my credibility and can. If you could only more then see, watch!

Credibility in craft and works is tied directly to authority and even worse, 'public opinion'. Philosophy in general is not something that is credible at all in either sense. It has to appeal to its own internal and rarified structures to maintain credibility and EVEN THAT is still authority based. So, I fail to agree with your point here. — Chet Hawkins

We all have a story, I wish all were credible as a source for your own.
That is why even the strangest of people should be credible in their own word, a source for themselves.

I am glad you mention authority too, its powerful I am not sure my brain is ready for my ramblings on power, authority freedom, and morality is tied all up in it, everywhere. "morality is EVERYTHING" you claimed and said before, I'm pretty sure. But i am not sure about that either, not important now.

When you "fail" to see my "non" point I'm fine with that, it is an honest and understandably common mistake. Not even a mistake, it almost feels natural sometimes. But I am not fine with the expressions you shared that put me, and possibly others in bad lighting (myproblem) for the hell of it...I dont want that happening for some odd reason (fixing it now)

I have many points I could make and it starts with the fact credibility is being dismissed it seems in the quote i referred to above. But the issue lies within you, I think. Is it an issue? Dont answer that here, you know the answer. You have a problem and is it a trust issue of sorts perhaps, with taking words or orders from? Authority? Others? How can you be so bothered.

But now i am thinking and that actually makes sense. If you dont clash well with authority perhaps its not CREDIBILITY itself. Yet why you use your feelings and words to share how valueless you feel about it ("whats it?" ask urself) Is that how it lives in your every day life, how its used, how you are familiar with its use? You portray your word, it in your every day life or experiences. The life you lead, steps you take, choices made. In your words, to me, it seems you are misplacing judgements on those in these positions that can have power and use it wrongly when they ARE NOT rightful deserving, fit, or reliable to be doing so...maybe they are just bad people. Its not ALL BAD though, cmon...Chet, ITS good.

Those who are (and arent) credible whether its in and of philosophy, of the public opinion, of authority why is "claiming" to be credible wrong??? Is it wrong for you, maybe but it is not wrong for there own sakes! I think your issue is an example of why it is to be considered like I originally intended... when its my point you are seeking to "understand" (i have my doubts thats intended by you from what is given back to me, feedback*) FEEDBACK is why public opinion, authority, and philosophy is credible, whos word are you trusting to accept and learn from?

YOU ARE ONLY AS VALUABLE AS YOUR SOURCE, or your friends/references who can vouch....
how credible is the source where your own words come from and to, then onto these nicely pained pictures from the written feelings to words built on pages you love to display to people, centerfold, more than the headlines or is that all you have to offer? Numbers are they just words? One Two Three...
Words are bigger than what they do or are...it is about who is placing value.

So, by being able to see design capabilities in that vision, requires intelligence, which is the knowledge one has to be able to see a design from the vision but not just see it, be able to produce or recreate the design based on approved plans (fully defined by constraints, tolerances and required dimensions, scales, measurements to be recreated accurately and communicating clearly in real life with credentials to back up your ability to work on the design.) — Kizzy

I disagree that credentials are in any way wise, except that we then know the person has been through a peer vetting process. The reverse is not wise. That is denying someone can contribute who has no credentials. The acquiring of credentials is an orderly cowardice thing. It is precisely the non-ordered types that tend to be the BEST inventors and dreamers. Gee, I wonder why? Nod's as good as a wink to a blind man, eh? — Chet Hawkins

I didnt mean the papers chet, I meant the credibility. Thats my bad. Credible in your craft, the experience, the work and projects completed, the relevance to the project, the power?? Thats a problem with who is hiring who to complete and build their visions or dreams or design..Thats just $$$ talk. The order of how one acquires is also in that boat I believe, but while the order is sure cowardice, i agree to what you mean. But I disagree when you say, "It is precisely the non-ordered types that tend to be the BEST inventors and dreamers." Where are they then? Inventors and dreamers....dreamers can be skilled in other ways their baseless visions can be included...but yeah I did not mean credentials in ANY way BUT when they are rightfully attained, is that all it takes for "we" to approve? A peer vetted "process"? (is that not an order, too?) What about just getting to know people, seeing the work, agreeing to work together, a decision is made...Is it not the credentials, fake earned or neither, and also about the money? Credentials can be faked, masked, covered...easily. That surely is not right by me? Its cowardice for BOTH parties... The proof, the portfolio, the past successes that EXIST from those with credentials they rightfully earned and deserve and WHAT comes with that is also accountability if things go wrong. Willing to stamp your name on the plans, or just willing to deal with the consequences that are weakly given to them. Thats what is cowardice, the punishments are designed in favor of them to still win, if they follow "order" I dont like followers......fines are given and paid off willingly, they can afford a loss for their short term gain...blah blah of course it isnt WISE to only seek the those with JUST good credentials...you could have great credentials on paper, its not my problem who isnt getting the chance to contribute...Where are these people? I am not talking buiness money bs...its simpler. Is technology advancing or evolving?

Daydreaming is interesting in this somehow, ill be back. **I wonder if we in the act of Daydreaming vs in the act of Dreaming during sleep are multitasking differently? Similarly? Is that worth a mention or consideration in terms of consciousness and experiences had that one is aware of....memories? images? I wonder also, if the way we daydream may help/worsen the way we dream or vice versa?

There are myriad accounts of inventors and others that admit freely that 'it came to me in a dream' and this does not even forbid inclusion of simple imagination, ... daydreaming. — Chet Hawkins

Yeah and? How did they earn the title of "inventor" was that before or after the "dreams"?

In particular, it may involve intuitive understanding. — Jack Cummins

Hmmm...

Dreams are objectively real. Their content does not always instantiate itself into the external world. But many dreams do become real. That is how advancement in technology happens. Architecture, ideas, etc all start only as dreams. The nature of that progression dream->instantiation->real external truth is amazing to admit and focus on. — Chet Hawkins

:up: I like this but I feel I could add something more to this. I think there is more to keep in mind or consider before getting here...i believe. But its not wrong at all, its right.

When you mention advancements in technology, architecture, ideas in that progression, where could one start or begin to understand this? How can you? Its interesting and impressive and worthy of acknowledgment that you chose to word this sentence in the way you did though. Thats more what I am wondering, how you figure that anything about the nature of about this progression only takes "admitting" **(accepting) (satisfaction)???** and focus and will to be amused or amazed? Is that natural to try and force that understanding into someone? Beat the solider into someone is work, chet! Good work, keep it shining.

The nature of that progression is for who to learn and who to teach? Who to make things happen from these "dreams" you mention...I like to use "visions" instead of dreams in my notes on this progression, and use slightly different stances. Its not about bridging gaps but finding and building new routes...that is always happening and going to happen, I believe. But thats my problem and I am willing to solve it with what I claim to be real knowledge not necessarily linked to any belief system but reason to believe and experience I can explain to an end that is real...

Chet when you said " That is how advancement in technology happens." I am just making sure you considered and confirm that its not that is HOW it happens but what happens and what is to be true is contained within our understanding of the world and the real external truth is bigger and more certain and this, our current scope is limited, until it isnt....Until its what is real?

Sure it's possible to bring into existence a "design" of something, anything one imagines to be "a good idea" or invention or dream or patent idea whatever... but when there is an absence of evidence/intention/dedication to the process of design within the visionaries original idea, it might make the how important to keep in mind...

How to get intelligent design from unintelligent visions?....And why is it the design or designer in question of any concern? It seems maybe perhaps one believes in intelligent design, but i think those same people could confuse the reality of the design and origin of the vision. It is important to regard the how and why you should go about the design, which isnt always the final product or overall vision, as the vision could evolve based on how it is consumed in reality....The design is perfected through many tests and trials, prototypes, different versions/adaptations stemming from a vision, that was maybe founded on a baseless idea.... but through and with an intelligent design, it is possible to start manipulating the very function and overall purpose of a vision (intentions and functions, and abilities and usage could change over time, as people go through phases and so does standards and environments.)

So, by being able to see design capabilities in that vision, requires intelligence, which is the knowledge one has to be able to see a design from the vision but not just see it, be able to produce or recreate the design based on approved plans (fully defined by constraints, tolerances and required dimensions, scales, measurements to be recreated accurately and communicating clearly in real life with credentials to back up your ability to work on the design.)

But if I do find myself believing in some God, it will be through reason, not faith. — QuixoticAgnostic

There is only one type of faith, blind, faith works via believing, not knowing — Vaskane

Should the reason to believe ought to be verified? What if that reason is "wrong" but that is all they know...until made "right" or corrected. What if no one questions a "wrong" reason to believe? "Dont stop believin''" Hmmm...is faith something that is stop and go? Can you just stop believing? I think yes. Can you just remember to start believing? Should faith be questioned at all? Especially should faith be questioned against or for what it is you KNOW? and Why? Who is bothered enough to question faith without wanting to KNOW more? Was faith born from the blind or to the blind or in the blind? With it? A "knowing" might be involved when it is/can be measurable. Through hope, perhaps?...Ones hope in a claim could be questioned or observed further, and verified as credible or not before doing anything further via believing....but knowing THAT alone now is no longer of the blind believer, but from knowing they are that....

Can you have or hold morals that may not ever be seen in action? perhaps morals are justification itself.
what if, intentions are a/the gateway to potentially lead to one participating in questionable behavior and ,by justifying ONLY planned actions as they play the role as "the excuse to act". despite the outcome that was bound to occur...no matter what, for better or worse.
***an excuse to act = tricking the brain into planning a justified NOT BELIEF, but idea with reason TO MAKE BELIEF through others perceptions without the true action explained aloud, despite the facts of matter being known or knowable, only interally between self and mind, know the true reason/s for hiding a "truth" thanks to privacy within us and our wants needs goals desires that we allow permit tolerate accept and all its opposites and vice versas equally considered and accounted for....the space for thought is and is found when and in using the brain silently within the minds limits, which the self can control as boundaries contrstraints etc for what it really is thats happening..e.g. daydreaming, multitasking, texting and in a meeting on zoom, other examples exist

*reason=goal or desire? i think they exists with and without a belief system but im looking at linking goals or desires to ones purpose in life, the one that exists despite knowing it. Though knowable. Morals are justification itself.

you can have intention without a goal, i say yes..but can you without a desire? i say no..for now at least. Your intent though doesnt need its own purpose, because it doesnt mean you act on it according to how you imagined you would act...Once the act occurs, your purpose could be repurposed successfully... but how much it was planned, thought of or out vs imagined or believed .[ex. my intention was/is to have fun tonight-8.20.23 522pm]] AND without parameters or constraints OR GOALS, intentions can change in decision making moments through that experience of choosing to act/acting on those intentions and how what you imagined vs what reality played out was very different

Intentions show that the individual has thought.
What happens when you bypass your intentions? COULD INTENSIONS COULD BE THE BRAIN TRICKING ITS SELF OR BODY? WHETHER WE ACT ON THEM OR NOT..PLANNED OR RANDOM, COMPLETE ATTEMPT AND FAIL, OR SUCCESS OF WHAT FROM ACTION IS JUSTIFIED? IS IT STILL WITHOUT ACTION?

It is belief + authority. — Leontiskos

what about this:
belief + expectations + authority ....combined with what else though?. I don't know why were adding or using the plus sign, its not worth adding these words up, why do we need or think an equation will be able to find that balance? But okay lets add these words, with all random values from all different valued random minds and solve!!! I am down but not here on the forum to solve anything. I come because I dont have many people in my realm who I am able to talk about these deep philosophical thinkings that I had before I even knew the word "philosophy" even meant, literally the word was not known by definition or by example or influence personally until I took a required general philosophy class in college at the age of 22..but i was reminded that my thoughts were the same as yours but I didnt know I was able to THINK ABOUT MY THINKING let alone LEARN from thinking thoughts. Just being, I was. Now, its been 7 years and I am proud of where I took this self taught journey and more importantly, WHY? I could be doing MANY other things and focusing on a goal...but the thing is, I just went where it made sense for me...I was able to now learn differently and in an environment and realm where i am myself shocked at my deep interests. I have better things to do, i know for a fact thats true..but here I am. I impressed myself and its impressive how much i have learned now that I know how to learn...and with passion and interest and will its not learning anymore its a knowing and what you learn is up to you and from others subjective stances that will help you learn how to learn, if thats what you want. Do what you want....I am, right now...I am getting off track, my apologies...I am LEARNING! Im on track actually, but my pace is just off, or not even off...im just differently moving along it....Where was I? OH YES, the math! Lets add together or shall i say combine the meanings behinda belief + an authority + an EXPECTATION/s if thats what we must do but it might not be worth the time....

Whatever the answer is I believe, whether if or how it that exists or it that can exist, the moral objective final truth I believe can differ or maybe not be constrained or bound to or from the group of objective truths. Its a balance of answers that will help this group find its perfect place...A balanced equation isnt the answer but it may really just be the base to get there but its important to know how material might always effect each equation every time its repeated... each load or force or weight or value that were put unto the ground which we take our stances...it cant be done with one standard formula, but these equations can be solved to bring new answers despite using the same "formula" and I think that is because of timing and the unreliability of human error in general.

When trying to balance or come to conclusive answers, it seems that objective moral truths may not be truths...what if its just the TRUTH? What if its a place? It can be denied and also too far to reach but eventually TIME will take us and maybe then reached by those better fit for it. though if authority is misused, misplaced it overrides or over powers the entire point...and that in itself is a way to figure out the limits were willing to take to get there...

I want to believe this place exists, but it I cant be too bothered.

I am moved though. It might be very far down a long road or is it that we are on this road but keep missing the turn or getting lost or incapable of getting there physically....mentally, emotionally? I think at least the first two should both arrive together with a real self awareness that is proven with you as the source, be credible, be that reference! Or dont...maybe thats the better option. We will never get to an answer without your word being able to be taken for what it REALLY is. I think words arent even necessary really because sometimes they dont add up..It dont add up, doesnt make sense for some reason...And one, with the life they lead will reveal everything needed to know, no words needed, and now is rightfully judged and questioned and with a chance to make a proof become an example.... of why it isnt about adding up anything...

As humans with such specific needs, can we see it through the words that we see and share on this forum...?

Well, I can see you.

I have scrolled every topic from every page here, and find myself going back again and again to see if I find anything I missed.... I love this site, I learn a lot and I am on the site a lot...I like like-mindedness and I think that is something we all have in common to any degree small or large...we sought out or stumbled upon or was referred or just looking to connect to someone who gives the time...whatever got us here (i think some might just want to chat and find friends lol thats fine too not cool but fine) but we all signed up to be members here on THE PHILOSOPHY FORUM....

Not every account contributes and I see the regulars, I see how those that do, use the site, engage, I see what you comment on, I see what you introduce to the thread in your OP's and that tells me a lot where or what ideas you lean towards and how you go about them also tells its own sometimes story in itself...and I must say, I have been highly impressed by the shared content and work by a lot of you while I have also cursed aloud reading somethings posted by others but those others mean that I am aloud to JUDGE because its not about what I think is complete bullshit nonsense. I really think the positive outweighs the bad here greatly. I love the openness andI dont want to say it because its not the right word, but the bravery some people have as they confidently share stuff I find to be...regurgitated and wrong...but THATS ON ME...and I would like to have more confidence in sharing myself. You have helped shine a light in my darkness. That counts for something.

But I am not there yet, I question myself and its valid that I do. BUT IM HERE, thats progress. Im proud.

I need to format better and type in a way more people can clearly understand my point but the point is not having one all the time still allows one to come...I think in this case I am replying because I have something and I wonder can you see that?...its because of YOU ALL HERE!

I have been highly motivated by the contributions I have seen to work on my communications, but I still think where i lack in organization and formatting can be easily improved but what I am saying now i decided is worth the risk of facing the outcomes or fear I have, being dismissed or belittled or corrected without AUTHORITY..

Yeah you can say I am going off the rails, over explaining myself. I can see someone saying I am doing it so much so that it may have little to NO VALUE to what concerns the OP. But I would not question that feedback, because i didnt ask for any. I am not agreeing or disagreeing I just like the direction this post has taken. Thanks for being you. But not thanks as in, you did something i needed...i would have been fine. I wasnt losing sleep or now seeing something I didnt already...I'm just glad to see the like mindedness and jumping in because of it in this thread...

I may see it more as a whole but its not real yet as a whole but its being built...I am seeing it as a whole, while those who may be taking the value of their views more seriously then the part itself, when the part is nothing without the whole...where if this forum were to be gone tomorrow, would you get or be willing to share your ideas and what do you seek? Who is your audience? How is feedback turned into new value for you? How can you be bothered? How bored are you? How much do you like like minded people?
...Its amazing how I seem to forget how much I need and crave getting into the minds of others who are well taught and educated and interesting and talented and well spoken too! I dont get to talk to people day to day without having to stop myself from going too deep getting to the bottom of things. Things like understanding people better for them without them even knowing. But I like to understand more then you may know. I see me in those of you with similar deep thinking thoughts and I have been intimidated by how beautifully some people can articulate without going off the rails like me...but maybe thats what I want to do...i'm being true in that, if you need prove...I havent commented on anything on this forum WITHOUT GOING OFF the rails at least a little, but I think if you get anything from this know feedback exists in me for many of you if you ever need to hear it for yourself....

what I meant about me seeing this place (the forum) as the whole rather than interacting as a part that is of no whole, i mean to say... when i say "whole" and "part" i think of a machine that is still being built but we have the parts but its not fully built yet...its hard to build something that was never designed before but it isnt hard to get there from a vision of the whole for what its worth...and TIME IS LIMITING but how so? (another topic I can go on an on about and shall one day) AND one day this machine will serve its function as a whole, and a successful one at that! When the parts come together with the function of it known undeniably serving its purpose but how did we get assembled and how many machines exists like this?
I am trying to say SOMETHING but I cant do it efficiently YET...For me, seeing that I am a part in this whole,its clear I am not established yet or successfully set in this whole, where is my place? Do i belong? I feel I can find my place as a part though, but not for me this time for the whole only! Not me any part will do....

Sorry its long winded, I have typed this up and enjoyed doing it. Those lost let me know where I lost you, to where the point of the OP may become NOT LOST for me but just pushed aside for the moment, because thats HOW I DO THINGS right now...If the worst happens, I'm dismissed and belittled and booted from the forum by someone or everyone on here and that alone would tell me a lot. Is that not useful real knowledge? Yeah, I would get my feelings hurt (thats my problem) and want to defend my honor (also my problem) but I STILL CANNOT BE BOTHERED because I would be learning regardless...Where my part in this belongs and is taught to me but not by any worthy teacher...education is lost when I realize the student depending on these "teachers"...by teachers I mean, strangers asking strangers "what is the meaning of life" and being dead serious like the answer is here...IF it is and was, WHY WOULD WE TELL YOU? You cant just ask that LOL I judge stuff like that but am I wrong?
EVEN IF WE KNOW FOR SURE...Its like they expect people to hand them the answer they worked hard to arrive to...They lose the chance to get there on their own, do they even know what they WANT? Is it THE TRUTH? And doing it in the least authentic, most basic way, and without questioning who and what they get an answer from... just a "thanks!" they say to those who has the patience to give them any attention, you are better then me...but do they not know that people still give an answer, even when they dont know themselves for sure...its interesting to see it happen. It does here, its all here.

I Question things, I question myself for questioning things...but I need to make it make sense for ME and from there I can make sense of things with others..together we can arrive at a truth thats objectively true, i think. I think regardless if no one responds. Thinking thoughts are sometimes not worth questioning too deep as its just the brain being with you... I am willing to be corrected but from where I stand who is to bother?

Look at all these words!!! Dont have to read to see.... Look what you did to me, I cant thank you enough.

I was moved to share all this, but its the work im tasking myself with...I have written a lot about moral objectivity not as a task, but for fun in my free time from such a subjective POV that isnt necessarily about "me" being the subject but a subjective POV from a person willing to take on a role and be a part of a team...the whole is real, but its hard to imagine human kind getting there as good as parts of a whole that is just doing what its function...its doing what its supposed to, a machine with parts of the whole...are we as humans doing this too? Perhaps...I am not asking because I want or need that answer from any one part here but I question it and want to see the parts in action....even if its not what I want to see.

...I dont want to see anything, I just wanted to let those know...and say for another moment, I did ask the people here, are we as humans doing this and heading there? are you all doing your part? and everyone replied with a confident "yes" I wouldnt question that but I need to be sure you do...because I will eventually question it anyways or someone will...Is lack of questioning and acceptance a problem to be bothered with? If that is what is preventing people and the will they have to participate in what I think is actually positive growth in humanity but can we see just how positive it really is? How can we see it as the whole when we are in it too deep ourselves?

What I may actually want to ask as a real question to this audience is this:
What the hell is an objective moral truth going to do for me today? Even if say we all agreed that we found at least one of them? How important really is an objective moral truth if I can be almost certain that my existence may be unknown to someone and never have any affect on the ways of our lives... I am doing my part and my faith is certain in the hopes and belief that an objective moral truth exists but we dont have any business driving that bus to get there...our bus is planet earth and we are here together headed....to i guess another place.

The chance doesnt exist, that my life will not interact or be known to many or anoher person whom is far far away from me and my world, that is my realm of reality and theirs is theirs but we both can live objectively without even knowing that we are moving together without bounds, doing our part, living our lives is doing our part and losing our lives is also our part, life and death, starts are ends...but we are unbothered by eachother because we dont know what about the existence of another, its impossible to know....I always think about stuff like that, that someone exists out there that cannot be bothered by me, even with all the authority I have.

Free will? Or free from a will to worry? That is a choice, i think...What do I know? I know that we can get to the bottom of things, but where we chose to go wont tell us anything about a real ETA because we dont have a GPS that takes us, we dont have an address to type into one! We dont even have the means to get there...but we dont stop...we keep moving, not just in time WITH IT.

And hey, we have proof! Proof is in the pudding! Our growth and knowledge that we chosen and even LIKE more in the learning part itself over the whole point or final answer is good enough but sometimes with indirect communication comes great ideas for the self but not any one else..and we cant get anywhere without selfless self awareness, but its not revealing an answer that can work every time...I dont think its worth being bothered over really...because of TIME...we are someones past and of the future but here now...

The fact that I can relate to a Philosophers mind that are centuries older, of a different country, of a different sex,of a different language of a different TIME [ (im a 27 year old Female from Central Fla who is self taught in philosophy with a degree in Drafting and Design, I do AutoCAD and Solidworks for work) this is not important really, only worth mentioning because my outspoken (some may be thinking OVERLY spoken, fine) I am saying this because im not known here, I dont reply to much but when I have its overly done perhaps and lacking what the forum is interested in hearing, but I have many bookmarked OP's and many opinions on topics brought up by the good people of the forum...not that your good or bad but im addressing the members as "the good people" because its a community, we are not ever going to find common grounds but I think a common ground can come from a POV that isnt of this community but is like us because of an interest in knowing the questions we all think about..

These deep questions that is labeled and organized and laid out here for us to share what we consider to be philosophically worth of discussion exists in even in the unlikely, like-minded stranger...because they dont know how deep it is yet and yet they still are doing their part.
That person is thinking and wondering, WE, THEM, US, cant avoid that search as humans but it seems avoiding the dive is worth it for certain minds, and they are right...and that is there part and they know how to play it...No one can see things like you but maybe they could...you may never know. Its not about them as a they but without them are we able to see an US?
I dont think I will see the day WE as THEY can live that way but I know it is true that one day it may happen...that what is being discussed here isnt really worth the back and forth bullshit unless you think we can get somewhere...with ME INCLUDED!
Perhaps more direction is needed but we not need to keep asking the good people of the forum...unless you want to argue, which is also I guess fine and judgement is not coming from me if you like arguing with the same people. Who am I to judge is not the question, because I can answer that. Its that judgement, I believe is perceived and given and taken and passed and wrongly sometimes rightly so...but its the stance one is able to judge from... Even if one may tell you they arent judging, why do you believe them? Some times they may be telling the truth but privacy in the mind allows our judgements to flow and happen and perhaps manifest into certain behaviors, actions, reactions that clearly demonstrate how you COULD judge.

Objective ways to possibly moralize can come from expectations perhaps and I have a lot to say on this, but I had to make certain things clear to get HERE NOW....thats okay. Im just doing my part.

I'm thinking like when a person can BE LET DOWN BECAUSE OF AN EXPECTATION that was unmet say or even if one was LET DOWN BECAUSE their EXPECTATIONS were OFF and they say to themselves "How could I have not seen that coming?!? WTF?" Now what I notice is that what that thinking person may do is behave in a way that is hard on their mind and body and what they are giving out into the world by allowing themselves to be bothered with that expectation they placed even if they knew they had them...
Perhaps if they can ask those questions to themselves but WITHOUT JUDGMENT ON their own self, it wouldnt be as easy to pick up on how morals really are affecting someones well being and peace of mind. These expectations speak for you and speak for me...it just takes someone to notice them. People brush off the idea of an expectation, as its a common thing to hear people claim they dont have any, because they know it will let them down...I do this depending on who, what, where why and how I am going about doing a thing, that I have experience being let down in before in a similar case just a different time. But why not give an expectation a chance?
I am reminded even when I think I am free from expecting anything, If I really think about the question and really answer it to myself FOR MYSELF...and when that doesnt work, I can ask the right person to get me back to a place where I am not to question myself and what i expected...that isnt always the problem. Dont ask if you just want a pick me up or sulking buddy or the one who will tell you what you WANT to hear (unless you admit you arent ready for the truth, thats fine if aware of what your doing in that act of avoiding or masking)....If you are lucky enough, ask that question first to your self and then someone whose word or life means something to you..someone who knows you and who can give you an answer in a way that can force through that prior harsh self judgement AND find the reminder and the goodness you really wanted and how you are going to deal with what comes to bother you again down the line. Its all good, and not because the subject has expectations...its that they are using them to discovering truth in themselves and seeing it in them and getting to see it from another.
The good is the growth and I think we are all growing here..that proof exists no matter what. Its just that who really cares? It doesnt matter how far you come because the way another will be able to get the full good from the objective moral truths created by US will eventually see the whole for WHAT ITS WORTH and they can judge the lengths we took to get there from there growth as well. No growth is almost like really really slow growth or maybe growth that started and never finished but stopped growing while still living..You cant ever really know how much anything was ever worth from this place I think were all talking about, the one and only truth. But if we cant catch up in time to see this truth, if time doesnt stop can we just slow it down...Maybe lose track of time? I have done that before, it comes with a consequence but sometimes is worth it. Maybe we could lose the track we say of time....if we knew the track at all, I dont think its possible to all arrive on time and on track to any where any place any world any space...but that time can be spotted, i think, when IT from US spots it, how could they understand all that? What knows US? WHO knows US? Maybe its not us they see just the progress and ideas we bring to the world from earth...I think US is through me and you and every one it has to be SO BIG and SO SURE. With US what CAN happen? We can decide...i think.