Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

What you think about how you think.
User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10714
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by Poodle » Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:36 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:46 pm
It is not possible to directly tell you.
That sums up the entirety of your ideas. Ineffability. You belong in a religious forum.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 18563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:42 am

It has to be said: I love women who are effable. Tall narrow hipped, no makeup. Not whiny, not religious.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
placid
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1447
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by placid » Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:50 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies.


But the eye is not seeing... it is just 'eyeing'. It is the appearance of an eye.

As one looks into someone's eyes, one is looking at an image. Behind the image and within it are nothing. The image has no 'behind' or 'within', any more than the image in an 'apparent nightly dream' has a 'behind' or 'within'.

There is no 'spark' or 'focal point' or 'bit' of consciousness in, or associated with, the image seen.

One is wholly present. One is not divided into 'bits' or 'loci' or any other differentiator.

___________

Also, for your perusal, watch and listen very carefully to Leo Gura's video..make sure you watch all of it, if you dare!! :shock:




Warning: the information contained in this video could potentially blow your brains right out of the pixel that is your puny brain into the bigger picture. :lol: :lol: :lol:


> > >

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10714
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by Poodle » Wed Mar 20, 2019 5:26 pm

Human Anatomy Grade F for FAIL.
By the same argument, human faeces don't exist. No {!#%@}, Sherlock.

User avatar
mirror93
Regular Poster
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by mirror93 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:20 am

'eyeing'? is that a new placid term invented? :lol:
:paladin:

User avatar
mirror93
Regular Poster
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by mirror93 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:23 am

placid wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:50 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies.


But the eye is not seeing... it is just 'eyeing'. It is the appearance of an eye.

As one looks into someone's eyes, one is looking at an image. Behind the image and within it are nothing. The image has no 'behind' or 'within', any more than the image in an 'apparent nightly dream' has a 'behind' or 'within'.

There is no 'spark' or 'focal point' or 'bit' of consciousness in, or associated with, the image seen.

One is wholly present. One is not divided into 'bits' or 'loci' or any other differentiator.

___________

Also, for your perusal, watch and listen very carefully to Leo Gura's video..make sure you watch all of it, if you dare!! :shock:




Warning: the information contained in this video could potentially blow your brains right out of the pixel that is your puny brain into the bigger picture. :lol: :lol: :lol:


> > >
you are seeing through your eyes
If there was no 'spark' or 'focal point', you would be constantly dizzy. Are you always dizzy placid? Don't you have a focal point to look at things?

What do you mean by looking at an image when you look at someone's eyes? Wtf are you on placid?
:paladin:

User avatar
machinegun1
Poster
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:49 am

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by machinegun1 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:34 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies. Try harder next time. [/color] :lol: :lol:
:laff: :laff:

Are you dumb? Did you even watch the video ? Now you're just making a fool of yourself, since it is CLEAR that when opsins are introduced in the ape's eyes they could see the color they couldn't before, EVER. Never once mentioned "brains evolving to perceive anything of that color", because that would contradict the experiment itself, just opsins introduced in the ape's EYES, and then puff, they could see, it directly contradicts your claims. It completely refutes your nonsensical made up hypothesis about brains having to do with the perception of color because of evolution, as it is clearly the eyes that detect its external red color through opsins allowing them to see what was there and they couldn't before, otherwise the ape's could NEVER see the color, as their brains didn't evolve like humans.

User avatar
mirror93
Regular Poster
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by mirror93 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:52 am

machinegun1 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:34 am
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies. Try harder next time. [/color] :lol: :lol:
:laff: :laff:

Are you dumb? Did you even watch the video ? Now you're just making a fool of yourself, since it is CLEAR that when opsins are introduced in the ape's eyes they could see the color they couldn't before, EVER. Never once mentioned "brains evolving to perceive anything of that color", because that would contradict the experiment itself, just opsins introduced in the ape's EYES, and then puff, they could see, it directly contradicts your claims. It completely refutes your nonsensical made up hypothesis about brains having to do with the perception of color because of evolution, as it is clearly the eyes that detect its external red color through opsins allowing them to see what was there and they couldn't before, otherwise the ape's could NEVER see the color, as their brains didn't evolve like humans.
that still doesn't disprove evolution, eyes evolved then
:paladin:

User avatar
machinegun1
Poster
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:49 am

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by machinegun1 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:24 am

mirror93 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:52 am
machinegun1 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:34 am
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies. Try harder next time. [/color] :lol: :lol:
:laff: :laff:

Are you dumb? Did you even watch the video ? Now you're just making a fool of yourself, since it is CLEAR that when opsins are introduced in the ape's eyes they could see the color they couldn't before, EVER. Never once mentioned "brains evolving to perceive anything of that color", because that would contradict the experiment itself, just opsins introduced in the ape's EYES, and then puff, they could see, it directly contradicts your claims. It completely refutes your nonsensical made up hypothesis about brains having to do with the perception of color because of evolution, as it is clearly the eyes that detect its external red color through opsins allowing them to see what was there and they couldn't before, otherwise the ape's could NEVER see the color, as their brains didn't evolve like humans.
that still doesn't disprove evolution, eyes evolved then
When did I type about this disproving evolution? This is just a fact I wanted to mention.

Darwin evolution itself is full of gaps, it's total nonsense

User avatar
machinegun1
Poster
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:49 am

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by machinegun1 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:27 am

placid wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:50 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies.


But the eye is not seeing... it is just 'eyeing'. It is the appearance of an eye.

As one looks into someone's eyes, one is looking at an image. Behind the image and within it are nothing. The image has no 'behind' or 'within', any more than the image in an 'apparent nightly dream' has a 'behind' or 'within'.

There is no 'spark' or 'focal point' or 'bit' of consciousness in, or associated with, the image seen.

One is wholly present. One is not divided into 'bits' or 'loci' or any other differentiator.

___________

Also, for your perusal, watch and listen very carefully to Leo Gura's video..make sure you watch all of it, if you dare!! :shock:




Warning: the information contained in this video could potentially blow your brains right out of the pixel that is your puny brain into the bigger picture. :lol: :lol: :lol:


> > >
See Matthew? I don't understand a single bit of word Placid types, how can you type that I'm Placid?
Placid's way of distorting perception of reality is not mine

User avatar
mirror93
Regular Poster
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by mirror93 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:40 am

machinegun1 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:27 am
placid wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:50 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies.


But the eye is not seeing... it is just 'eyeing'. It is the appearance of an eye.

As one looks into someone's eyes, one is looking at an image. Behind the image and within it are nothing. The image has no 'behind' or 'within', any more than the image in an 'apparent nightly dream' has a 'behind' or 'within'.

There is no 'spark' or 'focal point' or 'bit' of consciousness in, or associated with, the image seen.

One is wholly present. One is not divided into 'bits' or 'loci' or any other differentiator.

___________

Also, for your perusal, watch and listen very carefully to Leo Gura's video..make sure you watch all of it, if you dare!! :shock:




Warning: the information contained in this video could potentially blow your brains right out of the pixel that is your puny brain into the bigger picture. :lol: :lol: :lol:


> > >
See Matthew? I don't understand a single bit of word Placid types, how can you type that I'm Placid?
Placid's way of distorting perception of reality is not mine

Well, if you are not Placid .....Let me sum it up for you.
Placid is saying when you look at someone's eyes, there is nothing inside that, just an holographic image, not a real person with a life (as she said in her older posts, about her holographic theory), therefore, Placid's philosophy only helps psychos believing people's life are worthless and empty inside, when you look at someone you're looking at a projected holographic image, inside there, there is not-thing, they're like empty suits, you think that you exist, but she says there is no you who is existent, it's an empty-you, who talks about existing, and a thought about having a self and being separated from the rest.

That all sums up her own nihilistic poly-solipsistic and dangerous philosophy she preaches in this forum and in others.

That's why she's all for Hitler.
Also, I don't doubt she also believes mass shooting to be ok, as for her religion, it should be ok. (Until they start killing hippies?)

She has no idea as how this can absolutely influence someone's mind into 'mass shooting' mentality {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Matrix_defense}. (but I think she couldn't care less)

Her way of hiding the obvious sick and EVIL nihilistic {!#%@} she writes, is to be writing "LOVE" at the end of her posts, and claiming someone who isn't accepting her religion to be "egotistical".
The way she puts it out there is like Jehovah's Witnesses do, she tries to bait more people into her cult
:paladin:

User avatar
mirror93
Regular Poster
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by mirror93 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:54 am

placid wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:50 pm
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies.


But the eye is not seeing... it is just 'eyeing'. It is the appearance of an eye.

As one looks into someone's eyes, one is looking at an image. Behind the image and within it are nothing. The image has no 'behind' or 'within', any more than the image in an 'apparent nightly dream' has a 'behind' or 'within'.

There is no 'spark' or 'focal point' or 'bit' of consciousness in, or associated with, the image seen.

One is wholly present. One is not divided into 'bits' or 'loci' or any other differentiator.

___________

Also, for your perusal, watch and listen very carefully to Leo Gura's video..make sure you watch all of it, if you dare!! :shock:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?


Warning: the information contained in this video could potentially blow your brains right out of the pixel that is your puny brain into the bigger picture. :lol: :lol: :lol:


> > >

I think you forgot to watch this one from your favorite youtuber, that applies 100% for you.
(Also, cults don't mean necessarily they want your money or sex, pseudo neo advaita cults you are in are still cults)
:paladin:

User avatar
placid
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1447
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Debunking the Material Paradigm.

Post by placid » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:24 am

mirror93 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:40 am

That all sums up her own nihilistic poly-solipsistic and dangerous philosophy she preaches in this forum and in others.

It's only dangerous to the illusory sense of a ''separate self'' (ego) that is only concerned for it's own survival at all costs, take the case of the ego that expressed itself as Hitler for example. But that's all irrelevant.. the point is you have absolutely no understanding of the metaphysical dynamics of reality, nor do you have any understanding of Non-duality...but fear not, you are not alone. The world is not quite ready to hear Non-duality. Only 1% of the population really understands it.

Leo Gura is within that 1%...you obviously have no idea what this man is talking about, it's takes someone who has been on the path of awakening a very long time, and has taken the time to go very deep into it's own self-inquiry, unless this work has been done, there is no way anyone is going to understand a word he is saying. So if you are new to the path of what it means to be self-actualised through intense deep meditation and self-inquiry, you are not going to truly absorb what is being said, unless you are willing to be fully open and not be lost in your own restricted limited old worn out paradigms then you are just not going to be interested in new knowledge. Leo talks about direct actual experience, the only true knowledge there is, knowledge comes from you only, secondary knowledge is not to be trusted. Trust in your own actual direct experience only.

I'm only here to share my experience. I'm not here to be agreed with or seeking approval. I'm open to all knowledge, not closed.
Leo Gura happens to hit the nail on the head for me, I totally get what he is saying, and that's all there is to it. I don't care about all the stuff that you people believe and say about me, it's my job to like me and to know me, it's not for others to know. What other people think about me is none of my business, only I know what's true or not true.

You can refute anything I say all day long, makes no difference to me. I am my own teacher in life, only I get to decide what's real and what's unreal, what's true or false, that's my job and my job only. From the nondualist paradigm it only makes sense that ego will lash out at a perceived threat to it's survival. This anger and distain you are displaying at placid is hiding a deep seated fear. I've heard it all before, it's all water of a ducks back for me, I have come into alighnment with truth thanks to people like Leo Gura who can really articulate it in a way that only those with willing and open ears will hear it.

Leo Gura has already debunked materialism, he has made loads of videos on the subject. Go and check them out.

Here is another good video from Leo... Try debunking anything Leo says, if you know how and start a thread on it, that will be well worth watching.

Truth is, truth is irrefeutable for those who can hear it...those who can't fear not, your time will come to hear the voice of truth which is always within you, it's always this pure unconditional love holding and effortlessly carrying you every step of the way toward self actualisation.

What Is Actuality? - Distinguish Direct Experience vs Concept



User avatar
Dimebag
Regular Poster
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: Debunk / Inter Mind Religion

Post by Dimebag » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:50 am

machinegun1 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:34 am
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:06 am
Eyes evolved to discern different electromagetic radiation frequencies. The brain evolved colours to represent the different frequencies. Try harder next time. [/color] :lol: :lol:
:laff: :laff:

Are you dumb? Did you even watch the video ? Now you're just making a fool of yourself, since it is CLEAR that when opsins are introduced in the ape's eyes they could see the color they couldn't before, EVER. Never once mentioned "brains evolving to perceive anything of that color", because that would contradict the experiment itself, just opsins introduced in the ape's EYES, and then puff, they could see, it directly contradicts your claims. It completely refutes your nonsensical made up hypothesis about brains having to do with the perception of color because of evolution, as it is clearly the eyes that detect its external red color through opsins allowing them to see what was there and they couldn't before, otherwise the ape's could NEVER see the color, as their brains didn't evolve like humans.
Why is it that lesions to a certain area of the visual cortex (might have been v5 or 6) results in loss of colour perception? If it were purely the eyes which perceive colour this wouldn’t happen.

Please listen to this podcast:
[media]https://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/d/6/0/d605c0 ... ede41a4f5f[/media]
with Harvard Neuroscientist Dr John Dowling, it is an excellent overview of the visual system. It explains the important role the vitamin a pigment plays to the retina allowing vision to take place, but also how the rest of the visual system functions. In this view the retina, which contains neurons, is an extension of the brain, and so should not be seen as something separate from the brain. The visual system is contingent upon many different areas which perform different functions in breaking down an image from the retina and identifying basic features such as edges of various orientations, movement, then colour, depth perception.

Please do yourself a favour and listen to it as it is fairly comprehensive and will only extend your knowledge of this subject.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Fri Mar 22, 2019 1:25 pm

Poodle wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:36 am
SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:46 pm
It is not possible to directly tell you.
That sums up the entirety of your ideas. Ineffability. You belong in a religious forum.
I can't make you understand Calculus either. I can only explain what it is. It is up to you to put the work into understanding it. You probably have put the work into understanding Calculus but you probably have not put any work into understanding the ides about Consciousness that The Inter Mind talks about. It's the same thing and there is no Religion in what I say.

Actually I wasn't completely accurate when I said that I can't directly tell you. I do directly tell you all the time what it is that you should be thinking about. Just think about the Conscious experience itself. Don't get caught up in all the Neural Correlations of Consciousness. What is that Redness that you see in your Mind? How does it happen? These are the questions that I am trying to answer.

User avatar
mirror93
Regular Poster
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Debunking Leo Gura / Actualized.org Debunked

Post by mirror93 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:18 pm

placid wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:24 am
mirror93 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:40 am

That all sums up her own nihilistic poly-solipsistic and dangerous philosophy she preaches in this forum and in others.

It's only dangerous to the illusory sense of a ''separate self'' (ego) that is only concerned for it's own survival at all costs, take the case of the ego that expressed itself as Hitler for example. But that's all irrelevant.. the point is you have absolutely no understanding of the metaphysical dynamics of reality, nor do you have any understanding of Non-duality...but fear not, you are not alone. The world is not quite ready to hear Non-duality. Only 1% of the population really understands it.

Leo Gura is within that 1%...you obviously have no idea what this man is talking about, it's takes someone who has been on the path of awakening a very long time, and has taken the time to go very deep into it's own self-inquiry, unless this work has been done, there is no way anyone is going to understand a word he is saying. So if you are new to the path of what it means to be self-actualised through intense deep meditation and self-inquiry, you are not going to truly absorb what is being said, unless you are willing to be fully open and not be lost in your own restricted limited old worn out paradigms then you are just not going to be interested in new knowledge. Leo talks about direct actual experience, the only true knowledge there is, knowledge comes from you only, secondary knowledge is not to be trusted. Trust in your own actual direct experience only.

I'm only here to share my experience. I'm not here to be agreed with or seeking approval. I'm open to all knowledge, not closed.
Leo Gura happens to hit the nail on the head for me, I totally get what he is saying, and that's all there is to it. I don't care about all the stuff that you people believe and say about me, it's my job to like me and to know me, it's not for others to know. What other people think about me is none of my business, only I know what's true or not true.

You can refute anything I say all day long, makes no difference to me. I am my own teacher in life, only I get to decide what's real and what's unreal, what's true or false, that's my job and my job only. From the nondualist paradigm it only makes sense that ego will lash out at a perceived threat to it's survival. This anger and distain you are displaying at placid is hiding a deep seated fear. I've heard it all before, it's all water of a ducks back for me, I have come into alighnment with truth thanks to people like Leo Gura who can really articulate it in a way that only those with willing and open ears will hear it.

Leo Gura has already debunked materialism, he has made loads of videos on the subject. Go and check them out.

Here is another good video from Leo... Try debunking anything Leo says, if you know how and start a thread on it, that will be well worth watching.

Truth is, truth is irrefeutable for those who can hear it...those who can't fear not, your time will come to hear the voice of truth which is always within you, it's always this pure unconditional love holding and effortlessly carrying you every step of the way toward self actualisation.

What Is Actuality? - Distinguish Direct Experience vs Concept


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
I'm not saying it's dangerous for me or others you complete IDIOT, I couldn't care less about the vacuous nonsense you say, besides everyone on the forum made you a fool by your contradictions, this forum was used to expose you and your cult.
I'm saying it's dangerous INSIDE your cult, by psychopaths who may believe the woo you say, you lunatic.

No such thing as "survival" of the ego, self that is separated versus self that is not separated, these are just religious jargons from your cult. Ego is exactly what you have, you aren't striving to survive, you're just a stupid person who does nothing in life but turn on your computer to post garbage you learned before and resonate with IN FORUMS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO with it.

Also, Leo Gura debunked nothing.
He's just a narcissistic lunatic telling his subjective life and EXPECTATIONS must be the true reality for everyone to experience, he's just pretending to be "woke" from the matrix, doing lots of drugs and telling people he met god and that he reached nirvana and everyone is a "no-thing" for him, and now he wants everyone else to do the same (but wasn't everyone just a no-thing, why does he want no-things to follow his advices? he's just as full of {!#%@} as you are.

Leo Gura debunked Part 1:


Leo Gura debunked Part 2:


Leo Gura debunked Part 3:


Leo Gura debunked Part 4:


He's also a snakeoil salesman selling his books, that says a lot.
:paladin:

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:27 pm

Poodle wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:36 am
SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:46 pm
It is not possible to directly tell you.
That sums up the entirety of your ideas. Ineffability. You belong in a religious forum.
So do you think you can describe the Redness of Red or the Tone-ness of Standard A in words? These things are Ineffable but yet they Exist as Phenomena in the Conscious Mind. The Conscious Mind is Ineffable but it surely Exists because it is a Self Evident aspect of what you are. The Inter Mind specifically deals with these Ineffable Phenomena. So the Inter Mind necessarily is Ineffable at this point in time in our understanding. But I do my best to try to point people in the right direction.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10714
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by Poodle » Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:48 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:27 pm
... So do you think you can describe the Redness of Red or the Tone-ness of Standard A in words?
Your entire problem, Steve, is created by you thinking that I can't. Of course those things can be described in words, in terms of frequency and magnitude. Definitely NOT a good example to hang your theories on.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10677
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by landrew » Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:03 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:27 pm
Poodle wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 7:36 am
SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:46 pm
It is not possible to directly tell you.
That sums up the entirety of your ideas. Ineffability. You belong in a religious forum.
So do you think you can describe the Redness of Red or the Tone-ness of Standard A in words? These things are Ineffable but yet they Exist as Phenomena in the Conscious Mind. The Conscious Mind is Ineffable but it surely Exists because it is a Self Evident aspect of what you are. The Inter Mind specifically deals with these Ineffable Phenomena. So the Inter Mind necessarily is Ineffable at this point in time in our understanding. But I do my best to try to point people in the right direction.
We've all expended a great deal of time addressing your assertions, but you seem impervious to anyone else's ideas but your own.
There's nothing I could say that hasn't been repeated many times before.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Mar 24, 2019 11:39 am

Poodle wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:48 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:27 pm
... So do you think you can describe the Redness of Red or the Tone-ness of Standard A in words?
Your entire problem, Steve, is created by you thinking that I can't. Of course those things can be described in words, in terms of frequency and magnitude. Definitely NOT a good example to hang your theories on.
You have just revealed that you do not understand the issue. The Redness of Red has nothing to do with frequency. Think more Deeply about Red. See the Red. Experience the Red in your Mind. Understand the Redness.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10714
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by Poodle » Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:56 pm

I don't understand YOUR issue, Steve. But I understand red, which has EVERYTHING to do with frequency. Think less fancifully about reality. Feel the logic. Experience the deeply deep meaning of having five senses.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:06 pm

Poodle wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:56 pm
I don't understand YOUR issue, Steve. But I understand red, which has EVERYTHING to do with frequency. Think less fancifully about reality. Feel the logic. Experience the deeply deep meaning of having five senses.
I have thought Deeply in the context you have suggested. The Redness that you see has nothing to do with Frequency. The Redness is a Surrogate Conscious Phenomenon for the external Electromagnetic Wave which does have Frequency as a property. Redness is a Property of the Conscious thing. Redness is not a Property of the Electromagnetic thing. Frequency is a Property of the Electromagnetic thing and Redness is a Property of the Conscious thing. You can experience Redness when Dreaming, where there is no Electromagnetic thing present. This is undeniable proof that the Redness is not a Property of the Electromagnetic thing.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10714
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by Poodle » Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:51 pm

Does the word 'BS' mean anything to you?
There's not a single thing in what you claim which can be established. Fairydust comes to mind. Can you establish the non-existence of fairydust?

I don't mean to be cruel, Steve - but you ask us to accept a red repository in some special place in the universe. Show us where that is.

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1309
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: USA

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by Cadmusteeth » Mon Mar 25, 2019 11:30 pm

That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 18563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 26, 2019 12:23 am

I don't think Steve is going to quit. Leaving that option only for others........................
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1309
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: USA

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by Cadmusteeth » Tue Mar 26, 2019 1:24 am

Most likely

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:18 am

Poodle wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:51 pm
Does the word 'BS' mean anything to you?
There's not a single thing in what you claim which can be established. Fairydust comes to mind. Can you establish the non-existence of fairydust?

I don't mean to be cruel, Steve - but you ask us to accept a red repository in some special place in the universe. Show us where that is.
Now you are getting Religious by invoking such phrases as Blessed Sacrament.

I can show you exactly where that Conscious Space is. The next time you are asleep and See something Red in a Dream you will have seen where Conscious Space is located.

User avatar
mirror93
Regular Poster
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by mirror93 » Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:47 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:18 am
Poodle wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:51 pm
Does the word 'BS' mean anything to you?
There's not a single thing in what you claim which can be established. Fairydust comes to mind. Can you establish the non-existence of fairydust?

I don't mean to be cruel, Steve - but you ask us to accept a red repository in some special place in the universe. Show us where that is.
now you are getting religious by invoking such phrases as blessed sacrament.

i can show you exactly where that conscious ; --- is. the next time you are asleep and see something red in a dream you will have seen where conscious ; --- is ---.
There is no such thing, that's made up by you.
And we already debunked your dream argument, why do you keep repeating it?
When you are asleep you DON'T see red, when you're dreaming your mind creates red by your memories, you're NOT seeing with your eyes, you dullard. A born blind person cannot dream in red
:paladin:

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Addressing the Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:26 pm

mirror93 wrote:
Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:47 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:18 am
Poodle wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:51 pm
Does the word 'BS' mean anything to you?
There's not a single thing in what you claim which can be established. Fairydust comes to mind. Can you establish the non-existence of fairydust?

I don't mean to be cruel, Steve - but you ask us to accept a red repository in some special place in the universe. Show us where that is.
now you are getting religious by invoking such phrases as blessed sacrament.

i can show you exactly where that conscious ; --- is. the next time you are asleep and see something red in a dream you will have seen where conscious ; --- is ---.
There is no such thing, that's made up by you.
And we already debunked your dream argument, why do you keep repeating it?
When you are asleep you DON'T see red, when you're dreaming your mind creates red by your memories, you're NOT seeing with your eyes, you dullard. A born blind person cannot dream in red
You obviously don't understand the Huge Explanatory Gap that exists when you say that we see Red from Memories of Red? How does the Memory of Red get converted into the Experience of Redness? You sound like you think that the Neurons are storing Red Electromagnetic Light inside themselves and then releasing it when there is a Memory of Red.

The Born Blind argument is a bogus Distractor from the question of how does a Normally developed Visual System work? Degenerate cases like a person Born Blind will become understandable after we understand how a Normal Visual System works.