User Controls

bias and magical beliefs

  1. #81
    Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by sploo you have actual schizophrenia

    you, Bill Krozby, totse2001, hikimori-yuni, probably obbe

    these are germs

    Why do you think that?
  2. #82
    NARCassist gollums fat coach
    science is truth. at least its supposed to be. but like everything else it gets manipulated to suit peoples own agendas.




    .
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  3. #83
    Originally posted by 霍比特人 To be fair I did not read anything in this thread prior to Obbe's post

    But yes this is all good. We can have sex now, but I will probably continue to mish mash words in the future. If this were a real discussion it probably would've been solved in 10 seconds.

    This happens because my brain is special and you see people like me who are not §m£ÂgØLtypical have trouble holding onto concepts. This is counteracted by our extreme intelligence and overall superiority over most of humanity. I don't blame you guys for not catching on right away. Most normies don't.

    "i was wrong and spent a page arguing against something that is well defined and common knowledge for the second time in a day because i'm way too smart for everyone here and totally above you"
  4. #84
    NARCassist gollums fat coach
    Originally posted by greenplastic "i was wrong and spent a page arguing against something that is well defined and common knowledge for the second time in a day because i'm way too smart for everyone here and totally above you"

    yeh me too, wanna be buds?




    .
  5. #85
    benny vader YELLOW GHOST
    Originally posted by NARCassist science is truth.

    science is language. language is not truth.

    therefore science is not truth.
  6. #86
    NARCassist gollums fat coach
    Originally posted by benny vader science is language. language is not truth.

    therefore science is not truth.

    way to quote out of context dummy.




    .
  7. #87
    Sophie Pedophile Tech Support
    Originally posted by benny vader science is language. language is not truth.

    therefore science is not truth.

    That's a load of horseshit because you can use language to convey truth.
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  8. #88
    Originally posted by Sophie That's a load of horseshit because you can use language to convey truth.

    And science is the language of truth. If you haven't found out the truth, you haven't done proper science.
  9. #89
    Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    The difference between science and religion is the difference between the quantified equations of mathematics and the unquantified equations of metaphor. Those who cannot focus their mental scope with sufficient precision to count must guesstimate relationships by comparing superficial attributes to derive meanings from their experiences. The errors of both science and religion are produced by logical deductions made from inherently faulty language, but the errors cannot be perceived by people who mistake their words for real things and their language for a real map. Philosophic disputes are word wars; those who live by their words also die by their words.

    Conscious mind is a creation of words. Therefore, no one in his socially defined, right-thinking, right-handed mind can perceive anything not previously defined by words. Experiments have found that people lacking the words to describe subtle colours are also unable to distinguish fine differences in hues, but as soon as they are given the words to define the differences between crimson, scarlet, and vermillion, for example, they no longer see all reds as red. Poets expand the common Consciousness by giving new meanings to old words and by coining new words.

    Words referring to abstract concepts are projections of spiritual structures from hyperspace into our mental space. We are unable to know the higher dimensions of the hyperspacial universe we live in because our culture lacks the verbal concepts for our minds to perceive what our eyes plainly see.

    Scientific knowledge is nothing but verbal knowledge, and knowledge is the key to power; humanity is ruled by words. Words are ultraspacial structures created by abstracting common features of significance while ignoring unique features. Words amplify similarities and eliminate differences by wave interference. Words are the product of fusing all the unique images of several structures into an ultraspacial gestalt.

    The gestalt represented by its abstract noun is not visible to the material eye because it is a ultratridimensional physical structure that is manifest to our Consciousness only as a form of what we conceive to be mental energy, more rarified than electromagnetic substance.

    Abstract verbal concepts are understood only as they can be comprehended within the temporal dimensions of one's mind; a mind is perceived to grow to the extent that it perceives precedents and consequences. Athena is merely the god of intellect; the ruler of consciousness is Kronus, the Overlord of Time and Change.

    The nemesis of abstraction is that the symbol becomes the reality, and the individual differences in the real world are occulted behind the Veils of Maja. As the focus of the mind shifts from the immediately tangible world to verbal concepts, the mind becomes separated from the body and both lose their health. Paradise is a myth about a preverbal Consciousness, before men created words and subsequently mistook the symbol (idol) for reality (God); the Fall of Man and his Expulsion is the consequence of worshipping verbally fashioned images. Philosophers pretend to lead us back to reality on ways paved with more words of higher abstraction, like devils promising to lead us to Heaven. If the devil is the Father of Lies, words are surely the Mother.
  10. #90
    RisiR † 29 Autism
    Originally posted by Open Your Mind The difference between science and religion is the difference between the quantified equations of mathematics and the unquantified equations of metaphor. Those who cannot focus their mental scope with sufficient precision to count must guesstimate relationships by comparing superficial attributes to derive meanings from their experiences. The errors of both science and religion are produced by logical deductions made from inherently faulty language, but the errors cannot be perceived by people who mistake their words for real things and their language for a real map. Philosophic disputes are word wars; those who live by their words also die by their words.

    Conscious mind is a creation of words. Therefore, no one in his socially defined, right-thinking, right-handed mind can perceive anything not previously defined by words. Experiments have found that people lacking the words to describe subtle colours are also unable to distinguish fine differences in hues, but as soon as they are given the words to define the differences between crimson, scarlet, and vermillion, for example, they no longer see all reds as red. Poets expand the common Consciousness by giving new meanings to old words and by coining new words.

    Words referring to abstract concepts are projections of spiritual structures from hyperspace into our mental space. We are unable to know the higher dimensions of the hyperspacial universe we live in because our culture lacks the verbal concepts for our minds to perceive what our eyes plainly see.

    Scientific knowledge is nothing but verbal knowledge, and knowledge is the key to power; humanity is ruled by words. Words are ultraspacial structures created by abstracting common features of significance while ignoring unique features. Words amplify similarities and eliminate differences by wave interference. Words are the product of fusing all the unique images of several structures into an ultraspacial gestalt.

    The gestalt represented by its abstract noun is not visible to the material eye because it is a ultratridimensional physical structure that is manifest to our Consciousness only as a form of what we conceive to be mental energy, more rarified than electromagnetic substance.

    Abstract verbal concepts are understood only as they can be comprehended within the temporal dimensions of one's mind; a mind is perceived to grow to the extent that it perceives precedents and consequences. Athena is merely the god of intellect; the ruler of consciousness is Kronus, the Overlord of Time and Change.

    The nemesis of abstraction is that the symbol becomes the reality, and the individual differences in the real world are occulted behind the Veils of Maja. As the focus of the mind shifts from the immediately tangible world to verbal concepts, the mind becomes separated from the body and both lose their health. Paradise is a myth about a preverbal Consciousness, before men created words and subsequently mistook the symbol (idol) for reality (God); the Fall of Man and his Expulsion is the consequence of worshipping verbally fashioned images. Philosophers pretend to lead us back to reality on ways paved with more words of higher abstraction, like devils promising to lead us to Heaven. If the devil is the Father of Lies, words are surely the Mother.

    I think I understand, but there's nothing remotely useful in here other than the fact that you are trying to use nonsense as tool for understanding objective reality, which is contradictory. Is this like the old Watts idea that you can't have the one without the other? You are basically articulating that there is nothing objectively coherent in the text, which by the way is contradictory but also true at the same time. This is still a mathematical error, or only useful on the basis that it is not useful as a way to make people think and re-examine their own interpretations of reality. You write like a sophisticated Postmodernist jester like Cubronzo.
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  11. #91
    Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by RisiR † I think I understand, but there's nothing remotely useful in here other than the fact that you are trying to use nonsense as tool for understanding objective reality, which is contradictory. Is this like the old Watts idea that you can't have the one without the other? You are basically articulating that there is nothing objectively coherent in the text, which by the way is contradictory but also true at the same time. This is still a mathematical error, or only useful on the basis that it is not useful as a way to make people think and re-examine their own interpretations of reality. You write like a sophisticated Postmodernist jester like Cubronzo.

    That's a little creepy bro.
  12. #92
    RisiR † 29 Autism
    :)
  13. #93
    Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Why do you stalk me?
  14. #94
    RisiR † 29 Autism
    Why did you make me stalk you?
  15. #95
    Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    I didn't.
  16. #96
    RisiR † 29 Autism
    Ok.
  17. #97
    Originally posted by Sophie That's a load of horseshit because you can use language to convey truth.

    You can use music to convey emotion, does that mean that music is the same thing as emotion? Am I just autisming out or is everyone not making sense these days?
  18. #98
    Originally posted by greenplastic You can use music to convey emotion, does that mean that music is the same thing as emotion? Am I just autisming out or is everyone not making sense these days?
    we're constrained by language to categorize, describe, etc ... sure. math is probably the best language for containing information as it is designed with an unambiguous framework for defining phenomena
  19. #99
    Originally posted by 10 Ft. Ganja Plant we're constrained by language to categorize, describe, etc … sure. math is probably the best language for containing information as it is designed with an unambiguous framework for defining phenomena

    I don't know what you are talking about but science and reality are two separate things. Science can describe reality, sure, but they are not the same thing.
  20. Originally posted by greenplastic I don't know what you are talking about but science and reality are two separate things. Science can describe reality, sure, but they are not the same thing.
    no, i agree with you. my point is science is the closest we will get because it is based on math which is the clearest language that we have. it uses objectivity to describe how things work and is independent of our biases and feelings.

    Quantum mechanics is famous for saying that a tree falling in a forest when there’s no one there doesn’t make a sound. Quantum mechanics also says that if anyone is listening, it interferes with and changes the tree. And so the famous paradox: how can we know reality if we cannot measure it without distorting it?
Jump to Top