Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
The illusive Nature of Time
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dimension-1hacker" data-source="post: 197799" data-attributes="member: 11791"><p>Why is star wars logic so incorrect, science is the tip of the iceberg and most of societies adopted philosophical fragments are not only illogical and you yourself call "starwars logic" or in other words absurd, but cause any other view to seem "far out" because of the skewed difference. Questioning everything is not cherry picking what sounds "good" and ignoring what you think seeming absurd, people thought the earth was flat, the sun orbited around the earth, and any other belief "sounded like star wars" logic. Yet now most people think those peoples belief systems were "star wars" logic, therefore that statement is not valid as logic is either correct or not correct. With proving one or the other those types of statements can reflect negative on the speaker.</p><p></p><p>I view science as "star wars" based logic because science does not predict anything but a high probability of one occurrence happening multiple times visually but science does not describe what consciousness is, which neither proves or disproves senses manipulation. Assuming that your senses cannot be manipulated without understanding what consciousness is mocks the scientific and other philosophical methods of deduction which is a fallacy.</p><p></p><p>Which is the more absurd idea, to assume anything other then science is not logical without knowing anything about those things and therefore cannot determine which philosophy is more or less likely or to ask sensable questions about why something occurs then drawing reasonable conclusions.</p><p></p><p>question: How do you know if your senses are being manipulated if you do not know what consciousness is, and if your internal model of the external is accurate?</p><p></p><p>conclusion: If do not, if nothing is understood no possibility can be ruled out for how many ways my internal model could be changed to be other then the external world. As nothing is understood nothing can be determined to be more or less likely, which is a simple logical conclusion but most people would not understand that therefore fear and try to discredit that statement for the mere convenience of being certain of many things.</p><p></p><p>question: how do things that are only made out of mass move, how can there be a beginning if nothing can cause itself to move.</p><p></p><p>conclusion: As things with only mass are moving, yet nothing will only mass could of caused it, something that does not have mass cause it, which could be called time, which is now determined not be just be movement but a metaphysical priori.</p><p></p><p>That is getting to the root, or simplifying.</p><p></p><p>Thats what openmindless is, never assuming an concept is false because of societal pre conceptions while cherry picking unproven opinions and theories which is what "star wars" logic is without questioning if the statements are true or false without addressing the apposing arguements classified as awesome, while classifying idea's that come from questioning base assumptions as "star wars logic". Those types of opinions won't hold up against intense questioning, and do not represent the complexity of reality. like star wars, read over 50 star wars books, starwars is awesome. Logic will be the new science soon, when the next society rising from the ashes of the old on in a few years, hope that logic will stick after the next fad comes along. Watch rick and morty, that show opens your mind to different ways of thinking, looking at something from every metaphorical angle. Star wars logic is the only type of logic as the concepts a proven or debated by questioning everything compared to asking on question then thinking that is correct, every other type of supposed logic looks a bit niave, cherry picked, subjective, not metaphorical, one sided, on dimensional, and dreary to me.</p><p></p><p>I do not mean to offend if did, but am trying to debate factually and logically, cannot change how a person could possible enterprete only the substance of my claims. Ironically, scientific studies prove that most peoples opinions are not backed up by logic and only there because of being sufficiently influenced by others, which they are proven to not realize including about science. If you do not want to look only logically while analysing a concept then "trust" the current science.</p><p></p><p>refusing to debate because of the belief that something is not logical without mentally exploring if the opinion is logic or not if a fallacy.</p><p>I simple got to the root of science, "what does science depend on to be accurate; senses being accurate", "does science prove that the senses are accurate; no", "without knowing what enterpetes adds in changing data that is send to your consciousness can you know what the odds are your senses are not accurate without having any data to get odds from; no", "if there is no data can I rule out or and determine which possibilities are more likely then others; no", "there are an infinite amount of possible combinations of things like an infinitely large go board and an infinite amount of catagorizes of object based of size, density mass, and so on; yes", "there is only one accurate internal model of the external world; yes", " the odds are an infinite amount of possibilities for false and one possible accurate model, one/infinite; yes", and so on.</p><p></p><p>Not only are these statements logical onto themselves, but a supported by many well known philosophers including Descartes, Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates, like Plato's cave. analogy</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dimension-1hacker, post: 197799, member: 11791"] Why is star wars logic so incorrect, science is the tip of the iceberg and most of societies adopted philosophical fragments are not only illogical and you yourself call "starwars logic" or in other words absurd, but cause any other view to seem "far out" because of the skewed difference. Questioning everything is not cherry picking what sounds "good" and ignoring what you think seeming absurd, people thought the earth was flat, the sun orbited around the earth, and any other belief "sounded like star wars" logic. Yet now most people think those peoples belief systems were "star wars" logic, therefore that statement is not valid as logic is either correct or not correct. With proving one or the other those types of statements can reflect negative on the speaker. I view science as "star wars" based logic because science does not predict anything but a high probability of one occurrence happening multiple times visually but science does not describe what consciousness is, which neither proves or disproves senses manipulation. Assuming that your senses cannot be manipulated without understanding what consciousness is mocks the scientific and other philosophical methods of deduction which is a fallacy. Which is the more absurd idea, to assume anything other then science is not logical without knowing anything about those things and therefore cannot determine which philosophy is more or less likely or to ask sensable questions about why something occurs then drawing reasonable conclusions. question: How do you know if your senses are being manipulated if you do not know what consciousness is, and if your internal model of the external is accurate? conclusion: If do not, if nothing is understood no possibility can be ruled out for how many ways my internal model could be changed to be other then the external world. As nothing is understood nothing can be determined to be more or less likely, which is a simple logical conclusion but most people would not understand that therefore fear and try to discredit that statement for the mere convenience of being certain of many things. question: how do things that are only made out of mass move, how can there be a beginning if nothing can cause itself to move. conclusion: As things with only mass are moving, yet nothing will only mass could of caused it, something that does not have mass cause it, which could be called time, which is now determined not be just be movement but a metaphysical priori. That is getting to the root, or simplifying. Thats what openmindless is, never assuming an concept is false because of societal pre conceptions while cherry picking unproven opinions and theories which is what "star wars" logic is without questioning if the statements are true or false without addressing the apposing arguements classified as awesome, while classifying idea's that come from questioning base assumptions as "star wars logic". Those types of opinions won't hold up against intense questioning, and do not represent the complexity of reality. like star wars, read over 50 star wars books, starwars is awesome. Logic will be the new science soon, when the next society rising from the ashes of the old on in a few years, hope that logic will stick after the next fad comes along. Watch rick and morty, that show opens your mind to different ways of thinking, looking at something from every metaphorical angle. Star wars logic is the only type of logic as the concepts a proven or debated by questioning everything compared to asking on question then thinking that is correct, every other type of supposed logic looks a bit niave, cherry picked, subjective, not metaphorical, one sided, on dimensional, and dreary to me. I do not mean to offend if did, but am trying to debate factually and logically, cannot change how a person could possible enterprete only the substance of my claims. Ironically, scientific studies prove that most peoples opinions are not backed up by logic and only there because of being sufficiently influenced by others, which they are proven to not realize including about science. If you do not want to look only logically while analysing a concept then "trust" the current science. refusing to debate because of the belief that something is not logical without mentally exploring if the opinion is logic or not if a fallacy. I simple got to the root of science, "what does science depend on to be accurate; senses being accurate", "does science prove that the senses are accurate; no", "without knowing what enterpetes adds in changing data that is send to your consciousness can you know what the odds are your senses are not accurate without having any data to get odds from; no", "if there is no data can I rule out or and determine which possibilities are more likely then others; no", "there are an infinite amount of possible combinations of things like an infinitely large go board and an infinite amount of catagorizes of object based of size, density mass, and so on; yes", "there is only one accurate internal model of the external world; yes", " the odds are an infinite amount of possibilities for false and one possible accurate model, one/infinite; yes", and so on. Not only are these statements logical onto themselves, but a supported by many well known philosophers including Descartes, Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates, like Plato's cave. analogy [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
The illusive Nature of Time
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top