Knowledge and Justification

Question still remains why are you here? You have not shown how you arrived at incorrect assertions. It is you who are not interested in understanding what is wrong or right. Thus far, it can be safe to assume that it is you who are only intereested in image.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hey LIx do you believe in psychic phenonema,, especially that to do with cohersion and manipulation [ the power to influence]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Do you believe in addressing the topic. Obviously not as you are only interested in ad hom flaming. Get lost.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

naah I have shown plenty enough for any one else but you... the whole world can stand testimony to that...

nope! you still refuse to answer a simple question?

If you were wrong would you want to be shown why?

simple question Lix....

 

the topic has been addressed countless times Lix...time for a chnage don't you think...

 

Not if you understood simple logic.

Not by anyone but you.
Do some research; read a few books.
You'll find you are alone.

Incorrect.

 

Watch the ad hominem.

 

there is an old saying in philosophy by I don't remember who:

"there is no right or wrong, but only keen minds and deliberate debate on issues that can ultimately never be resolved"
As soon as you use the word "wrong" [ in the context you are using it] you are no longer talking philosophy or logic

 

You claim to some absurd conclusion, and yet have anything to show for yourself. And the question is whether or not you would want to be shown if you were wrong. Which if you don't, you have no purpose in discussion. Thus, get lost.

 

you can't asnwer the question can you?
You simply can not utter the words you know are needed?
So I ask my self; " Who is cohersing you into such a state?"

If you were wrong would you want to be shown why?

 

I am always wrong but sometimes not as wrong as others...

 

I am going in to town now with camera and laptop so I'll catch ya when I get there... such a nice day too, good light conditions....nice to get lost every now and then....try it one day...

 

I already stated the following:
1. The question is invalid.
2. The conclusion you arrived at is baseless.

You asked the question to which I responded:

After my clear response, you came back with nonsense:
So I take it that if you are wrong you would NOT like any one to show why this is so?

Is this supposed to be serious? Then you come back with more flaming on top of nonsense.

My response regarding rule #10 still stands. If you don't know how to proceed with something relevant and productive, there is no need for you to be here.

 

No you are incorrect. You have no proof of anything. Until you can provide any back up instead of stating my assertion is incorrect, you really are not saying anything.

 

Why don't we just leave him to it? he obviously doesn't want to discuss anything except how he is always right, and everyone else is always wrong.

Maybe he can find a bit of masonry that needs repairing?

After all, he clearly believes that no-one can say anything meaningful, except him.
Perhaps the logic goes: "My logic says everything you say is wrong, and I know this is true because I'm the only one who understands logic".

It's a logic made for one. So let him keep it, obviously the limpet does not want to come unstuck. The wall must be guarded constantly. I wonder if he sleeps at all?

 

The question I asked is a straighforward question that normally poses no problem for most peoople who have a respect for rational and sensible debate.
It is a question that askes also whether you acknowledge human falibility.

It is a question you cannot answer.

If you were wrong would you want someone to show you why? [ psychiatry 101]

 

Also I am here by invitation by the thread starter. I have every right to be here and typing to this forum just as you have.

Also I enjoy chatting with quality minds like that of Sarkus and Glaucon and a few others....on the rare occassions that I get the chance.

 

This is nothing but contrariness.
As you obviously don't understand, I'll tell you: this does not formulate an argument.

It is you, and you alone who is in support of the novel idea of an objective truth. Thus, the burden of proof falls upon you.

If you would like a link to a decent site detailing an introduction to elementary logic I would be happy to oblige.

 

And I posted a valid response to that question. Instead of moving forward, you responded with flames.

I've already outlined the rules of how exactly discussions are to be approached. You then ask me those questions as if you have not read what I have already stated clearly. If I already stated something, why post questions that you already know the answer to from my previous post. Then proceed to respond with:

How? Why? What do you no understand about the rules I already provided?

 

Bzzzt!, no, the maintenance of an individual logic does not require input from anyone else.

If you can invent something all by yourself, you have to make sure no-one steals it.

Individualistic logic cannot understand how anyone can't understand their individual set of rules, and must not move beyond this.