TeaDidikai
Ishsha
And no one else will trust me unless I have at least one other person whose seen the same thing, whose been there.
Stop with the generalizations. Please.
Quote:
No one gives a s**t what you see unless you have Proof.
See above.
Quote:
But No... I will never be completely objective... I will never be omnipotent. I can not know all all I have are pretty ******** good guesses because I've pieced together all these ******** patterns and Yes to me its a matter of trust. To me its unattainable because I've tried for complete objectivity and I've failed...
Ah... I get it. So because you failed, no one could possibly succeed.
Remember what we said about projection?
Just because you disassociated doesn't mean I did. Just because part of you broke in that way does not make me as delusional as you are.
Also- I don't think you understand what knowledge is. There are a number of different forms of knowledge- and your practice of making up false definitions in order to defeat them is yet another fallacious practice you indulge. You did it with god. You did it with knowledge.
Recursive Paradox
Oh. Ohhhhh.
So basically, the observations and studies are fine with observer effect because they're including the observer effect (not necessarily defining it specifically but simply accounting for the fact that you have an effect and having the observations say, "ants walking in search of food with a person nearby watching")
Yanno, that actually makes a lot of sense. There's a lot of situations where the observer effect and the system disruption are not relevant to the observations themselves.
Spiff. Looks like we're on the same page.
The only schism I am still seeing is the concept of relevance. I don't dismiss that there may be important relevant byproducts of being observed. What I am saying however is that which we observe doesn't need to exist in a vacuum in order to be valid.
You really just don't Get it
You don't actually argue at all
You would rather hide behind your beliefs and cat call others then actually proffer up any counter.
I was raped I know my rapist lied when he raped me because I KNOW I was there. Do you think you saying that makes it true? Me listening to you say that doesn't make it true. Doesn't mean I know its true. I have to give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't making it up to prove a point. Words don't create truth, they are just a parody of it. If I saw it happen then I would have to believe you because the only thing I have to automatically believe is my senses.
Are you completely objective? Are you biased and led astray by your emotions hells to the ******** ya. Have you looked at the massive studies of eye witness reports. Have you seen all the Errors there. Have you closely observed and reported on your own observations and paid close attention to detail writing everything down. Have you participated in studies concerning memory?
Do you understand any of this. When will you start wanting to think instead of playing a station of automatic superiority because I just joined this guild and you've been here longer.
You ask for data you ask for answers and then you mock them. You mock information and pretend it isn't relevant because you don't want to believe anything I have to say. You want to play pretend because you have some Issue and I'm not sure that its with the information itself or with me. As I'm fairly sure other people have said things which are very similar and yet you only attack mock and parody my responses in multiple threads.
You haven't provided any links you haven't actually debated the subject within any of the contexts.
Definitions are very Personal things and just because you have a different definition then me doesn't mean I "made up" my definition. I defined the words that I used while I was using them in many instances. Because My definitions don't fit Your views and doesn't fit your little game of everything I say is wrong doesn't make you any more right. Its a different perspective and it fits the definitions in the dictionary etc.
You can't put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head and whatever meanings you try to impose on what I'm saying Doesn't change what I Mean by it. It might work for whatever you feel like Interpreting it as. Thats your choice and you can destroy whatever little foundation talking to you may have and thats Your choice.
You seem to have some sort of unresolved issue which I Am Not a Part Of. I just met you and quite frankly I've been trying to keep an open mind that perhaps there was just a massive miscommunication concerning this entire affair and I am leaning closer and closer to you have nothing better to do then try to feel superior to anyone you have an issue with. It would make sense considering your in a guild which is supposed to be "reeducating fluffies" but what you seem to be doing is praying on people who are generally weaker then you who are albeit many times more ignorant then you and spout more of the passe trite bull s**t that is the foundation for any long standing practitioner.
Rather then foster any sort of creativity or flexibility in your reasoning you'd rather just harass whatever new thing comes along. That seems kind of sad to me and a bit pathetic. Whatever doesn't fit into the comfortable little box you seem to be forming around your self has to go right?
You'd be about as bad as a fluffy then... they are too flexible you, too rigid. I'm sorry you were raped and I'm sorry you were hurt but thats You and it really had nothing to do with the conversation. Using the easy out that my logic is too flawed to actually argue it is a BS move and you know it. You haven't really argued a single point since you started responding to any of my passages and you have continued to avoid making a real answer.
I use generalities because I don't like to make any sort of claim which is unjustifiable. I stick to logical proofs that rely on preset definitions which should be agreed upon at the beginning of any conversation because without those definitions conversation is pointless. I use a very passive speaking style and I don't use proper names in most of my conversations with anyone. I use myself as an example because I don't believe you can 100% know what another person thinks. The only time I reference other people is when I am making an observation about a behavior. Any sort of inference concerning another person is just that an inference. Sometimes I am lazy and I slip up.
If you notice the You seem to be, or if you were's and other qualifiers which I try to attach to any sort of statement I make that I'm not sure of.
If you give me proof or a logical way that a person could be completely objective go right ahead. That would be a real argument.
If you are going to get pissy and do your little deflection routine one more time you can. Stay in your bubble.
I never Said you dissociated and just because I did doesn't mean that I am delusional. It doesn't mean that I didn't Feel everything it means I realized that it doesn't have to AFFECT me. You choose your own misery you choose how you see the world You choose how you process events.
Your feelings are your responsibility. You can't blame others for the hurt you feel. You are still deciding to feel it as hurt. It does you no good. Why not get rid of it? If the definitions you use to view the world don't fit the world change your definitions. Change your perspective to something that actually fits it.
I believe continuing to believe something when faced with proof to the contrary is the definition of delusion.
Concerning God, I said I didn't agree with the definitions others gave me so I made my own which I did agree with. Though of course your probably just going to twist my words for the 4th time now? Also I'm using the definition for knowledge which is in the dictionary and explaining how the existence of an observer alters an observation. If your tracing the interconnections you are "tracking the truth"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge
Reply
