Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14593834 - 06/11/11 12:53 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

"No, because not all humans go to school..all migrating birds migrate.

Is this really too tough for ya? I thought you had a degree in philosophy."


There's quite a few captive birds that disagree. Also, many migrating birds have some members of the species who stay back. Here in the eastern U.S. there are often plenty of migrating birds that overwinter in warmer places in the cities and where they are fed by people in the country. You don't know much about birds do you?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14593847 - 06/11/11 12:57 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

So what was wrong with #2 for 'senseless' (lacking mental perception...or comprehension)? How is that not what we're looking for? Someone who didn't suck ass at using dictionaries would notice that that's exactly what we're looking for and hence wouldn't still be stuck in circles. :nut:

Who cares if it could apply to comatose people? It could also apply to idiots, depending on the context in which it is being used.


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14593864 - 06/11/11 01:04 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

xFrockx said:
"No, because not all humans go to school..all migrating birds migrate.

Is this really too tough for ya? I thought you had a degree in philosophy."


There's quite a few captive birds that disagree.


So fucking what? They're not exposed to the stimuli that activate their migrating instinct, of course they're not going to appear to desire to migrate.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
Also, many migrating birds have some members of the species who stay back. Here in the eastern U.S. there are often plenty of migrating birds that overwinter in warmer places in the cities and where they are fed by people in the country.


That only means that those birds, like the captive ones, are not exposed to the stimuli that activate their migrating instinct. Obviously, if they were, they would migrate.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
You don't know much about birds do you?


You don't know much about instincts, do you? Apparently, you believe that instincts should be expressed even in the absence of instinct-stimulating stimuli. :imslow:


I know a good amount about birds..I've owned chickens, a parrot, and have read into the behavior of crows, and how they are distinct from ravens. Most of what I know is about parrots, however (Red Lored Amazons in particular).


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14593875 - 06/11/11 01:08 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

"So what was wrong with #2 for 'senseless' (lacking mental perception...or comprehension)? How is that not what we're looking for? Someone who didn't suck ass at using dictionaries would notice that that's exactly what we're looking for and hence wouldn't still be stuck in circles."




I was waiting for this. Let's see how far we get here when we try to see what the dictionary means by this #2 definition. First off the "lacking mental perception, appreciation, or comprehension"is what we're working with, so we need to find out what these words mean, and make sure they don't lead us into more circles.

Let's start with "lacking"
Quote:


"1.
being without; not having; wanting; less: "




So looks like we can interpret the definition as being either about people without these abilities, or with lessened skill in them. Ok then. What are the abilities?

Perception:
Quote:

".
the act or faculty of apprehending by means of the senses or of the mind; cognition; understanding."




Ok, so its the faculty of apprehending, which is:
Quote:

"2.
the faculty or act of apprehending,  especially intuitive understanding; perception on a direct and immediate level. "




So it says perception is the faculty of apprehension, and apprehension is perception on a direct and immediate level. Fuck. Looks like this is a neat little 2-sided circle. But we still have 2 more definitions for perception... I'll leave them to you. Fuck this shit.

"2.
immediate or intuitive recognition or appreciation, as of moral, psychological, or aesthetic qualities; insight; intuition; discernment: an artist of rare perception."

3.
the result or product of perceiving,  as distinguished from the act of perceiving; percept. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14593888 - 06/11/11 01:12 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

"So fucking what? They're not exposed to the stimuli that activate their migrating instinct, of course they're not going to appear to desire to migrate."

Wait so without stimuli instincts don't trigger? What makes you so certain these instincts are different from reflexes? If they were there regardless, why would it matter?

"That only means that those birds, like the captive ones, are not exposed to the stimuli that activate their migrating instinct. Obviously, if they were, they would migrate."

Sorry but this isn't even sound. The birds that overwinter are exposed to all the same stimuli as the ones that don't.

"You don't know much about instincts, do you? Apparently, you believe that instincts should be expressed even in the absence of instinct-stimulating stimuli. "

You still haven't shown me how you know anything is instinct, as opposed to any other anthropomorphic explanation of bird activity you could bullshit out. Wikipedia's article on migration does not mention instincts once. You ignored that apparently. Didn't fit into your world view?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14593931 - 06/11/11 01:25 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

xFrockx said:
Quote:

"So what was wrong with #2 for 'senseless' (lacking mental perception...or comprehension)? How is that not what we're looking for? Someone who didn't suck ass at using dictionaries would notice that that's exactly what we're looking for and hence wouldn't still be stuck in circles."




I was waiting for this. Let's see how far we get here when we try to see what the dictionary means by this #2 definition. First off the "lacking mental perception, appreciation, or comprehension"is what we're working with, so we need to find out what these words mean, and make sure they don't lead us into more circles.

Let's start with "lacking"
Quote:


"1.
being without; not having; wanting; less: "




So looks like we can interpret the definition as being either about people without these abilities, or with lessened skill in them. Ok then. What are the abilities?

Perception:
Quote:

".
the act or faculty of apprehending by means of the senses or of the mind; cognition; understanding."




Ok, so its the faculty of apprehending...


It's also 'understanding'..why did you conveniently ignore that?


Quote:

xFrockx said:
...which is:
Quote:

"2.
the faculty or act of apprehending,  especially intuitive understanding; perception on a direct and immediate level. "




So it says perception is the faculty of apprehension, and apprehension is perception on a direct and immediate level.


Perception is also understanding.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
Fuck. Looks like this is a neat little 2-sided circle.


Sure, if you cherry-pick your definitions so as to form this idiotic 2-sided circle. :wink:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14593954 - 06/11/11 01:32 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

xFrockx said:
"So fucking what? They're not exposed to the stimuli that activate their migrating instinct, of course they're not going to appear to desire to migrate."

Wait so without stimuli instincts don't trigger? What makes you so certain these instincts are different from reflexes?


Many instinctive behaviors are reflexes, the two concepts are not mutually exclusive. I never said or implied that these instincts are different from reflexes, they may in fact be both instincts and reflexes.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
If they were there regardless, why would it matter?


Please rephrase this..you've confused me.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
"That only means that those birds, like the captive ones, are not exposed to the stimuli that activate their migrating instinct. Obviously, if they were, they would migrate."

Sorry but this isn't even sound. The birds that overwinter are exposed to all the same stimuli as the ones that don't.


Obviously they don't need to migrate because they are in warm environments, as you previously explained..you don't know what precise stimuli stimulate their migrating instincts, perhaps coldness is one of the more influential ones.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
"You don't know much about instincts, do you? Apparently, you believe that instincts should be expressed even in the absence of instinct-stimulating stimuli. "

You still haven't shown me how you know anything is instinct, as opposed to any other anthropomorphic explanation of bird activity you could bullshit out.


I've referenced Wikipedia's definition of the concept several times now..if you can't understand it by now, you might not ever any time soon.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
Wikipedia's article on migration does not mention instincts once. You ignored that apparently. Didn't fit into your world view?


Why does it matter that it didn't explicitly state that bird migration is instinctual? The behavior perfectly fits the description of an instinct regardless.


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Edited by Poid (06/11/11 01:38 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14593968 - 06/11/11 01:37 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Ok, for the last time, Understanding:

Quote:

"–noun
1.
mental process of a person who comprehends; comprehension; personal interpretation: My understanding of the word does not agree with yours."




Comprehension. Ok, this I can work with. Comprehension:

Quote:

"–noun
1.
the act or process of comprehending.
2.
the state of being comprehended.
3.
perception or understanding
"




OK. Looks like #1 for understanding is bunk, because it defines understanding as comprehension, then defines comprehension as comprehending or being comprehended, perception, and understanding. Leading us into more circles.
Quote:


2.
intellectual faculties; intelligence; mind: a quick understanding.




Next up: intelligence. Understanding as intelligence. Ok, this I can work with. Let's see what intelligence is:
Quote:


"–noun
1.
capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.
2.
manifestation of a high mental capacity: He writes with intelligence and wit.

3.
the faculty of understanding.
"




The only part of this that isn't more circles, yet, is "aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc." Is this our dead end? Let's see if we don't see more circles as we look closer, as we have every. other. time. The problem is, this phrase we're left with isn't easy to look up like others have been. "Grasping truths" is a metaphor that is not going to be defined in the dictionary. But if we look up "truths" were going to get more circles, I looked, don't make me paste. If you think otherwise, you try. So since the word "truths" will lead us into more circles, and here intelligence is defined as "aptitude in grasping truths, facts, meanings, etc" we are still stuck. I don't feel like showing the circles in the facts and meanings definitions too, but they are also there.

Quote:

"3.
superior power of discernment; enlightened intelligence:




This seems like a definition for M&P style understanding, not really what were looking for is it?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14593984 - 06/11/11 01:43 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

"Obviously they don't need to migrate because they are in warm environments, as you previously explained.."

That was half of it. I also mentioned the being fed by people in the country. These birds are exposed to the same climate and food availability, they all have the same opportunities to stay, some do, some don't. I see now you re cherry picking my arguments so this can continue, ignoring things and just being sloppy.


Edited by xFrockx (06/11/11 01:51 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14594042 - 06/11/11 02:01 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

xFrockx said:
Ok, for the last time, Understanding:

Quote:

"–noun
1.
mental process of a person who comprehends; comprehension; personal interpretation: My understanding of the word does not agree with yours."




Comprehension. Ok, this I can work with. Comprehension:

Quote:

"–noun
1.
the act or process of comprehending.
2.
the state of being comprehended.
3.
perception or understanding
"




OK. Looks like #1 for understanding is bunk, because it defines understanding as comprehension, then defines comprehension as comprehending or being comprehended, perception, and understanding. Leading us into more circles.


I don't know what dictionary you're using, but the one I'm using isn't forcing me into more circles.

Looks like someone sucks ass at using dictionaries! :razz:


Quote:

xFrockx said:
Quote:


2.
intellectual faculties; intelligence; mind: a quick understanding.




Next up: intelligence. Understanding as intelligence. Ok, this I can work with. Let's see what intelligence is:
Quote:


"–noun
1.
capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.
2.
manifestation of a high mental capacity: He writes with intelligence and wit.

3.
the faculty of understanding.
"




The only part of this that isn't more circles, yet, is "aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc." Is this our dead end? Let's see if we don't see more circles as we look closer, as we have every. other. time.


You don't remember that I said "pretty much", do you? Obviously, you can keep going into more circles if you search for the definition of each descriptor in any given term's definition, but major circles can be avoided, especially if you don't suck ass at using dictionaries.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
The problem is, this phrase we're left with isn't easy to look up like others have been. "Grasping truths" is a metaphor that is not going to be defined in the dictionary. But if we look up "truths" were going to get more circles, I looked, don't make me paste. If you think otherwise, you try. So since the word "truths" will lead us into more circles, and here intelligence is defined as "aptitude in grasping truths, facts, meanings, etc" we are still stuck. I don't feel like showing the circles in the facts and meanings definitions too, but they are also there.


Yeah, again, I never said that we could completely stop going in circles. I said "pretty much".


Quote:

xFrockx said:
Quote:

"3.
superior power of discernment; enlightened intelligence:




This seems like a definition for M&P style understanding, not really what were looking for is it?


I don't know what fucking dicktionary you're using, but I assure you it sucks ass. :penis::ass:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14594048 - 06/11/11 02:03 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

"Yeah, again, I never said that we could completely stop going in circles. I said "pretty much"."

So in other words, we do continue to go in circles. What does "pretty much" mean if not "almost"?



I don't find circles in definitions because I suck at using dictionaries. You don't find them because you don't look enough.

"I don't know what fucking dicktionary you're using, but I assure you it sucks ass."

Dictionary.com


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14594050 - 06/11/11 02:03 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

xFrockx said:
"Obviously they don't need to migrate because they are in warm environments, as you previously explained.."

That was half of it. I also mentioned the being fed by people in the country.


Right..so two conditions that affect whether or not their instincts will be stimulated.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
These birds are exposed to the same climate and food availability, they all have the same opportunities to stay, some do, some don't.


This is obviously evolution in action..does not discount the idea that the migrating bird's migrating behavior is instinctual.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
I see now you re cherry picking my arguments so this can continue, ignoring things and just being sloppy.


Where am I doing this?


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14594055 - 06/11/11 02:05 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

"This is obviously evolution in action..does not discount the idea that the migrating bird's migrating behavior is instinctual. "

Relabel everything that does not agree with your assumptions to compartmentalize it away. Do not let go of your beliefs.

"Where am I doing this? "

I fucking told you in that post specifically. Taking half my argument.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14594062 - 06/11/11 02:07 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

xFrockx said:
I don't find circles in definitions because I suck at using dictionaries. You don't find them because you don't look enough.


Oh I find them, I just don't generally pay them much heed because I am not often confused by what people mean when they use the words they use.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
"I don't know what fucking dicktionary you're using, but I assure you it sucks ass."

Dictionary.com


That dictionary sucks ass (notice all the ads they depend on?)! :rofl:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14594066 - 06/11/11 02:08 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

"Oh I find them, I just don't generally pay them much heed because I am not often confused by what people mean when they use the words they use."

How do you know that your lack of confusion is the result of real understanding and not merely a suspension of disbelief?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14594086 - 06/11/11 02:13 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

xFrockx said:
"This is obviously evolution in action..does not discount the idea that the migrating bird's migrating behavior is instinctual. "

Relabel everything that does not agree with your assumptions to compartmentalize it away. Do not let go of your beliefs.


Well do you have something to say that directly disproves my "assumptions", or are you satisfied with making these lame petty remarks that in no way add to the debate at hand? :smirk:


Quote:

xFrockx said:
"Where am I doing this? "

I fucking told you in that post specifically. Taking half my argument.


What, only mentioning the warmness part? I didn't think that it would be relevant to also include that they were being fed by humans..I thought that, if anything, that would support my argument that a change in their environment caused their instincts to be excited differently.

I would assume that most take to the usual migration? This would support my theory that the city-dwelling birds that belong to migrating species are actually evolving in such a way that their migrating instinct is less pronounced, and is unnecessary for survival.


Quote:

xFrockx said:
"Oh I find them, I just don't generally pay them much heed because I am not often confused by what people mean when they use the words they use."

How do you know that your lack of confusion is the result of real understanding and not merely a suspension of disbelief?


Because, when there is poor understanding between people, "communication breakdown" occurs..I'm not sure why it would be a suspension of disbelief, it's not like communicating with people is like watching a movie, or playing a video game (at least not for me).


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinexFrockx
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 18 days, 23 hours
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Poid]
    #14594118 - 06/11/11 02:24 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

"Well do you have something to say that directly disproves my "assumptions", or are you satisfied with making these lame petty remarks that in no way add to the debate at hand?"




How do you know there are instincts, aside from being taught that as an explanation? What are instincts aside from the experience that occurs in which the bird flies? What makes an action an instinctual action versus just an action? What actions are not determined by the past of a species? What's the difference between an instinct to do something and a want to do something?

There. You'll say you addressed it, even though you have not at all. You posted a couple wiki articles. I understand the language framework being used. I am disagreeing that we can know it is actually applicable, or even that the idea of "instincts" is meaningful moreso than just being "actions".

Quote:

"What, only mentioning the warmness part? I didn't think that it would be relevant to also include that they were being fed by humans..I thought that, if anything, that would support my argument that a change in their environment caused their instincts to be excited differently."




Why would they even accept the food if their "instincts" were to do otherwise?

"Because, when there is poor understanding between people, "communication breakdown" occurs..I'm not sure why it would be a suspension of disbelief, it's not like communicating with people is like watching a movie, or playing a video game (at least not for me). "

It isn't? You don't have to have some suspension of disbelief to communicate? What if you are talking to a Hindu? Can you understand what they are saying if you refuse to accept any of their assumptions? Sure you can say that you can understand it, but do you really understand it, or are you merely suspending disbelief enough to lie to the Hindu man and tell him that you do understand his mystical ideas that have no grounding in reality, much like the idea of ancestral memory, or "instincts?"


Edited by xFrockx (06/11/11 02:37 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr.Knowitall
hip priest


Registered: 02/25/08
Posts: 86
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: xFrockx]
    #14594602 - 06/11/11 06:27 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

The swallow may fly south with the sun or the house martin or the plover may seek warmer climes in winter, yet these are not strangers to our land?

Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?

Not at all. They could be carried.

What? A swallow carrying a coconut?

It could grip it by the husk!

It's not a question of where he grips it! It's a simple question of weight ratios! A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineNoteworthy
Sophyphile
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/05/08
Posts: 5,599
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Mr.Knowitall]
    #14595006 - 06/11/11 09:01 AM (12 years, 8 months ago)

maybe if it was dropped from a great height?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Is it impossible to prove solipsism? [Re: Mr.Knowitall]
    #14596061 - 06/11/11 01:24 PM (12 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mr.Knowitall said:
The swallow may fly south with the sun or the house martin or the plover may seek warmer climes in winter, yet these are not strangers to our land?

Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?

Not at all. They could be carried.

What? A swallow carrying a coconut?

It could grip it by the husk!

It's not a question of where he grips it! It's a simple question of weight ratios! A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.



The Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow

You're welcome.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Instinct = Reincarnation = Oversoul ? HagbardCeline 1,311 7 04/17/09 07:52 AM
by HagbardCeline
* "Fear" & "Instinct" as two DIFFERENT "Senses".....(?)
( 1 2 all )
eMotionALLmotion 2,545 30 05/04/05 11:06 PM
by Psychoactive1984
* Instinct
( 1 2 all )
Swami 3,595 35 10/23/04 05:07 PM
by Huehuecoyotl
* You Can't Prove A Negative
( 1 2 3 all )
DiploidM 2,710 47 10/12/04 04:54 PM
by Diploid
* Exsistance is pointless... (prove me wrong, plz)
( 1 2 3 all )
ShrooomKing 4,310 45 04/22/11 08:20 PM
by jjdiggincrates
* can you prove the existence of absolute, objective morality?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Anonymous 21,753 157 12/21/04 06:31 AM
by deafpanda
* can science prove/disprove reincarnation? LifeIsSweet 2,528 8 11/17/05 02:44 PM
by Deviate
* A surprise test is impossible! Annom 865 7 11/14/03 01:32 PM
by Sole_Worthy

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,995 topic views. 2 members, 8 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 15 queries.