₦airaland Forum

FreeIgboho:
Exactly!! Now you are getting some education! I don't know anything FOR SURE including if I really won this argument. But from all preponderance of evidence I PROBABLY did (assuming I've been arguing with real people)

Guy you need to see a psychologist. Something is seriously wrong with you.

FreeIgboho:
The discussion was existence of supernatural not Seth. I don't see how you are debating that.

1. He actually was wrong. I experience reality as presented to my brain. No approximations.
You are wrong on the other point too. Everything is probabilistic (including all of science that you worship) I said it before, there is nothing I know FOR SURE except that this thought exists (same applies to you if you exist and are like me)

2. The word "conclusively" exposes your biased selectivity. EVERYTHING is probabilistic. You have been presented with all sorts of possible supernatural occurences and skeptical experts who investigated them and became convinced there are more to things than we think. And you are looking for "conclusive" proof!!

Did Dr Anil Seth say anything about supernatural?

1. Somehow he is both wrong and right. You claim he was right because he said our brains are only approximating now you are claiming he is wrong that your brain doesn't approximate. You seem to be confused. Oh I forgot you know nothing.

2. LoL! You never bothered to ask did you if probability factored into my statements. You were busy in your solipsistic dungeon convinced you know nothing. I have been presented with cases that occurred so long ago that details of their occurrences are sparse but I am supposed to form the opinion that there is some kind of supernatural realm or power when it can't be demonstrated in any conclusive or remarkable way. Yes I need conclusive proof, I am not trapped in a solipsist basement thinking I know nothing. I know and I am capable of knowing.

LordReed:
No, you aren't arguing with real people, you are arguing with the simulations in your head.

LoL! You are so trapped in your solipsistic dungeon you can't understand sarcasm even when it bites your arse. Bwahahahahahaha!

As long as you got an education who cares wether you call it sarcasm or marcasite. I am not really a solipsist. They speak big grammar, etc. Mine is boiled down to four words: I MAY BE WRONG. Keeps me humble and honest and keeps me reminded my thinking could be flawed and that there could be things I don't know that I don't know.

Hismasterpiece:
Guy you need to see a psychologist. Something is seriously wrong with you.

LordReed come and see. Didn't I tell you? Does this sound like a real person to you??!!
Like I said, boil it down to four words: I MAY BE WRONG. Keeps me humble and honest and keeps me reminded my thinking could be flawed and that there could be things I don't know that I don't know.

'

LordReed:
Did Dr Anil Seth say anything about supernatural?

1. Somehow he is both wrong and right. You claim he was right because he said our brains are only approximating now you are claiming he is wrong that your brain doesn't approximate. You seem to be confused. Oh I forgot you know nothing.

2. LoL! You never bothered to ask did you if probability factored into my statements. You were busy in your solipsistic dungeon convinced you know nothing. I have been presented with cases that occurred so long ago that details of their occurrences are sparse but I am supposed to form the opinion that there is some kind of supernatural realm or power when it can't be demonstrated in any conclusive or remarkable way. Yes I need conclusive proof, I am not trapped in a solipsist basement thinking I know nothing. I know and I am capable of knowing.

You tell us. You are the one who say he said consciousness disproves supernatural.

1) I was just telling you what he said concerning AGREEMENT, which made sense. But I myself perceive things as my brain receive them - no approximations.

2) Then you would have not used the word "conclusive". See below again. That's as conclusive as things get in this our reality

FreeIgboho:
As long as you got an education who cares wether you call it sarcasm or marcasite. I am not really a solipsist. They speak big grammar, etc. Mine is boiled down to four words: I MAY BE WRONG. Keeps me humble and honest and keeps me reminded my thinking could be flawed and that there could be things I don't know that I don't know.

You are far from humble. You are so conceited I wonder how your head fits through your front door every time you go out. I specifically said in one of my responses in this thread that it may be possible that gods exist somewhere in the universe but because you are too conceited and lost in your solipsistic dungeon you didn't see or understand what I wrote. Yes you are a solipsist, go look up the meaning if you don't know what it means or scratch that you'll claim someone other bizarre thing lemme do it for you. Solipsism from Latin solus 'alone', and ipse 'self') is the philosophical idea that only one's mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind.

*****Transmission Begins******

I am Bot )(67:3yWHth-44-1, the rector capacitor of the 2590th simulatrix.

This is the 785th version of this conversation.

FreeIgboho wins once out of the 1000 scheduled simulated arguments of the fourth kind

This conversation is not the one he his scheduled to win

H the jigs full blast on the E7-2521-EGO

*****Transmission Ends******

LordReed:
You are far from humble. You are so conceited I wonder how your head fits through your front door every time you go out. I specifically said in one of my responses in this thread that it may be possible that gods exist somewhere in the universe but because you are too conceited and lost in your solipsistic dungeon you didn't see or understand what I wrote. Yes you are a solipsist, go look up the meaning if you don't know what it means or scratch that you'll claim someone other bizarre thing lemme do it for you. Solipsism from Latin solus 'alone', and ipse 'self') is the philosophical idea that only one's mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind.

Aahh, but you are wrong. I AM HUMBLE. And you should be too because if you are like me you should know you know nothing FOR SURE. That's reality.
I am not a solipsist because I'm not sure even my own mind exists. Also, unlike solipsists, I concede I may be wrong about even that!

KnownUnknown:
*****Transmission Begins******

I am Bot )(67:3yWHth-44-1, the rector capacitor of the 2590th simulatrix.

This is the 785th version of this conversation.

FreeIgboho wins once out of the 1000 scheduled simulated arguments of the fourth kind

This conversation is not the one he his scheduled to win

H the jigs full blast on the E7-2521-EGO

*****Transmission Ends******

I KNEW IT!!! LordReed didn't I tell you!

FreeIgboho:
Aahh, but you are wrong. I AM HUMBLE. And you should be too because if you are like me you should know you know nothing FOR SURE. That's reality.
I am not a solipsist because I'm not sure even my own mind exists. Also, unlike solipsists, I concede I may be wrong about even that!

The truly humble don't go about bragging about how humble they are. You are not humble if you have to brag to me about your humility, instead you reveal just how conceited you are.

Still a solipsist, pick your flavour:

Metaphysical
Metaphysical solipsism is a variety of solipsism. Based on a philosophy of subjective idealism, metaphysical solipsists maintain that the self is the only existing reality and that all other realities, including the external world and other persons, are representations of that self, and have no independent existence. There are several versions of metaphysical solipsism, such as Caspar Hare's egocentric presentism (or perspectival realism), in which other people are conscious, but their experiences are simply not present.

Epistemological
Epistemological solipsism is the variety of idealism according to which only the directly accessible mental contents of the solipsistic philosopher can be known. The existence of an external world is regarded as an unresolvable question rather than actually false. Further, one cannot also be certain as to what extent the external world exists independently of one's mind. For instance, it may be that a God-like being controls the sensations received by one's brain, making it appear as if there is an external world when most of it (excluding the God-like being and oneself) is false. However, the point remains that epistemological solipsists consider this an "unresolvable" question.

Methodological
Methodological solipsism is an agnostic variant of solipsism. It exists in opposition to the strict epistemological requirements for "knowledge" (e.g. the requirement that knowledge must be certain). It still entertains the points that any induction is fallible. Methodological solipsism sometimes goes even further to say that even what we perceive as the brain is actually part of the external world, for it is only through our senses that we can see or feel the mind. Only the existence of thoughts is known for certain.

Methodological solipsists do not intend to conclude that the stronger forms of solipsism are actually true. They simply emphasize that justifications of an external world must be founded on indisputable facts about their own consciousness. The methodological solipsist believes that subjective impressions (empiricism) or innate knowledge (rationalism) are the sole possible or proper starting point for philosophical construction. Often methodological solipsism is not held as a belief system, but rather used as a thought experiment to assist skepticism (e.g. Descartes' Cartesian skepticism).

KnownUnknown:
*****Transmission Begins******

I am Bot )(67:3yWHth-44-1, the rector capacitor of the 2590th simulatrix.

This is the 785th version of this conversation.

FreeIgboho wins once out of the 1000 scheduled simulated arguments of the fourth kind

This conversation is not the one he his scheduled to win

H the jigs full blast on the E7-2521-EGO

*****Transmission Ends******

Bwahahahahahahaha! LMFAO!

FreeIgboho:
You tell us. You are the one who say he said consciousness disproves supernatural.

You'd know if you paid attention. Read again:

LordReed:
This is the problem with people like you, you enjoy quote mining and taking things out of context because they stroke feeling of profundity the narrative you want to construct gives you.

This statement: human consciousness generally is a tiny region in a vast space of possible consciousnesses when read in context will let you understand that he was talking about how it is possible that other animals may indeed be experiencing consciousness in ways we don't. Read the full context here: https://blog.ted.com/how-does-consciousness-happen-anil-seth-speaks-at-ted2017/

At no point does Anil mention the possibility of the existence of a supernatural, in fact he says consciousness is firmly grounded in the body here:

"Just as biologists have explained the properties of living systems — like metabolism, homeostasis and reproduction — once we start explaining the properties of consciousness in terms of things happening inside brains and bodies, the apparent metaphysical mystery of what consciousness is should start to fade away."

So yes Mr Matrix, Anil Seth does not say consciousness is a supernatural phenomenon.

You should poke your head out of your solipsistic dungeon so you can understand even if you don't know.

1) I was just telling you what he said concerning AGREEMENT, which made sense. But I myself perceive things as my brain receive them - no approximations.

2) Then you would have not used the word "conclusive". See below again. That's as conclusive as things get in this our reality

1. Does your brain see all the wavelengths of the light hitting your retina? No it doesn't therefore it must be APPROXIMATING.

2. I would and I do, just that your conceit won't let you ask questions.

FreeIgboho:
I knew it! What real person would type this??!!
You can't fool me. Figment of my imagination

The same shit budaatum specialises in.

Vain repetition


It won't help your children

LordReed:
The truly humble don't go about bragging about how humble they are. You are not humble if you have to brag to me about your humility, instead you reveal just how conceited you are.

Still a solipsist, pick your flavour:

Metaphysical
Metaphysical solipsism is a variety of solipsism. Based on a philosophy of subjective idealism, metaphysical solipsists maintain that the self is the only existing reality and that all other realities, including the external world and other persons, are representations of that self, and have no independent existence. There are several versions of metaphysical solipsism, such as Caspar Hare's egocentric presentism (or perspectival realism), in which other people are conscious, but their experiences are simply not present.

Epistemological
Epistemological solipsism is the variety of idealism according to which only the directly accessible mental contents of the solipsistic philosopher can be known. The existence of an external world is regarded as an unresolvable question rather than actually false. Further, one cannot also be certain as to what extent the external world exists independently of one's mind. For instance, it may be that a God-like being controls the sensations received by one's brain, making it appear as if there is an external world when most of it (excluding the God-like being and oneself) is false. However, the point remains that epistemological solipsists consider this an "unresolvable" question.

Methodological
Methodological solipsism is an agnostic variant of solipsism. It exists in opposition to the strict epistemological requirements for "knowledge" (e.g. the requirement that knowledge must be certain). It still entertains the points that any induction is fallible. Methodological solipsism sometimes goes even further to say that even what we perceive as the brain is actually part of the external world, for it is only through our senses that we can see or feel the mind. Only the existence of thoughts is known for certain.

Methodological solipsists do not intend to conclude that the stronger forms of solipsism are actually true. They simply emphasize that justifications of an external world must be founded on indisputable facts about their own consciousness. The methodological solipsist believes that subjective impressions (empiricism) or innate knowledge (rationalism) are the sole possible or proper starting point for philosophical construction. Often methodological solipsism is not held as a belief system, but rather used as a thought experiment to assist skepticism (e.g. Descartes' Cartesian skepticism).

Good to know you've been proded into doing some research. Our other figments of imagination on this thread should do same. No, you can't call me a solipsist because solipsists are deep philosophers with big grammar. I am simply a guy who acknowledges: I MAY WRONG.
You should be same way too (if you exist). Don't go around calling yourself an atheist when you know absolutely nothing for certain!

LordReed:
You'd know if you paid attention. Read again:



You should poke your head out of your solipsistic dungeon so you can understand even if you don't know.



1. Does your brain see all the wavelengths of the light hitting your retina? No it doesn't therefore it must be APPROXIMATING.

2. I would and I do, just that your conceit won't let you ask questions.

What my brain is doing is it's biz. The Seth guy said I am hallucinating and approximating. I can assure him I only present whatever my brain perceives. If it perceives there are 3, I see 3. I don't approximate it to 2 or 4. I actually don't think I can do that.

FreeIgboho:
What my brain is doing is it's biz. The Seth guy said I am hallucinating and approximating. I can assure him I only present whatever my brain perceives. If it perceives there are 3, I see 3. I don't approximate it to 2 or 4. I actually don't think I can do that.

LoL! See the person saying there is nothing definitive yet is saying he knows. Guy you are confused. Bwahahahahahaha!

FreeIgboho:
Good to know you've been proded into doing some research. Our other figments of imagination on this thread should do same. No, you can't call me a solipsist because solipsists are deep philosophers with big grammar. I am simply a guy who acknowledges: I MAY WRONG.
You should be same way too (if you exist). Don't go around calling yourself an atheist when you know absolutely nothing for certain!

LoL! See me see conceit. Instead of acknowledging you've learnt something you are acting stuck up. Bwahahahahaha. You are a joke. really.

LordReed:
LoL! See the person saying there is nothing definitive yet is saying he knows. Guy you are confused. Bwahahahahahaha!

Everything I say is probabilistic. The foundation of all I say is : I MAY BE WRONG

LordReed:
LoL! See me see conceit. Instead of acknowledging you've learnt something you are acting stuck up. Bwahahahahaha. You are a joke. really.

I acknowledged it. I proded you into doing some research - which other figments on the thread have refused to do

FreeIgboho:
Everything I say is probabilistic. The foundation of all I say is : I MAY BE WRONG

YOU ARE WRONG.

LordReed:
YOU ARE WRONG.

How do you know?

FreeIgboho:
I acknowledged it. I proded you into doing some research - which other figments on the thread have refused to do

You acted like this is not new to you. You are a solipsist, it is clearly defined in what I posted but instead of you to read and understand it, you are acting like a child. You are childish and conceited.

FreeIgboho:
How do you know?

Good question! This is how conversations should work. Now I will demonstrate how I know, look straight ahead, take a book and position it to the 2o'clock position of your view. Now while still looking straight ahead try and read the book. You won't be able to but don't take my word for it (like I won't take yours that a supernatural exists), try it out for yourself.

LordReed:
You acted like this is not new to you. You are a solipsist, it is clearly defined in what I posted but instead of you to read and understand it, you are acting like a child. You are childish and conceited.

Conceited my ass. Which kind of Conceited says "I may be wrong" in capital letters??

LordReed:
Good question! This is how conversations should work. Now I will demonstrate how I know, look straight ahead, take a book and position it to the 2o'clock position of your view. Now while still looking straight ahead try and read the book. You won't be able to but don't take my word for it (like I won't take yours that a supernatural exists), try it out for yourself.

You are going way ahead. Question is how do you know I exist?

LordReed:
Good question! This is how conversations should work. Now I will demonstrate how I know, look straight ahead, take a book and position it to the 2o'clock position of your view. Now while still looking straight ahead try and read the book. You won't be able to but don't take my word for it (like I won't take yours that a supernatural exists), try it out for yourself.

I never said a supernatural exists. Who am I to say that - a humble guy like me

LordReed:
You acted like this is not new to you. You are a solipsist, it is clearly defined in what I posted but instead of you to read and understand it, you are acting like a child. You are childish and conceited.

I acted nothing. I said I proded you into doing research for us

FreeIgboho:
Conceited my ass. Which kind of Conceited says "I may be wrong" in capital letters??

The kind that claims to know while claiming not to know. You are only wrong in the ones you choose, you can never be wrong if you don't choose to be, even if the facts are glaring.

FreeIgboho:
I acted nothing. I said I proded you into doing research for us

You didn't prod me to do any research, I knew you'd merely deflect to some other nonsense, just like you are doing now, if I asked you to look up the definition. The definition clearly encapsulates all you've been saying but instead of accepting, you want to act like you are in a world of your own, your solipsistic cage.

FreeIgboho:
I never said a supernatural exists. Who am I to say that - a humble guy like me

What did you say?

FreeIgboho:
You are going way ahead. Question is how do you know I exist?

LoL! The response to "YOU ARE WRONG" was "How do you know?" and now you are changing it to something else. LMAO! I think I am done with you.