What's reality?

Tercon

Well-known member
No. You stop running.

Answer my questions.

Sure you are.

Deal with what's being said to you and stop running away. Everything is belief based. And if it isn't in the form of a belief, then it has nothing to do with the truth or reality. God tells us to believe for a reason, because He uses belief to do everything He does. God doesn't do things to us, rather He does it with us; He believes with us and that makes us a part of His truth and reality = His Kingdom.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
Yes you are...
No, I'm really not deceived by your nonsense.

But that's what you said implies.
No it isn't. And your reading skills are very much a problem.

If everything that is known to exist including all occurrences requires and entails a believing mind...
It doesn't. Starting with a false premise won't get you anywhere.

And if "all knowledge requires a mind" and QM requires and entails knowledge too, then how is anything known and entailed in QM without a believing mind to make it known and/or to give wave function collapse and entanglement a way and place to occur?
QM events do not need to be known in order to occur.

If "the thing known does not require" or entail a believing mind for its existence, then how do you know it exists without YOUR believing mind making it known to exist silly?
The knowledge DOES require a mind. The thing known does not.

In reality all knowledge and occurrences require and entails a believing mind to give it a way and place to occur.
Unsupported nonsense. Not all occurrences need be known in order to occur.

There is nothing ambiguous as to how and why the truth and reality is known to us.
As usual, you misrepresent what was said to be ambiguous, and you refuse to answer my questions on the topic.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
Um...I are what?

You cannot and do not answer any question I've posed to you.

You lose.

I answered you question, now deal with what's being said you instead evading.

My answer: Deal with what's being said to you and stop running away. Everything is belief based. And if it isn't in the form of a belief, then it has nothing to do with the truth or reality. God tells us to believe for a reason, because He uses belief to do everything He does. God doesn't do things to us, rather He does it with us; He believes with us and that makes us a part of His truth and reality = His Kingdom.
 

HouOz

Active member
What's reality; a rock in your head or the belief in your head that informs you of a rock?
If we had a rock in our head we would be suffering pain.
If we knew for certain it was a rock and not say a tumor, then the pain would verify it.
Your hypotheses on this reality and god you have been posting ad nauseum ad infinitum over the years indicate you have many rocks in yours.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
No, I'm really not deceived by your nonsense.

You're confused by everything, even of how and why the truth and reality is known.

No it isn't. And your reading skills are very much a problem.

Not at all. Your inability to know just how and why the truth and reality is known renders you useless to both.

It doesn't. Starting with a false premise won't get you anywhere.

How is it "a false premise" when you literally cannot know about any occurrence including wave function collapse and entanglement without a believing mind silly?

QM events do not need to be known in order to occur.

How do you know when no event including QM events can be known without a believing mind silly? That's not how the truth and reality works.

The knowledge DOES require a mind. The thing known does not.

If the truth and reality can only by known to exist and be experienced in and by a believing mind, then everything that can be known to exist must be known to exist in and with a believing mind. Because without a believing mind nothing including any event can be known to exist or occur outside of a believing mind.

Unsupported nonsense. Not all occurrences need be known in order to occur.

What occurrence do you know of that didn't require a believing mind in order to occur.

As usual, you misrepresent what was said to be ambiguous, and you refuse to answer my questions on the topic.

All you are doing is projecting your own unbelief (atheism) and denial of a believing mind's necessity in order to make everything known to exist and occur, because outside of a believing mind nothing can be known to exist or occur silly.

For instance the question: Does a tree that falls in the forest make a sound if there is no-one there to hear it? No it doesn't, because sound is only heard with ears and interpretable with and by a believing mind.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
If we had a rock in our head we would be suffering pain.
If we knew for certain it was a rock and not say a tumor, then the pain would verify it.

Strawman. Still cannot know anything including the truth, reality, logic or QM without a believing mind silly.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
You're confused by everything, even of how and why the truth and reality is known.

Not at all. Your inability to know just how and why the truth and reality is known renders you useless to both.
Unsupported.

How is it "a false premise" when you literally cannot know about any occurrence including wave function collapse and entanglement without a believing mind silly?
Strawman. That was not the false premise.

How do you know when no event including QM events can be known without a believing mind silly? That's not how the truth and reality works.
Strawman. I never claimed knowledge without a mind is possible.

If the truth and reality can only by known to exist and be experienced in and by a believing mind, then everything that can be known to exist must be known to exist in and with a believing mind. Because without a believing mind nothing including any event can be known to exist or occur outside of a believing mind.
There's that ambiguity again. The same ambiguity of locating knowledge vs existence that has been pointed out dozens of times, and which you keep refusing to address.

What occurrence do you know of that didn't require a believing mind in order to occur.
All of them. For instance, it rained here yesterday. No mind was required in order for water droplets to fall from the sky.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
No, I am not. The ambiguity has been explained to you many times; you refuse to even discuss it. You won't even answer questions on the subject, which is what shows your duplicity.

Can the truth or reality be known to exist outside of a believing mind?

And your unwillingness to accept the truth and reality even when it has been shoved down your throat for year shows the absolute depravity of the atheist mind, in its willingness to embrace the epitome of ignorance; their own unbelief as their worldview. What can be anymore brain deadening than that?

Like I said, please peddle your illness elsewhere.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
Unsupported.

No, you support your own ignorance in and with your atheist unbelieving mind, I just like pointing out your ignorance to you.

Strawman. That was not the false premise.

How is it "a false premise" when you literally cannot know about any occurrence including wave function collapse and entanglement without a believing mind silly?

Strawman. I never claimed knowledge without a mind is possible.

Can anything be known without a mind silly?

There's that ambiguity again. The same ambiguity of locating knowledge vs existence that has been pointed out dozens of times, and which you keep refusing to address.

All of them. For instance, it rained here yesterday. No mind was required in order for water droplets to fall from the sky.

How do you know it rained anywhere "yesterday" without "no mind" to inform you silly?
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Can the truth or reality be known to exist outside of a believing mind?

And your unwillingness to accept the truth and reality even when it has been shoved down your throat for year shows the absolute depravity of the atheist mind, in its willingness to embrace the epitome of ignorance; their own unbelief as their worldview. What can be anymore brain deadening than that?

Like I said, please peddle your illness elsewhere.
Please answer the question:

Do you understand that the following two statements mean two very different things?

a) only a believing mind can know that the truth and reality exist.
b) the truth and reality exist in and with a believing mind, which fact can be known.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
No, you support your own ignorance in and with your atheist unbelieving mind, I just like pointing out your ignorance to you.
Again, unsupported rhetoric.

How is it "a false premise" when you literally cannot know about any occurrence including wave function collapse and entanglement without a believing mind silly?
Can you follow the conversation? Do you even know what it was I said was the false premise? I'm betting you have no idea.

Can anything be known without a mind silly?
Of course not. No-one has ever suggested otherwise.

How do you know it rained anywhere "yesterday" without "no mind" to inform you silly?
I never suggested that my knowledge of the event doesn't require a mind. I said the rain itself did not require a mind. Once again you are conflating an event and our knowledge of it. And you are still dishonestly evading your ambiguity problem.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
I did not say you know that reality.

Well you are pretending to know the impossible and I am asking you questions about how you know it to be true.

I only say what I know, because I experience it.

Sorry but you can't know or experience anything without a believing mind.

And it is not in my mind.

If "it is not in" your "mind", then how do you know or experience its occurrence?
 
Top