FreeIgboho:


Oh, you don’t know the movie “the matrix”?
I’ll that clip and post it

Movies don’t exist. The clip you want to post is a signal in the simulation they created to convince you that you are alive.

KnownUnknown:


Nothing exists to perceive. Even this conversation is simulated. Perception is not going on. They are simulating your consciousness.

Simulated or not, the fact that there is perception is 100% certain

KnownUnknown:


Movies don’t exist. The clip you want to post is a signal in the simulation they created to convince you that you are alive.

How do you know they don’t exist?

FreeIgboho:


Simulated or not, the fact that there is perception is 100% certain

Hdjkf huddle haul Reid oh . This simulation hjkfjhh dysfunctional. Shutting xxxdyg. Next Simugdtion scheduled for 00:14.

FreeIgboho:


Oh, you don’t know the movie “the matrix”?
I’ll that clip and post it KnownUnknown

Here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVM5-_fusjs

FreeIgboho:

Here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVM5-_fusjs

I don’t see anything.

To play your silly game. Isn’t there a difference between the reality in the Nebuchadnezzar/real world and the reality in the Matrix?

Isn’t there a difference between the fields,where they grow humans and connect their brains to the mainframe through the pods, and the Matrix?

You keep on yapping about consciousness being the only real thing in the Matrix while ignoring the real world where the connections occur.

Yapping about the matrix and ignoring that the damn computer holding the simulation is supposed to be in the real world.


Did you just see the movie or something?!!!

KnownUnknown:


I don’t see anything.

To play your silly game. Isn’t there a difference between when they are on the Nebuchadnezzar/real world and when they are in the Matrix?

Isn’t there a difference between the fields,where they grow humans and connect their brain to the mainframe in the pods, and the Matrix?

Now u r getting it a little bit!! Neo has no way of knowing what he doesn’t know that he doesn’t know. So Neo can rightfully say: “the only thing I’m 100% certain about in this my reality is that I’m perceiving things, beyond that I’m not sure any of this stuff truly physically exists the way I perceive them, or even exits at all”

FreeIgboho:


Now u r getting it a little bit!! Neo has no way of knowing what he doesn’t know that he doesn’t know. So Neo can rightfully say: “the only thing I’m 100% certain about in this my reality is that I’m perceiving things, beyond that I’m not sure any of this stuff truly physically exists”

Getting what?!

There is a real world in the damn movie apart from the simulation they called the Matrix. Neo’s brain and all the human brains are connected to a mainframe. So things in the matrix are not real but they are based on things in the real world.

The conversation between Cypher and Agent Smith is an example. The steak that the machines coded in the matrix is based on the steak that humans ate in the real world before the war with the machines forced them underground. Everything in the matrix is a model based on something real. Even the Neo in the matrix is based on the real Neo connected to the mainframe computer through the pod.

You are not saying anything sensible. You don’t even understand the movie you are using to support your nonsense.

FreeIgboho:


Now u r getting it a little bit!! Neo has no way of knowing what he doesn’t know that he doesn’t know. So Neo can rightfully say: “the only thing I’m 100% certain about in this my reality is that I’m perceiving things, beyond that I’m not sure any of this stuff truly physically exists the way I perceive them, or even exits at all”

Answer the questions and stop fooling yourself.

KnownUnknown:


I don’t see anything.

To play your silly game. Isn’t there a difference between the reality in the Nebuchadnezzar/real world and the reality in the Matrix?

Isn’t there a difference between the fields,where they grow humans and connect their brains to the mainframe through the pods, and the Matrix?

You keep on yapping about consciousness being the only real thing in the Matrix while ignoring the real world where the connections occur.

Yapping about the matrix and ignoring that the damn computer holding the simulation is supposed to be in the real world.


Did you just see the movie or something?!!!

KnownUnknown:


Getting what?!

There is a real world in the damn movie apart from the simulation they called the Matrix. Neo’s brain and all the human brains are connected to a mainframe. So things in the matrix are not real but they are based on things in the real world.

The conversation between Cypher and Agent Smith is an example. The steak that the machines coded in the matrix is based on the steak that humans ate in the real world before the war with the machines forced them underground. Everything in the matrix is a model based on something real. Even the Neo in the matrix is based on the real Neo connected to the mainframe computer through the pod.

You are not saying anything sensible. You don’t even understand the movie you are using to support your nonsense.

You can’t possibly be this dense. If u really are, then may be we should stop. We are only using the movie as an analogy, and the only things relevant to our analogy in the movie is Neo inside the matrix, not Smiths or any of the other stuffs. Look at it this way: some people believe things just are and have always been - no creation or nothing. Same way (forget the Matrix for a minute if u can) maybe consciousness is all there is, and all there has ever been!

FreeIgboho:


You can’t possibly be this dense. If u really are, then may be we should stop. We are only using the movie as an analogy, and the only things relevant to our analogy in the movie is Neo inside the matrix, not Smiths or any of the other stuffs. Look at it this way: some people believe things just are and have always been - no creation or nothing. Same way (forget the Matrix for a minute if u can) maybe consciousness is all there is, and all there has ever been!

You can call me dense all you want, I don’t rate your intellect high enough to consider it an insult.

Your analogy is nonsense because you ignore everything that goes into creating the matrix and keep insisting that Neo doesn’t know the difference between the Matrix and the real. You even want to ignore the other characters in the damn movie just to support your ignorance.

I’ll have a conversation about consciousness if you can show consciousness independent of the brain. Even your Neo’s consciousness in The Matrix is housed within a material body that is connected to the computer. Or are you going to claim that Neo’s consciousness didn’t depend on a brain/body?

The next movie in the series comes out in December. Maybe they will introduce other ideas to buttress your nonsense.

FreeIgboho:

Look at it this way: some people believe things just are and have always been - no creation or nothing. Same way (forget the Matrix for a minute if u can) maybe consciousness is all there is, and all there has ever been!

What is creation? Rhetorical question because I’m not entertaining silly religious claims so “creation” is a non-starter.

Conciousness is a property of something and doesn’t exist on its own. Too many people on this board acting as if consciousness exists as an object.

There are no consciousnesses running around anywhere. Life forms are conscious. Consciousness is not an independent thing that exists without a life form that is conscious.

KnownUnknown:


You can call me dense all you want, I don’t rate your intellect high enough to consider it an insult.

Your analogy is nonsense because you ignore everything that goes into creating the matrix and keep insisting that Neo doesn’t know the difference between the Matrix and the real. You even want to ignore the other characters in the damn movie just to support your ignorance.

I’ll have a conversation about consciousness if you can show consciousness independent of the brain. Even your Neo’s consciousness in The Matrix is housed within a material body that is connected to the computer. Or are you going to claim that Neo’s consciousness didn’t depend on a brain/body?

The next movie in the series comes out in December. Maybe they will introduce other ideas to buttress your nonsense.

I didn’t say u r that dense - I said u can’t be.
Now, remember we are dealing with certainty. There is no way we can be 100% certain that consciousness is not all that exists. In other words it is conceivable though not likely at all - it is entirely possible that all that exists is perception, consciousness. Like we are all in a dream but that the dream is all there is - no before or after it.

FreeIgboho:


I didn’t say u r that dense - I said u can’t be.
Now, remember we are dealing with certainty. There is no way we can be 100% certain that consciousness is not all that exists. In other words it is conceivable though not likely at all - it is entirely possible that all that exists is perception, consciousness. Like we are all in a dream but that dream is all there is - no before or after it.

Lol. Just stand by your words and call me dense. You are not intelligent enough for it to mean anything.

Your arguments are nonsense. Perception and consciousness do not exist independent of a life form that can perceive other objects.
Your dreams are entirely dependent on things you have perceived and you can’t dream of things you’ve never perceived. Go ahead and dream or think about Buzithliamis if you can.

We can be 1000% sure that consciousness is not he only thing that exist because consciousness itself is an attribute of certain things that exist.

KnownUnknown:


What is creation? Rhetorical question because I’m not entertaining silly religious claims so “creation” is a non-starter.

Conciousness is a property of something and doesn’t exist on its own. Too many people on this board acting as if consciousness exists as an object.

There are no consciousnesses running around anywhere. Life forms are conscious. Consciousness is not an independent thing that exists without a life form that is conscious.

Ahaa, see that’s the thing : how do you know??
Is it not conceivable that all that exists is a sea of consciousness and our individual selves are illusion. In fact that’s their belief in some religions - that we are all one, that the individual is an illusion

FreeIgboho:


Ahaa, see that’s the thing : how do you know??
Is it not conceivable that all that exists is a sea of consciousness and our individual selves are illusion. In fact that’s their belief in some religions - that we are all one, that the individual is an illusion

Still talking nonsense.
Your “sea of consciousness” only makes sense as a metaphor for a crowd of people otherwise it’s rubbish.

I don’t care for the exoteric nonsense votaries of the different religions have been taught to believe.
The individual is not an illusion. Yes, we are all part of the universe and made up of atoms that have always existed, but individuals aren’t illusions.

How do I know this? I know because I am conscious. I am aware of what I perceive as distinct from myself.

KnownUnknown:


Lol. Just stand by your words and call me dense. You are not intelligent enough for it to mean anything.

Your arguments are nonsense. Perception and consciousness do not exist independent of a life form that can perceive other objects.
Your dreams are entirely dependent on things you have perceived and you can’t dream of things you’ve never perceived. Go ahead and dream or think about Buzithliamis if you can.

We can be 1000% sure that consciousness is not he only thing that exist because consciousness itself is an attribute of certain things that exist.

I didn’t say u r dense. I said u can’t be that dense.
You keep forgetting we are talking of certainty. Same way “I think, therefore I am” is wrong because it presupposes an “I” doing the thinking, when strictly speaking, all we are 100% sure of is that thinking is taking place

FreeIgboho:


I didn’t say u r dense. I said u can’t be that dense.
You keep forgetting we are talking of certainty. Same way “I think, therefore I am” is wrong because it presupposes an “I” doing the thinking, when strictly speaking, all we are 100% sure of is that thinking is taking place

Ok, you can’t be that dense either. But the evidence doesn’t suggest so. The one suffering from a delusion is you. And the delusion is that you’re not certain of anything.

Anyway, thinking is taking place within a conscious agent that can refer to itself as a distinct individual so Cogito ergo sum is not wrong.

Even your grammar betrays your unfounded arguments. You’re not sure that “I” is doing the thinking but “we” are sure that thinking is taking place.

KnownUnknown:


Ok, you can’t be that dense either. But the evidence doesn’t suggest so. The one suffering from a delusion is you. And the delusion is that you’re not certain of anything.

Anyway, thinking is taking place within a conscious agent that can refer to itself as a distinct individual so Cogito ergo sum is not wrong.

Even your grammar betrays your unfounded arguments. You’re not sure that “I” is doing the thinking but “we” are sure that thinking is taking place.

Sorry, the delayed responses are not intentional.

You probably like Sam Harris.
Well, Sam Harris is a one example of someone who argues from a neuroscientific point of view that the “I” is an illusion. And if there is no self to attribute existence, the cogito fails.

Descartes’ entire motivation for writing that famed statement was in order to establish that he existed, based on the premise that to think requires a thinker, and that the thinker must be something - him.
Which assumes a lot about time and space and that our thoughts are not manipulated to fallaciously deduce cogito ergo sum.

The statement we can really be 100% sure about is: “There is thinking, so something exists.”

LordReed:


The question you asked was:

No where in it do you ask anything about existence.

The questions were in the perspective of EXISTENCE. The premise was laid by one of you guys who said: anything that is not physical does not exist

Crystyano:


Leave me alone!

Stop disturbing my life!

Your conscience is disturbing you!?
Dont kill it.
He's there for your own good!!

LordReed:


This:

Question:
How do you know something that is not physical when the instruments by which you know things are physical?

There are many things that are known NOT by physical instruments BUT by other abilities given to man such as
1. Intuition
2. Conscience
3. Instinct
Just as the five physical senses, they exist to help man know things that are strictly not physical!

Nothingserious:


Please is this from the Bible?

Yes..2nd Chronicles 7:14. God gave a solution to the problem of sin. All he ask was we to humble ourselves, confess and forsake our evil ways and he will forgive. He never demanded a blood sacrifice. Neither was it necessary..
He sent Jonah to Nineveh, they repented, he forgave them. No human or animal sacrifice was required.

God has got nothing to do with Jesus. He is just a product of the Roman empire..

sonmvayina:


Yes..2nd Chronicles 7:14. God gave a solution to the problem of sin. All he ask was we to humble ourselves, confess and forsake our evil ways and he will forgive. He never demanded a blood sacrifice. Neither was it necessary..
He sent Jonah to Nineveh, they repented, he forgave them. No human or animal sacrifice was required.

God has got nothing to do with Jesus. He is just a product of the Roman empire..

This is interesting!

Thank you for appealing to the Old Testament.

But do you think the New Testament is part of the Bible and is valid?

If yes, then the sacrifices of Jesus Christ and his death , resurrection and atonement death is valid. Acts and Hebrews discuss the indispensability of salvation through Jesus Christ and his blood.

But if you say no, then you will need to help us carefully and with surgical precision excise the Old Testament texts that talked about the Messiah and the work he will do in saving his people from sin and reconciliation of men and women to God.

Will you be willing to help us out Sir/Ma?

TenQ:

Question:
How do you know something that is not physical when the instruments by which you know things are physical?

There are many things that are known NOT by physical instruments BUT by other abilities given to man such as
1. Intuition
2. Conscience
3. Instinct
Just as the five physical senses, they exist to help man know things that are strictly not physical!

Those things will not exist without physical material ie your brain which is physical. We have never seen or experienced body-less minds, the very concept is not even coherent because a mind needs physical instruments in other to communicate and establish its presence. No body, no communication so how can a body-less mind even establish its presence?

TenQ:
The questions were in the perspective of EXISTENCE. The premise was laid by one of you guys who said: anything that is not physical does not exist

That was not communicated to me. Also I have answered the question asked.

LordReed:


That was not communicated to me. Also I have answered the question asked.

Okay!

Nothingserious:

This is interesting!
Thank you for appealing to the Old Testament.
But do you think the New Testament is part of the Bible and is valid?
If yes, then the sacrifices of Jesus Christ and his death , resurrection and atonement death is valid. Acts and Hebrews discuss the indispensability of salvation through Jesus Christ and his blood.
But if you say no, then you will need to help us carefully and with surgical precision excise the Old Testament texts that talked about the Messiah and the work he will do in saving his people from sin and reconciliation of men and women to God.
Will you be willing to help us out Sir/Ma?

Just ask him few questions:

What was God's original purpose for Adam and Eve? Were they to live for a short time and die? If not then why are we all dying since we are not Adam and Eve? Is it just for humans to continue dying that God created us or we are to continue living forever on planet earth?

Then let him explain what the Messiah is coming to do, even little children that never committed any wrong do die, so is it their sin that led to their death?

FreeIgboho:


I didn’t say u r that dense - I said u can’t be.
Now, remember we are dealing with certainty. There is no way we can be 100% certain that consciousness is not all that exists. In other words it is conceivable though not likely at all - it is entirely possible that all that exists is perception, consciousness. Like we are all in a dream but that the dream is all there is - no before or after it.

What would 100% certainty consist of? What parameters need to be established to achieve 100% certainty? And why is a good degree of certainty unacceptable why must it be 100%?

LordReed:


Those things will not exist without physical material ie your brain which is physical. We have never seen or experienced body-less minds, the very concept is not even coherent because a mind needs physical instruments in other to communicate and establish its presence. No body, no communication so how can a body-less mind even establish its presence?

Your argument is lame dear.
Its like foetuses arguing about the non-existence of life outside the womb. They would be asking useless questions like if a foetus is outside the womb, where would their umbilical cord be tethered to? Your argument is like saying that UNTIL we die before we know the truth which although true is dangerous for you.

The essence of Christianity is the acknowledgement of the existence of personalities and consciousnesses outside the physical realms.

Near death experiences have shown that it may be possible for a flatlined person seeing things he/she could not have seen.
It may not be a conclusive proof BUT it creates doubt in the mainstream scientific narratives!
And since science doesn't claim to know everything, it is one of those dark areas you are not certain of.

TenQ:

Your argument is lame dear.
Its like foetuses arguing about the non-existence of life outside the womb. They would be asking useless questions like if a foetus is outside the womb, where would their umbilical cord be tethered to? Your argument is like saying that UNTIL we die before we know the truth which although true is dangerous for you.

The essence of Christianity is the acknowledgement of the existence of personalities and consciousnesses outside the physical realms.

Near death experiences have shown that it may be possible for a flatlined person seeing things he/she could not have seen.
It may not be a conclusive proof BUT it creates doubt in the mainstream scientific narratives!
And since science doesn't claim to know everything, it is one of those dark areas you are not certain of.

And yours is even lamer. You cannot show how a body-less mind will communicate, you cannot show how you would go about establishing that nonphysical things exist yet you are saying what is clearly established is lame. LoL.

LordReed:


And yours is even lamer. You cannot show how a body-less mind will communicate, you cannot show how you would go about establishing that nonphysical things exist yet you are saying what is clearly established is lame. LoL.

1. Except you are seeing something else "I didn't even use the words CLEARLY ESTABLISHED" in my writeup. Instead I have said:
"Near death experiences have shown that it may be possible for a flatlined person seeing things he/she could not have seen.
It may not be a conclusive proof BUT it creates doubt in the mainstream scientific narratives!"

2. So you can see how my foetus analogy is perfectly illustrated

One foetus to another:
You cannot show how a body-less mind will communicate foetus can exist outside the fluid in the womb, you cannot show how you would go about establishing that non-physical things exist existence is possible outside the womb, yet you are saying .... is lame. LoL.