New discovery

[infamous]

Please do not tell me that this is what you got from my posts. Who is excusing your actions? You have to be kidding? You do not understand one iota of what this discovery is about. I suggest you start all over again from the very first post. That is your assignment for the next week. I have defined my position and I am responsible for that; but you have not fulfilled your responsibility which is to read this work carefully, which obviously you did not.

So your dishing out assignments now are you? I think not.

[peacegirl]

The basis for this argument is thoughtworthy, but, as you will find in your travels with this new thought in mind, it is Humanly impossible, as you will learn as opposition confronts you...The idea is Jesus like though :shrug:

 

It is absolutely humanly possible and this author spells it out with clarity as he extends this principle into every area of human relation. But of course the first comment I got from here was, accidents will always be here. It's amazing how people are very quick to reject something they haven't even heard. Maybe there is a fear that I might actually have something. I don't know what the problem is but I find this to be true in general. This is not a reflection on the book because no one has read it in its entirety.

 

People make so many assumptions; it's no wonder this author couldn't get his knowledge investigated in his lifetime. Too many naysayers. I don't mind confronting the opposition, but without giving me half a chance, this knowledge will be hidden for many years to come. Eventually it will brought to light just like the shape of the earth finally was revealed although it took 2000 years. This is not up to me, so I must rest in the knowledge that even if it is not in my lifetime (which is a tiny speck in time), peace on earth will one day become a reality.

[peacegirl]

So your dishing out assignments now are you? I think not.

 

That was a joke infamous. But I would recommend that you read what I wrote again. This is free of charge. One day you might tell people that you met me and I personally cut and pasted this book for this special group of people. You will feel honored. :shrug:

[infamous]

That was a joke infamous. But I would recommend that you read what I wrote again. This is free of charge. One day you might tell people that you met me and I personally cut and pasted this book for this special group of people. You will feel honored. :shrug:

Quite honored I'm sure. Look, I will read through it again, I promise. Maybe I missed something, or maybe I'm just not smart enough to get it. We can agree on determinism, right, or have I missunderstood that also?? If I have, maybe you need to restate your position in more simple terms. In some respects it's like reading in circles, that is not meant to be disrespectfull. It is just the truth, and I'm not the only one that has taken this position. Again, no disrespect intended, it is just very difficult to follow your line of thought.

[Smokinjoe9]

People make so many assumptions; it's no wonder this author couldn't get his knowledge investigated in his lifetime. Too many naysayers.

This is exactly how the authors of the Bible felt....Which by the way has a lot of the same premise in it.

[infamous]

The lack of free will is unchangeable, it does not matter whether a choice has been made or not made. The point is that everytime we move at all, we are making an unconscious decision to move away from what dissatisfies us to what is more satisfyiing. this is very difficult to understand but it is the basis of the rest of this knowledge. I hope you all get it because I feel alone in this. I am not giving up. I am just beginning and you are a group that I believe in because you don't jump the gun; you are not attacking me to prove your point, I see the difference with different audiences.

I'm just asking a question here so don't get angry with me, OK? You say: "we are making an unconscious decision to move away from what dissatisfies us". How can we make a decision unconsciously about what is satisfying to us? Because what satisfies must by definition be a conscious act.

[infamous]

The very moment the dethronement of free will makes it known that no one henceforth will be held responsible for what he does because his will is not free, and there will be no more criticism or blame regardless of his actions, it becomes impossible for him to blame someone or something else as the cause for what he knows he has done because he also knows that no one is blaming him.

 

Man is prevented from excusing or justifying his own actions which compels him, completely beyond his control but of his own desire, not only to be absolutely honest with himself and others since there is no way he can shift the blame, but to assume full responsibility for everything he does.

 

Man will invent new ways to shift the blame even if you take away all presently known ways.

[infamous]

that's it, i give up on getting a response... even with generosity.

 

I agree bumab; This is not a discussion or even a debate, it's a lecture.

[infamous]

No one has answered me. I am not sure if I should continue. I don't want to impose my thoughts on anybody.

 

I can't believe you actually think that anyone here is going to buy that one.

[infamous]

Well peacegirl; I've read though your posts and quite frankly, I haven't found much to comment on. I do believe that you are well intentioned and honestly believe that your views about this subject will hold true. Somehow I think that you are a bit naive and unwise about the true nature of man. Have you heard the old saying: "give him an inch, and he'll take a mile". Do you realize that their talking about us, that is we humans. We are survivors, predators, everyone of us, take no prisoners, looking out for number one. Don't you realize that what you are trying to say about people will not work. Civilized humans do exercise some degree of concern for others some of the time. I did say, "some of the time". The uncivilized human needs no excuse to do exactly what he chooses, nor does he even care. Your philosophy is admirable, but it won't work. Human beings are not going to let it work.

[peacegirl]

Well peacegirl; I've read though your posts and quite frankly, I haven't found much to comment on. I do believe that you are well intentioned and honestly believe that your views about this subject will hold true. Somehow I think that you are a bit naive and unwise about the true nature of man. Have you heard the old saying: "give him an inch, and he'll take a mile". Do you realize that their talking about us, that is we humans. We are survivors, predators, everyone of us, take no prisoners, looking out for number one. Don't you realize that what you are trying to say about people will not work. Civilized humans do exercise some degree of concern for others some of the time. I did say, "some of the time". The uncivilized human needs no excuse to do exactly what he chooses, nor does he even care. Your philosophy is admirable, but it won't work. Human beings are not going to let it work.

 

Infamous, I understand your take on what I wrote but it just proves to me that you understood nothing. You have yet to explain what the discovery is; if you can't do that you are not in the position to tell me if it is factual or not. I can see that you are very quick to dismiss it as naiive as many people do. You are incorrect. Until someone can actually explain what this discovery is, I have reason to believe none of you actually got it. That's okay, it took me years but eventually I realized that this is a major breakthrough. I know you are wondering why on earth did I come to this forum if this knowledge was so great? Wouldn't it be known already? Well, it is just this criticism without understanding that caused this author to die in obscurity. All I am asking Infamous is that you read what I wrote carefully, and you may just change your mind.

[peacegirl]

I agree bumab; This is not a discussion or even a debate, it's a lecture.

 

This is not a debate you are right; a debate implies that there is room for opinion. This is a discovery. In other words, is there debate over 1+1=2? I don't think so, and in the same vein there is no room for debate with a discovery that is undeniable. Unfortunately, if you can't understand something that was written, instead of asking for an explanation you are apt to disregard it as theory, opinion, or what have you. I guess that is also human nature. No one wants to be proven wrong; we want to express ourselves and our thoughts on important subjects, and we want to be heard. We certainly don't want to believe that many of our ideas are wrong. In our eyes that is a put down. I understand totally, but this will impede progress unless you can get over your long held beliefs to allow for something new.

[C1ay]

This is not a debate you are right; a debate implies that there is room for opinion. This is a discovery. In other words, is there debate over 1+1=2? I don't think so, and in the same vein there is no room for debate with a discovery that is undeniable. Unfortunately, if you can't understand something that was written, instead of asking for an explanation you are apt to disregard it as theory, opinion, or what have you. I guess that is also human nature. No one wants to be proven wrong; we want to express ourselves and our thoughts on important subjects, and we want to be heard. We certainly don't want to believe that many of our ideas are wrong. In our eyes that is a put down. I understand totally, but this will impede progress unless you can get over your long held beliefs to allow for something new.

Baloney. In the first place there is no discovery here. Determinism goes back to Democritus and his atomic theory around 400 BCE. Simply stated it is a metaphysical principle in philosphy that an uncaused event is impossible. It has been debated and discussed for more than 2000 years. The fact that you have proffered some new angle to support it does not make it a discovery or an undebatable, undeniable fact. Nobody needs to get over any long held beliefs just because you declare you are right and everyone that doesn't believe you is wrong. Now, do you have some proof or not? Nothing you have presented thus far qualifies as any kind of undeniable proof of your claim.

[peacegirl]

Baloney. In the first place there is no discovery here. Determinism goes back to Democritus and his atomic theory around 400 BCE. Simply stated it is a metaphysical principle in philosphy that an uncaused event is impossible. It has been debated and discussed for more than 2000 years. The fact that you have proffered some new angle to support it does not make it a discovery or an undebatable, undeniable fact. Nobody needs to get over any long held beliefs just because you declare you are right and everyone that doesn't believe you is wrong. Now, do you have some proof or not? Nothing you have presented thus far qualifies as any kind of undeniable proof of your claim.

 

Clay, I know you are the administrator and you can ban me anytime but I have to honest here. You obviously did not carefully read the posts. Someone said I was repetitive. The reason? Because no one pays attention the first time around. Even the second or the third. I can do no more. It is up to you take your time and carefully read the text. This is not about an angle, this is about a finding. Belief systems play a major part in how someone receives this knowledge. I don't know you personally but it seems to me that you are defending yourself against something that will be for your benefit and all of our benefit. Unless you can scientifically disprove what I claim, then you are not being true to yourself. If you think I have not proved my claim, then at least explain what my claim is? Isn't that fair? I think I am being more than fair.

[infamous]

Peacegirl; We all would like a friendly discussion, not a lecture. If I may make a suggestion; Try a question and answer session, a few one liners and wait for some response. You will have much more success if you try to join in the discussion instead of trying to lead it. We understand that you are quite convinced and you have that right. Just try listening for a change, I'm sure you also have something to learn. A very intelligent man once said "say what you have to say in the least number of words you can organize and still make your point, you might get someone listen". And be ready to answer questions instead of trying to avoid them by telling us that we must find answers to our own questions.

[Fishteacher73]

IMO most of PG post are cut and paste from "the work" that she seems intyent on compliling and selling. She believes it but cannot debate it because they are not her ideas and possibly does not understand the ramifications of some of here concluded "undeniable facts" that are incorect. This is about as informative as getiibg a visit from the Jehova Witnesses. The evidence essentially boils down to "It's like I said eventhough I have no evidence to support it. It's in the book.".

[Kirk Gregory Czuhai]

Peacegirl; We all would like a friendly discussion, not a lecture. If I may make a suggestion; Try a question and answer session, a few one liners and wait for some response. You will have much more success if you try to join in the discussion instead of trying to lead it. We understand that you are quite convinced and you have that right. Just try listening for a change, I'm sure you also have something to learn. A very intelligent man once said "say what you have to say in the least number of words you can organize and still make your point, you might get someone listen". And be ready to answer questions instead of trying to avoid them by telling us that we must find answers to our own questions.

i agree! i actually tried to pay at least a little attention for once and read through most of these posts and i do not know what peacegirl is talking about!

 

i have the hunch its all a joke!

 

lol!

 

for a proof that deteminism is dead! the proof is quite short! :shrug:

 

http://KirkGregoryCzuhai.WS

 

peace and love,

and,

love and peace,

(kirk) kirk gregory czuhai LOVES !!! :o