The ONLY question lifegazer must answer

[Piscivore]

...for me to take him seriously.

What is the difference between a "sensed-thing" and a "real thing," and how does one distinguish them?

That's it. That one question. Answer that.


Please, everybody else, give him room.

[H'ethetheth]

If he answers, the 'answer' will be: Real things don't exist, sensed things do.

In other words: bump!

[UndercoverElephant]

Originally posted by H'ethetheth
If he answers, the 'answer' will be: Real things don't exist, sensed things do.


.....except if he does that then he can't make sense of dreams, hallucinations and perceptual errors. We've been round this loop before.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by JustGeoff
.....except if he does that then he can't make sense of dreams, hallucinations and perceptual errors. We've been round this loop before. We have been around all of the loops before but these are great ones, no doubt. Has LG ever tried to resolve these flaws in his argument?

[H'ethetheth]

Originally posted by RandFan
We have been around all of the loops before...Hear, hear!
Has LG ever tried to resolve these flaws in his argument? That should be: "Has LG ever tried to resolve the flaws that are his argument?"

In fact, I believe that answers your question. :D

[lifegazer]

The conversation in my own thread suffices to answer Pesky's question.
Consider what I had to say about the reality of a Sun as opposed to the sense-of-a-Sun:

'The Sun' is an object that we see because of the sensation of yellow [light], within/upon awareness.
In other words, the sensation of [a ball-shape of] 'yellow' [light], is what we call 'The Sun'.
The interesting thing about this is that we've always thought that 'The Sun' (that we experience) was the cause of the light that we actually sense. But we were wrong!!!!!!!!!
The yellow [light] is actually the prior cause of 'The Sun' that we see!!!!!
... 'The Sun' that we sense and which scientists observe (since they can observe no other) is not the cause of our sensation of it (which means that it is not the cause of the light within/upon our awareness). Neither is it the cause of anything else within/upon awareness.


A real Sun must necessarily exist apart and beyond the sensed awareness of one. Not only that, but as I discuss in that thread, a real Sun has causal influence or power whereas a sensed-Sun (any sensed 'thing' in fact) has ZERO causal influence or power.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by JustGeoff
.....except if he does that then he can't make sense of dreams, hallucinations and perceptual errors. We've been round this loop before.
My philosophy encompasses the totality of experience within/upon awareness.

[Robin]

As I posted in the other thread there were calculations made about the solar system that predicted the existence of planets that were not in anybody's awareness.

Science continually studies things that are not in our awareness and often invent the technology to bring these things into our awareness.

We have good evidence of the independent existence of our universe, but perhaps not evidence beyond unreasonable doubt.

Lifegazer has zero evidence, let alone proof, for the existence of the so-called One that knows all experiences. Nobody's awareness ever included the experience of being anybody but themselves.

[UndercoverElephant]

Originally posted by RandFan
We have been around all of the loops before but these are great ones, no doubt. Has LG ever tried to resolve these flaws in his argument?

No. :D

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Robin
As I posted in the other thread there were calculations made about the solar system that predicted the existence of planets that were not in anybody's awareness.

Big deal. Whatever it is that creates the sensation of a world certainly knows about the [sensed] order it is creating before reason ever comprehends that order.
It knew about gravity long before Newton came along. It knew about 'relativity' long before Einstein had a brainstorm.
'we' discover the order that It has been projecting upon awareness. It was projecting this same order upon awareness before 'we' even discovered the wheel.

'we' are trying to discover everything that It already knows!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Roadtoad]

In encountering arguments like LG's, I am reminded why truckers like me wear boots.

(Big @$$ load of horsesh** is what it sounds like to me...)

[H'ethetheth]

Originally posted by lifegazer
'we' are trying to discover everything that It already knows!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good, and Piscivore's question was: How do 'we' distinguish everything that It already knows from a universe governed by certain universal laws? And if we cannot, why bother making the distinction?

[RandFan]

Originally posted by lifegazer
The conversation in my own thread suffices to answer Pesky's question.
Consider what I had to say about the reality of a Sun as opposed to the sense-of-a-Sun:

'The Sun' is an object that we see because of the sensation of yellow [light], within/upon awareness.
In other words, the sensation of [a ball-shape of] 'yellow' [light], is what we call 'The Sun'.
The interesting thing about this is that we've always thought that 'The Sun' (that we experience) was the cause of the light that we actually sense. But we were wrong!!!!!!!!!
The yellow [light] is actually the prior cause of 'The Sun' that we see!!!!!
... 'The Sun' that we sense and which scientists observe (since they can observe no other) is not the cause of our sensation of it (which means that it is not the cause of the light within/upon our awareness). Neither is it the cause of anything else within/upon awareness.


A real Sun must necessarily exist apart and beyond the sensed awareness of one. Not only that, but as I discuss in that thread, a real Sun has causal influence or power whereas a sensed-Sun (any sensed 'thing' in fact) has ZERO causal influence or power. Non responsive. Care to try again?

[Robin]

Originally posted by lifegazer
[B]Big deal. Whatever it is that creates the sensation of a world certainly knows about the [sensed] order it is creating before reason ever comprehends that order.
How can order be sensed? Can you 'sense' Pythagoras' theorem? What colour is it? What texture or taste or smell does it have? No you can't sense it, you have to understand it in abstract. Order is understood in abstract and therefore out of the the realm of the senses. Even order between sensed things is not sensed order if it is consistent - it is real order.

You call science the science of 'sensed' things. You say that the light is the prior cause of the sun. So is the light reflected from Neptune the prior cause of Neptune? Even though the gravitational effects of Neptune were detected before any light or anything was ever 'sensed' from it? Are the gravitational effects of Neptune the prior cause? Or perhaps the light from the bodies affected by the gravitational effects of Neptune?

In fact if humans had evolved without eyes we could still study the sun and would eventually come to just the same conclusions about it. Because the light is clearly - clearly - not the prior cause of the Sun. Similarly we knew many of the properties of DNA before anybody figured out a way to 'sense' it. Is the light reflected from DNA the prior cause of DNA?

So how can the science of sensed things if it studies things that are not sensed? Even if things were only sensed, science would be the study of the real order behind sensed things.

[SezMe]

I simply cannot understand why people continue to feed this troll. He had a moderated thread that failed to produce one shred of logic. He could not even state the premises of his "philosophy." Whatever new could possibly be pried out of this idiot?

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Robin
Similarly we knew many of the properties of DNA before anybody figured out a way to 'sense' it. This is a huge flaw in the theory. Theoretical physicasits have figured out many things without directly "sensing" them including the structure of atoms.

[Iacchus]

Reality is just a dream which, we all lose sight of the fact -- i.e., don't wake up to -- when we die. Or, at least this is the most materialism can hope to explain.

[Wudang]

Originally posted by lifegazer
My philosophy encompasses the totality of experience within/upon awareness.

Correction: "Your perception of a philosophy"

[Dagny]

Originally posted by lifegazer
'we' are trying to discover everything that It already knows!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So if we discover everything that "it" knows, do we become some sort of god like super organism?

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Originally posted by SezMe
I simply cannot understand why people continue to feed this troll. He had a moderated thread that failed to produce one shred of logic. He could not even state the premises of his "philosophy." Whatever new could possibly be pried out of this idiot?

I believe, at least it is my case, that it is because the entertainment he provides. The guy is arrogant as humanly possible, ignorant and unreasonably immovable in his absurd beliefs. All that is true. Yet, I believe most of us answer him because we want to see what illogical answer is next, how far he will take his stubbornness. I guess, sadly, that its like being addicted to a crappy soap opera.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by RandFan
This is a huge flaw in the theory. Theoretical physicasits have figured out many things without directly "sensing" them including the structure of atoms. There is a huge flaw in my spelling. :( :D

[RandFan]

Originally posted by SezMe
I simply cannot understand why people continue to feed this troll. He had a moderated thread that failed to produce one shred of logic. He could not even state the premises of his "philosophy." Whatever new could possibly be pried out of this idiot? I have largely abandoned gazer. You are right on all counts. Assuming this guy had indeed discovered something he is entirely without ability to even explain what that something is in a cogent and coherent fashion. Beyond that he has not advanced a single new idea or concept. It might be unique in the way he has stitched his notions together but those aren't even consistent nor is he certain what exactly is unique or important above and beyond the early Greeks and some eastern philosophies. He has brought a baseball to the sand box thinking it is the first time anyone of us have seen a baseball. We all sit back and marvel that someone could be so taken with baseballs. Still he can generate amusing notions from time to time.

[SezMe]

Originally posted by Bodhi Dharma Zen
I believe, at least it is my case, that it is because the entertainment he provides. The guy is arrogant as humanly possible, ignorant and unreasonably immovable in his absurd beliefs. All that is true. Yet, I believe most of us answer him because we want to see what illogical answer is next, how far he will take his stubbornness. I guess, sadly, that its like being addicted to a crappy soap opera.
I'll give you and RandFan the entertainment factor - I must admit I read some of his stuff the same way I gawk at an accident on the freeway when I shouldn't. Ghoulish, I guess.

lifegazer: the side show. Don't miss a single episode. :) :)