When you identify yourself as a Gnostic, you are evoking the syncretistic religious movement, who took their name from the greek word γνῶσις, knowledge, and whose beliefs rest in the idea that humans are divine souls trapped in a material world created by an imperfect god, the demiurge- the judeo-christian god. When I hear the word “Gnostic” as applied to a philosophical or religious stance I do not immediately think of the greek word (Gnosis).
Didn’t I write the exact thing In my response to you ? Do you have difficulties understanding concepts or stuff that I write ?
but to the term as it has been contextually applied in the history of religious and philosophical movements. Since no other group in history outside of these beliefs have claimed the term for themselves
Actually there are a lot of people identifying themselves for Gnostic/Agnostic Atheists ( http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?tit…st_vs._Agnostic ).
BTW A nice hint you start using logic and reason then you don’t look retarded. Trying to prove a absolute negative is impossible you fool ! Because you would need to be all knowing and have knowledge of every single person in history and obviously your knowledge is less then a Google searche
, that’s a nice example of what accurse if you don’t accept the impossibility of proving a absolute negative (matrix scenario) especially is it is possible (there is no logical of physical limitation for humans to do this ).
You can try to define “Democratic” as “human,” but unfortunately ‘you ought to discover some day that words have an exact meaning.’
O Yes how I love the superstitious people always believing in magic seriously you are going to defend this notion ?
Ok neo-mystic boy here it comes “HOW do you discover the exact meaning of the word ONI ?”
What is the exact meaning of this combination of audio waves and how are you going to discover it ? Maybe using your magical crystal ball ? ![]()
How about the word Hel is it Hell ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell ) like in English or Hel ( http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hel_(miasto) ) like in Polish ? And with in Polish is it the hel ( http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hel_(pierwiastek) ) element or Hel ( http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hel_(miasto) ) please ? Yes overindexing can accrue in one language or how about the English word state is it a synonym for government “the state haze ordered” or a word like “I state this proposition” ?
Bring it on show me this discovering of exact definitions of sound wave patterns and I will be the firs to congratulate you on your Nobel prize in linguistics and physics .
Bring it
on stop talking nonsense and give me some examples instead of this religious crap I’m a hard core empiricist and I will get my evidence.
BTW what are you going to tell me next “One day you will discover there is a god ” ? HAHAHA really you silly religious notions are the same retarded bullshit that Christians throw at me simply replace the word “god” with anything and you have again the same illogical argument.
Maybe you assumed that you don’t supposed to overindex in a definition set however this is more a rule then a discoverable truth. I argue strongly in favor of outlawing overindexing.
However this is not consistent with word like “discover”.
PS: Why do I suppose to hold enemy respect for a definition of something that belongs to a long extinct religion. I can use their index numbers because they sound nice if I wont to besides its used by many Atheist so they understand it and its accepted. Whets next rename the planets because if someone says Jupiter you think about the god Jupiter and not the name give to the planet ? Your proposition is absurd at best to honor the index numbers of nonexistent religions of how altruistic from you.
Have you been reading too much Derrida?
???
What is that ???
???
Are you referring to this dude http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derrida ???
Do you really think I got my ideas from a book ?
HAHAHAHA Thus are self evident truths that can be found true experimentation its like me presenting the proof for gravity and you say “Have you been reading too much Newton ”. You can find and prove everything that I have stated here ! Look up the languages ! See that overindexing occurs ! Case proven there can be overindexing therefore there is no inherent meaning to audio wave combinations that we have for index numbers or are you implying numerology ?
It may be surprising to someone who is a second hander that depends on other people for knowledge that some people like me are quite capable of discovering knowledge on their own.
Maybe what you mean is that you have to recognize that after you have made a conclusion, new information could come to light that could change the equation? Because that’s true, but it isn’t quite the same as always assuming you could be wrong on any point. If someone is schizophrenic and all they do is see cats where there aren’t any, then it might be a while before someone realizes what’s happening and points it out to them (which is what happened to Nash in the movie - everyone just figured he was an oddball genius and left him alone). But once someone does point it out, then you can evaluate the new information and maybe come to a different conclusion.
What Prosperity means (correct me if I’m wrong) is that it’s arbitrary to assume that whenever I see a cat it might just be that I have schizophrenia. If there’s no evidence of it then you can assume you don’t have it. If there’s no evidence that you’re wrong, then you can assume that you’re right. Then when/if new evidence comes to light you can reevaluate - you don’t have to assume that it’s going to in any given case. In most cases if you’re evaluating the truth value of something that actually matters (i.e. is a truth valuation you need to make in order to decide on a course of action), it’s going to come to light pretty quickly. But you need some reasonable level of certainty in a conclusion in order to take any action at all, and a level of certainty in which all your knowledge is taken into account and you have no evidence to the contrary is as “certain” as it gets.
While I agree for all practical reasons with his its still not sufficient to deny a matrix scenario because there would be no possibility of every discovering something different because every sensory impute would be a part of the matrix and unlike in the film there would be no people or evidence to free you from the matrix (no evidence to show that you are deluded , its more like a insane person who is constantly hallucinating and will never awake and haze no contact with reality or real people ). The matrix scenario is a nice description of the impossibility of all knowledge because even if something is claming a absolute stance to know that he is all knowing he would need to know that he isn’t in a matrix and the matrix is obscuring itself from his powers.
Besides its a nice that experiment to realize how some experiences can be deceiving like hallucinations and some truths that can be hidden under a that we think is the truth examples Newton physics and Einstein’s physics or how about the atom previously assumed to be indivisible now we know we can split it or even play alchemy creating gold from air (nuclear fusion) so knowledge can be only statistical never absolute.
The matrix scenario is for me more of a abstract mind experiment to show that sometimes evidence like thinking you can disprove the possibility of making iron into gold by seeing some religious nonsense preformed on metals doesn’t negate the possibility of iron turning into gold however we never can know if there exists this possibility or not. On a side note there could be a possibility us really living in the matrix and do to our limitations never realizing it , a nice example of this is found in games/simulations for instance the game “black and white” is a god game where players play as gods to compete with other while some AI gods are really all knowing (they can detect everything instantaneously do to the scripting) in the game , they can never use thus abilities out side of the game because they are only a limited script created by the computer/matrix. And this is a nice debacle for Christians and everyone claming to have negative knowledge that is absolute (god can not be deceived) in science positive knowledge only counts (like this experiment doesn’t make iron into gold ) that is not absolute.
One thing before someone points out “but saying that it is impossible to prove a absolute negative is absolute in itself ” maybe I clarify if I use impossible I have ~99% certainty only and if someone shows me a method to find a way out of the matrix scenario I will correct my self and accept that is possible however until someone doesn’t show a method that works my statistical knowledge remains the same.