What do we really know?

[funnyguy]

Some definitely struggle to understand it. I don't even try to...
As you said there's two sides to everything.
Then there's a choice to be made.

Is your name inspired by chaos?

[Kaomea]

This is why I struggle voting.. I appreciate each political voice. Re surveillance concerns, I appreciate the desire for transparency. I also appreciate secrecy as some information has the potential for misuse. I think choices are already made long before we believe we're making them.

Oddly, my name describes love. It's a long translation... but heavenly love is the short version. Go figure, wishful thinking.

[funnyguy]

There was a town I don't remember the name and can't find the documentary which has actually employed full-blown surveillance and is entirely transparent about it. I think they were using the word experiment when referring to the ordeal and I think it was in China or Japan I'm not sure. You can probably find more information on it if you dig deep enough.

I know I make my own choices. How conscious or aware of doing so one is at the moment of taking them is entirely different. To me lifting a finger is a choice.

I always thought of chaos when I read your name probably because it starts with Kao and I've seen you write about chaos. I would've never guessed it means love.

[funnyguy]

[Julio Juliopolis]

funnyguy wrote:
I thought so too, however, that doesn't fit in your description of to know at all. In essence you're saying that depending on the context I'll be understood if I say "I know information" but I don't really know it. So you can see the contradiction and what I explained about words having several meanings.
When you say that you know your name I understand what you mean and I don't believe you really know it. Where's the contradiction?

[funnyguy]

The contradiction is in the fact that you understand that I acknowledge the fact that I possess the information of being named even though I'm using the word know which by your (Dok's) definitions means something entirely different.

Hence my explanation that words can have different meanings and be perceived differently.Just as coke and coke.

And you're on the right track JJ don't believe me, act and see learn for yourself.

[Julio Juliopolis]

funnyguy wrote:
The contradiction is in the fact that you understand that I acknowledge the fact that I possess the information of being named
Actually that's not a fact. I do not understand that what you acknowledge about possessing the information regarding your name is a fact. I only understand that you seem to think it is.

When someone tells me that they know their name, I usually give them credit for telling me what they think their name is, but I don't see how they could know it absolutely.

[funnyguy]

The two people who had sex and as a result of which I popped into this tonal reality told me in confidence (it's a government secret) that they have indeed named me the name I am named today in this reality/body/world.

So I possess the information that this has indeed happened so it is in fact a fact. Just as it is a fact that I had a fruit salad today for breakfast. As I said though you don't have to believe me.

Anyways that doesn't change the other fact which is "words can be perceived differently and the same word can hold different definitions". And that you understand what I mean even though I'm supposedly saying something entirely different.

[Julio Juliopolis]

funnyguy wrote:
The two people who had sex and as a result of which I popped into this tonal reality told me in confidence (it's a government secret) that they have indeed named me the name I am named today in this reality/body/world.
Oh, someone told you something? I guess that does make it an indisputable fact.

[funnyguy]

Let's use a different example.

I know what I had for breakfast today.

Do you understand what I mean here?

[Julio Juliopolis]

I don't see how this is any different from the last example. I understand that you think you know what you had for breakfast. And I still don't see how that is possible. Memories are not 100% reliable and neither are our perceptions. Thus how can we ever claim to know anything?

When people use the word know, it strikes me that they are saying they are unwilling to consider any evidence to the contrary of whatever it is they claim to know. And, when someone does challenge them they usually seem to invest more energy into holding onto that belief. I don't see a benefit in doing that. I try to always be open to contrary evidence, even if it would be about something as seemingly indisputable as what my name is or what I'm eating right now. Admittedly, I think it's highly unlikely that anyone could present evidence which would be more compelling than that from which I've presently concluded my name is, but why rule it out before looking at it? If it actually does make a strong case that my name is something other than what I think it is, I'd like to see it.

People seem to want to be able to say that they know things. Some people will say they know what the best possible economic policy is for the entire world, others say they know their name. To me that looks like just a difference in scale.

[funnyguy]

The question I asked required a simple yes or no answer. I was going to show you and dumb it down for you even more. I no longer have the desire to do so as I am tired of repeating myself.

Right now you're clinging to your belief that even if I was aware, present, and made the choice to eat what I did, and knew the source from which it came since its homegrown I still don't know what I ate. Just look at how ridiculous it is from the side. Can you? Are you flexible enough to do that? Or are you blinded by something heavy and big? A monster with a thousand heads!

Also you're straying far from Dok's description of "to know" as well as you're trying to prove the validity of information with "to know" while his definition is that it is to act and it is power and it's not explained with words and its claimed through action. That's why he separated his description of to know with inventory and information. The only misunderstanding for me was why would you still use to know to express the possession of information since it's something entirely different.

If you want to play this game prove me that I did not eat what I ate this morning. I'm not discarding the possibility of me being insane and making up what I ate and that my memory can be totally screwing with me right now but give me one good reason why I shouldn't have the confidence to say I know what I ate a few hours ago. Please!

There's so many definitions of the word know in here right now that it's ridiculous.

[funnyguy]

By clinging to your belief that I don't know you're doing exactly what you're saying people do and strikes you.

Please go towards my first posts and read how I said that nothing is constant everything is subject to change it is a matter of the assemblage position and that perception and information can shift in the blink of an eye. I repeated that a few times too.

[funnyguy]

Go to vietnam and tell them you're eating an orange.
They'll tell you that you're a fool and you're eating a trái cam.

[Julio Juliopolis]

funnyguy wrote:
By clinging to your belief that I don't know you're doing exactly what you're saying people do and strikes you.

First of all, I wouldn't call it a belief. I'd call it a hypothetical that, at the moment, the evidence I'm aware of seems to more greatly support than dispute. You haven't really provided much evidence against it. If you do provide a stronger case that you know what you ate, what your name is, or anything else than that you don't absolutely know it for certain, then I'll change my mind. It's as simple as that.

Please go towards my first posts and read how I said that nothing is constant everything is subject to change it is a matter of the assemblage position and that perception and information can shift in the blink of an eye. I repeated that a few times too.

That seems like a pretty good argument against you knowing your name and what you ate for breakfast, isn't it? Why do you keep wanting to make saying that you know things as reasonable?

[Julio Juliopolis]

funnyguy wrote:
Go to vietnam and tell them you're eating an orange.
They'll tell you that you're a fool and you're eating a trái cam.

I've been called a fool before. At least, I think I have.

[funnyguy]

"First of all, I wouldn't call it a belief. I'd call it a hypothetical that, at the moment, the evidence I'm aware of seems to more greatly support than dispute. You haven't really provided much evidence against it. If you do provide a stronger case that you know what you ate, what your name is, or anything else than that you don't absolutely know it for certain, then I'll change my mind. It's as simple as that."

A few posts back you said you don't believe me get your mind straight on what exactly you're trying to say as you're falling in your own trap.

Who do you think you are? Why would I have to provide evidence for who I am or what I ate when it's you claiming and disputing the information I have while you yourself say that there's hardly anything to support your case?

If you provide a stronger case and some solid evidence that my name is not what it is I am inclined on changing my mind as well, however, until then I know what my name is.  (Here's an example of the second paragraph of mine you quoted in action.)

"That seems like a pretty good argument against you knowing your name and what you ate for breakfast, isn't it? Why do you keep wanting to make saying that you know things as reasonable?"

Dude I can say I know my name but if I learn tomorrow that I've been adopted and my real mother named me something else that will change in my perception until then, however, I will know my name. And yet even if I learn I was named something else at birth I may choose not to identify myself with that name but with my current one or change it completely why is it so hard to understand that we have a choice and that we can shift our knowledge and our truths? Leave one position for another... That is not an argument against my knowledge that's supporting it because you can choose your definitions of words you can choose the descriptions of your world you can choose what to ignore and what to be aware of you can choose what information you want to learn and pursue you can choose what information you'd like to shift or update and do that or you can choose to keep the same old that's it.

And if some dude who lives a few thousand miles away from me and doesn't even know my name claims that I don't know my name why would I choose to believe him and discard what I know my name to be? Don't you see how ridiculous you are? I'm open to change my name prove me my name is not what it is until then my name is what it is.

[funnyguy]

Here's something to cheer you up.

[DoktorGreen]

As a result of my experiences with plants, I have realized (this is another good synonym for 'know') that plants consume energy from the soil and environment.  They also eliminate waste. We humans call this waste fruits and vegetables! Thus your breakfast was sh!t. So, is there anything else we 'know' that isn't a belief or speculation? I think not. The list may be complete.

[funnyguy]

As a result of my experience with perception and alignment you can call it whatever you want if you're fine with eating **** call it ****!

I call it a healthy breakfast.

[DoktorGreen]

Nah. It's healthy sh!t. Lol, we've burned this one down!

[funnyguy]

Well I just don't call my food **** that's all.

[Julio Juliopolis]

funnyguy wrote:
Out of curiosity why do you ignore parts of my posts?

A better question is why don't I ignore all of them.

[funnyguy]

Julio Juliopolis wrote:
funnyguy wrote:
Out of curiosity why do you ignore parts of my posts?

A better question is why don't I ignore all of them.

You should.

[funnyguy]

I know that intent can be used to direct the show and influence probability.