Well technically I didn’t quote you. And technically you still haven’t revealed an actual formula, you only revealed that you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Okay, So,
-
You talk to God.
-
You tell God what is true or not true.
-
You claim to know how “autistics” typically process “could you”. Now why do you know what “autistics” typically do?
So, as I have been pointing out, for quite a while now, human beings in the days when this is being written, would say and write some things, but mean somethine else. Which, as I have been explaining is why they continually misunderstand each other.
I have also been explain a huge reason why so much conflict, division, and/or wars keeps on taking place is because they keep misunderstanding each other.
LOL
- I am not asking any human being to do absolutely any thing. I keep informing that all of you are absolutely free to do whatever you want to do.
- If you really want to keep believing that just actually saying and writing what you actually mean is “autistic thinking”, then so be it. You are absolutely free to believe this and to think this way.
But, in “everyday language” you did.
Again, if ‘this’ is what you see and believe only, then this is great, for me.
Hm, you seem to have missed that I explained it was a request not a question. And further I already told you how I would solve the issue.
Oh, it was my mistake. You, unlike more fluent users of English, do not take requests in that form as requests. It’s ok. We solved it, Atla and I.
Right. You couldn’t possibly respond. Yes, I will. Then not do it for months. Or say you will if I do certain things first. And so on. In any case, in the English speaking world ‘Could you’ is considered more polite and, yes, very clear as a request. Unless the context indicates curiosity about your abilities.
That makes no sense. With Atla I can expect fluency in English. And he already has. His answer didn’t seem to fit with what you implied.
Ah, the customs in formal logic are the same type of issue as the Could you literalism, according to you.
You rarely write using formal logic conventions and yes the post with the ‘some people’ in it was everyday speech and not a post in formal logic.
Succumbing? What an odd NON-LITERAL metaphor.
You almost never communicate using formal logic or formal arguments. The above is an informal argument.
No, it does not. You added something. Once again one set of standards for others, a different looser set of standards for yourself.
Further you seem to have little knowledge of humans. Of course we can believe things with different degrees of certainty. You may think that is wrong of us to do, but it is nevertheless true. And you are being disingenous. If it is obvious, as you seem to think it is, and like pregnancy lol, then there was no need for you to add the word. But you’re always doing stuff like that without other people, but you, you want to be quoted exactly.
If you use citation marks around a word in formal logic/argument, as you did here, then it means you DO NOT consider that correct as a description of reality. If you leave them off, as most fluent speakers and writers of English would, it would mean it does reflect reality.
I’m sorry but your posts do not in the main use formal/logic and argument. I would suggest you study that area of philosophy and come back.
Your posts do not follow the conventions of formal arguments and for some reason you are assuming that I am following those conventions, despite nearly every post in ILP not conforming to formal argument/logic style, including yours. It does arise on occasion, but, yes, rarely.
Again, you keep adding the word ‘absolutely’ despite claiming that conclude entails absolutely. That makes no sense. I notice you add it to you own assertions. Does that mean that if you don’t use the word absolutely (for example when telling me I am free to do certain things) it means you think you might be wrong?
I don’t know why you are responding to my quote this way.
Um, you used the adjective ALL KNOWING. I apologize for reading what you write more carefully than you do.
Yes God and as I’ve already explained to you, you’re dead wrong. Neurotypical communication works quite well and is a lot faster than your divine-autistic communication. It’s not the main reason why people often misunderstand each other and not the main reason why so much conflict exists. It’s not even in the top 5 reasons.
If you want to learn more about this world God, then be truly open and honest with yourself for once.
I don’t know why you are responding to my quote this way.
I can say the same thing using conclude. If I conclude you have beliefs, this means I come across as all knowing. Ridiculous. Will you demonstrate that the bolded sentence is true using formal logic and argument? Please include justification for why someone using the word ‘conclude’ in the context I used it it must mean I believe it absolutely or conclude it absolutely. You could also explain why when I use the word ‘conclude’ you get to define it. But if you use a word and others make assumptions about your meaning, they should have asked clarifying questions. How are you not being a hypocrite?
I can say the same thing using conclude. If I conclude you have beliefs, this means I come across as all knowing. Ridiculous. Will you demonstrate that the bolded sentence is true using formal logic and argument? Please include justification for why someone using the word ‘conclude’ in the context I used it it must mean I believe it absolutely or conclude it absolutely. You could also explain why when I use the word ‘conclude’ you get to define it. But if you use a word and others make assumptions about your meaning, they should have asked clarifying questions. How are you not being a hypocrite?
So,
-
Now your claiming that requesting one to do something is not a question in any way at all.
-
There was never any issue to solve.
LOL What we have here is another prime example of these two jumping to conclusions, before the actual facts have been presented. They believe they have “solved it”, already.
You presume and believe some of the most outrageous things. And worse still your presumptions and beliefs are ‘about me’. Again you speak as though you are all-knowing God in regards to me and to thinking within this body.
LOL Of course I could respond with what you wrote. But, I was responding to the actual words in your request. Not to some “other words” that were never presented.
-
As soon as I was asked to, then I did it. Months or years are of no concern at all to Me.
-
As soon as the certain things were done first, then, as I said, I would do it. Which I did.
-
LOL If you think or believe that ‘could you’ is considered more polite than ‘will you’, then okay. In case you are still unaware, ‘could you’ and ‘will you’ imply very different things, when look at properly and Correctly, to some “english” speaking people. By the way, “could you go and fly that helicopter for me?”, for example, can have a very different meaning to “will you go and fly that helicopter for me?”. I ‘could’ say, “Yes, I could fly that helicopter for you, but I will not”. However, if you asked me, “could you go and fly that helicopter for me”, then I did not follow your so-called “more polite” and “very clear” request? If I said, “No”, would you consider this very inconsiderate and impolite, on your part? After all, you were just asking a “polite request”, right?
The word, ‘could’, contextually and directly indicates, ‘curiosity about one’s abilities’.
LOL If you were to say, “could you fly that helicopter”, which you claim is a polite and very clear request to fly and move that helicopter, but what you actually meant was, “could you fly that helicopter” and not “will you fly and move that helicopter”, then ONCE MORE why not just say what you actually mean?
What is it with human beings and their insistence that saying what we do not mean, and meaning what we do not say, is somehow more important to the better and right way to communicate, then just saying what we mean or just meaning what we say.
Human beings like “greenfuse” would prefer to bicker over this then just stay focused on what the very things that led to this absurdity.
So, once again, instead of spending a split-second of pondering over, “could that make sense?” and then asking for what was meant or for clarificatin instead it just jumps to the absolute conclusion, “That makes no sense” at all.
Yet here you two are, still, have no understanding of what the actual answers are to the meaningful questions in Life, and still bickering over some of the most mundane things in Life.
But, his answer was just another attempt and deception and deflection. “atla” is like a wizard at that.
LOL “atla’s” answer even implied that what you clearly knew already exists, did not even exist.
Also, I did not ‘imply’ what we are talking about. I ‘claimed’ what what we are talking about
Were you presuming or believing they would change?
If yes, then why?
So why do you obtain so much misunderstanding?
You have, again, misunderstood.
It was not a non-literal metaphor at all.
Why do you keep believing that what you presume and concluded is the one and only truth?
Who cares?
I speak and write ‘the way’ I do, (for the reasons I have already provided), and you speak and write ‘the way’ that you do.
No I have not. Once again, you are presuming and believing that you are so all-knowing that you can tell me what I am or am not doing.
If this is what you want to believe is absolutely true, then okay.
I just point out and show where you make errors. You obviously do not acknowledge this, and like when “atla’s” errors are pointed out, you both like to try to deflect, and then make comments like this about some perceived inability I have.
Of course only when you believe things. I do not, so I cannot do what you say and claim, “Of course we can”.
To me, of course it is wrong for you to believe things are true, when do not yet have the actual proof for.
It was you who made the statement about ‘concluding’ things. Which I just pointed out is in relation to ‘absolutely’. I also pointed how and why ‘concluding’ is in relation to ‘absolutely’.
I just add the word ‘absolutely’ to your claims to point out the ‘absoluteness’ of your claims. I also do it to show and reveal how you will jump to ‘concludes’, based on nothing but your own pre-existing beliefs and assumptions, before you make any effort at all to seek out and obtain clarification.
As I pointed out earlier, you have not really changed much at all in this regard.
Okay. But most of you also say, ‘could’ when what you actually mean is ‘will you’, for example.
Again, your condescending character shines through as bright as daylight.
I never made any claim about following any conventions of formal arguments. So, what you are waffling on about now, in some attempt to deflect again, is just revealing more ‘about you’ than ‘about me’.
You have already clearly shown that quite a lot of what I write does not make sense, to you. So that that does not make sense to you comes as absolutely no surprise at all, to me.
No.
Because I added “atla’s” quote directly before your quote here, and because I knew you two would presume and believe that you two had already worked out what the truth is before you even found out what the actual truth is.
You two obviously believed you knew the truth before you ever waited for me to show and reveal where ‘it’ is. Again, you two this sort of thing because your beliefs and assumptions blind you completely, which, in turn, leads you two to only see and hear what ‘it’ that you already presume and believe is true.
LOL Who cares?
Once again, this one is trying to deflect away from the fact that it keeps changing its words, to try and fit in with its own narrative, and to try to deceive the readers here.
If only it knew. If only it knew.
Why would I?
After all, it is absolutely nothing that I said, implied, nor meant.
Once again, you completely and utterly absolutely missed the point.
Because I have, AGAIN, not said and meant what you have presumed, believed, and concluded. That is how.
LOL about your ridiculous allegation about me getting to define your use of the word ‘conclude’.
LOL It is like just about every word I write goes completely “over the head” of this one.
If you you conclude I have beliefs, do you believe I have beliefs?
I called it a request a while ago, not just recently (‘now’)
I don’t know what you’re trying to say here.
I asked you. You suggested I ask Atla. I had already done that. I certainly solved finding out what Atla would say. LOL, yourself. By the way, do you literally laugh out loud when you use LOL?
Well, perhaps you will demonstrate that I speak as though I am all-knowing. I think that’s pretty silly. I wouldn’t even say that you come across as all knowing, even though you make statements like…..
Anew1 I may be a very simple person but seeing and understanding all of ‘life’s’ so called problems, and answers is really rather easy. I can see and understand why every person is the way they are and why they do the things they do.
You seem to be seeing your own patterns in others and being critical of them there.
Because all knowing means know all. I used the verb ‘know’. Which led you to you criticizing me as if it wasn’t the correct verb and I was up to something.
I am very sorry I responded to your statement with the correct verb since I was accused of seeming all-knowing. Not all thinking or all concluding or all believing. I was accused with the use of the adjective ‘all-knowing’.
Again, I don’t think you read what you write very well.
Here’s the exact quote:
If you were to conclude that I believe something, despite whatever, reveals that you still believe, absolutely, that I could and would believe something.
Will you prove this using a formal argument and formal logic? Please include the proof that my use of conclude means that I believe this absolutely.
That does not show what I meant by concluded or conclude. What you responded above has nothing to do with the issue of you assuming what I mean by conclude You have assumed that when I use conclude it means I believe absolutely what I have asserted. Will you demonstrate how this must be the case? Even if I tell you that is not what I mean, you continue to assume it does mean that. Whereas when others interpret your words, from your perspective, incorrectly, you say they should have asked clarifying questions. Yet, when you misinterpret, you not only do not ask clarifying questions, you tell me what the word means period, denying my sense of what I meant. And that is what makes you a hypocrite.
Even this presumption, belief, and conclusion of yours is wrong.
Once again, I suggest you people seek out clarification and obtain clarity before you even begin to start assuming or believing absolutely anything. Again, that way you will not be as wrong as often as you are.
Which presumption? I asked you a question? After this very strange remark you then go on to suggest….
I asked a question, falling perfectly in line with your suggestion here.
Can you admit your mistakes here and will you?
Yes.
xxxxxxxxxxxx
1 Like
I’m not sure what the xs mean, but good on ya for the yes!!
You also, once again, appear to be not sure of what the yes means and is referring to exactly?
Will you share what you were presuming and had concluded?
Consider it a moment of grace. I understand that with your background it might be hard to receive praise.
And the xxxxxxxxxxxx adds a nice intentional non-communication. Win win, again.
So, once again, what you presumed and concluded my response was in reference to is wrong, let alone being anywhere close to understanding what I was actually meaning. This, however, is the consequence of presuming before clarifying.
What are you presuming and concluding I presumed your response was in reference to?
Do you want me to answer your question before you answer mine?