@shallow-blue saidTell us all what the status of Mr. Moneypenny is if he builds a widget factory on the edge of town, and hires 200 of the townspeople. They make money, and he makes money.
Capitalism.
It's capitalism which rides on the back of prosperity created by others.
Describe Mr. Moneypenny for us.
@wajoma saidI'm not saying there are multiple realities. How would I know? I'm trying to get you to think a little more abstract about concepts and that there people who are discussing theories beyond what you see in front of you. That's the first part.
I didn't get that from the quote, rather that it was a variation on what I've been saying for 5 posts, that each believes themself to be right i.e. that they believe there is right and wrong, that they both can't be right.
If you think there are multiple realities all competing with one another, that there is no right or wrong then there's probably not a lot to talk about. ...[text shortened]... rue reality, or right or wrong, I say there is only one.
One of us is right, one of us is wrong.
That you go to a violent situation as an example and talk a lot about living force free is a nice disconnect, but otherwise that old example doesn't matter in this context.
I'm also not saying you aren't correct (about one truth). Just that in the real, practical world it doesn't really matter if you cannot answer or define what that truth is. That's the second part.
Besides, if there is a universal truth that must hold across potential multiple realities, right?
1 edit
@lundos saidThere's no foundation in "I'm not saying you're right, I'm not saying you're wrong" it doesn't mean anything. As for the piece of wood example you've missed the point that a piece of wood is a piece of wood no matter how you perceive it.
I'm not saying there are multiple realities. How would I know? I'm trying to get you to think a little more abstract about concepts and that there people who are discussing theories beyond what you see in front of you. That's the first part.
That you go to a violent situation as an example and talk a lot about living force free is a nice disconnect, but otherwise that old ...[text shortened]...
Besides, if there is a universal truth that must hold across potential multiple realities, right?
So there is one reality, a piece of wood is a piece of wood, to thine own self be true, this is all laying the foundation for everything else. Good luck with your might be right, might be wrong limbo land. As I've said the denial of reality is the basis for your claim on the lives of others, it's necessary. No doubt No1 and your buddy shallow blue are in the same "how can we know anything' camp.
To know reality one must first acknowledge it exists. To deny it, you have nothing to stand on from which to make such a claim.
@shallow-blue saidOK. But could you describe Mr Moneypenny, the capitalist in this scenario ?
Don't be trite, Marauder.
@wajoma saidFirst of all what other people mentioned have nothing to do with what I write just as I have nothing to do with what they write.
There's no foundation in "I'm not saying you're right, I'm not saying you're wrong" it doesn't mean anything. As for the piece of wood example you've missed the point that a piece of wood is a piece of wood no matter how you perceive it.
So there is one reality, a piece of wood is a piece of wood, to thine own self be true, this is all laying the foundation for everything e ...[text shortened]... st acknowledge it exists. To deny it, you have nothing to stand on from which to make such a claim.
Secondly, I don't know if there is a singular, absolute or universal truth among humans. I left thinking in absolutes behind after having to defend the subject in my in high school ethics exam. I ask again. Who/what gets to define what is THE "universal truth"?
If the baseline is that you have to be true to yourself, then that truth is individual, right?
I haven't at any point denied reality.