Thread: Dreams forsee the future.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Mario, I had hoped you were joking, but I see you are mystified. You want to see something that is difficult, or was for me? Check out my Delian Quest--It took me ten years to figure out the Delian Problem, no one else, in 2500 years was able to.

http://www.archive.org/details/The_D...st_062308_2008

Now that is what I called somewhat difficult.

Secondly, all information processed in the human mind is processed by a grammar system of which there are two primitive categories--tautologics and relatiologics. The fact that how you think determines what you do was behind the Platonic dialogs---and the Judeo-Christian Scripture (mark on the forehead and hands is a metaphor for it) and it is something you should have learned in school. Or did you somehow believe that grammar is just the limited concept to what you learned in school?

Hey, congrats for you. Mind taking your massive planetary brain and gigantic epeen somewhere else? Because for how smart and brilliant you claim to be, you still can't speak like a regular human being. And as for your grammar, listen to what I have to say: I still have no idea what your hangup is all about, but whatever it is, I'm pretty damn sure it is completely and totally irrelevant. All I need to know in regardds to grammar to go about my life effectively is how to communicate with people. That's it. And guess what institution teaches me that just fine?

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

and justy who the fuck are you? You think your display of stupidity is special?

I lay perfectly beautiful ideas at your feet and try to make me feel like Jane Goodall the first time she stepped into the woods. .

If you have beautiful ideas, they're cloaked in so much yammering incomprehensible crap that it's not worth looking for them.


To the OP: sorry for derailing your thread. In response to your post...600 to 1 is at first a staggering odd, but given how long your life is, how many dreams you've had, and how many have come true to date, it isn't that unlikely. Neurons are specialized nerve cells in the brain, and given all our studies, don't appear to move around or pop in and out of present-day existence. I would more than likely chalk this up to chance. Besides that, you yourself said that buying the thing was partially influenced by the dream itself. I'd call that future shaping, rather than future predicting. But your repeated deja vu dreams are a bit more interesting. I wonder...would it be possible that they are influenced by real-life events, and your dreams are simply good at putting the pieces together? Like the ash cloud event. They say animals know when a crisis is about to hit...perhaps you subconsciously knew something was up before the disaster struck. And maybe for the deja vu dreams in general, your brain took events from your day and arranged them into a plausible future scenario? Just speculating here.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

and justy who the fuck are you? You think your display of stupidity is special?

I lay perfectly beautiful ideas at your feet and try to make me feel like Jane Goodall the first time she stepped into the woods. .

WTF???????????????????

> Off topic for a second< philosopher why the fuck are you talking like a person from 600Ad O_o if your so smart how do you not realize that your speaking and using weird sentences? whose the stupid one here then?

grammar system of which there are two primitive categories--tautologics and relatiologics

ok, im calling BS. ive never heard of neither. jesus. your just spewing smart crap hoping no one reveals your actually an babbling idiot that doesnt know what hes talking about. and tautology of grammar is the act of repeating oneself using different words.(Rhetoric) which, fyi, is NOT a category of GRAMMAR. its goddamn concept. JESUS CHRIST. if your going to be an ass, then at least make some sense.>Rant Over<
I had dreams of death and the next morning i would always be told someone was dying.

Originally Posted by Skydreamer707

> Off topic for a second< philosopher why the fuck are you talking like a person from 600Ad O_o if your so smart how do you not realize that your speaking and using weird sentences? whose the stupid one here then? ok, im calling BS. ive never heard of neither. jesus. your just spewing smart crap hoping no one reveals your actually an babbling idiot that doesnt know what hes talking about. and tautology of grammar is the act of repeating oneself using different words.(Rhetoric) which, fyi, is NOT a category of GRAMMAR. its goddamn concept. JESUS CHRIST. if your going to be an ass, then at least make some sense.>Rant Over<
I had dreams of death and the next morning i would always be told someone was dying.

You are absolutely correct that you have never heard of them, these are two names I developed, if you search, you will find the Two-Element Metaphysics was never developed. Plato and a few started, but no one, not even Aristotle, could further the work.

Look at your own body, If a system abstracts form it must supply material to that form to make a thing--this is a tuatologics. If it abstracts material, it must apply form--a relatiologic. As I said, even your own body shows you there are two, and only two primitive logic systems.

And yes, it is my life's project to develope and try to teach this very simple idea. It is the foundation of all craft. And when you start understanding, you will start understanding what Plato was about, that is why I do the free audiobook project. Even how to think, is learned also by example.

Call it bull shit all you want, but when you see--the material does not end up in your head, and when you eat, you do not become the form.

A thing is an material in any form. These are the two elements. Material and form.

And Plato was correct, because it is biologically the foundation of life, and of physics. If you cannot manipulate these correctly, or even the names of things, names of forms, and names of material, your mind is not functioning. When it starts to function you will see the real bull shit and just how steeped this planet is in it.

Pathetically simple, yet you people cannot do it. It is not even taught. And so, instead of using words by habit, I try to make you think in terms of meaning, in terms of craft, you act like spoiled children.

We don't act like spoiled childeren, we are spoiled children.. that is something you need to take into account when trying to explain.. your "very simple idea"

What is your very simple idea anyway? How exactly does the body show that there are only two logic systems? Can you give a few examples? Which two logic systems are you talking about?

Logic system 1 = ?
Logic system 2 = ?

You take too large steps in your argumentation for me to follow

Why do you ask me to tell you what has already been said? Damn!

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Mario, I had hoped you were joking, but I see you are mystified. You want to see something that is difficult, or was for me? Check out my Delian Quest--It took me ten years to figure out the Delian Problem, no one else, in 2500 years was able to.

http://www.archive.org/details/The_D...st_062308_2008

Now that is what I called somewhat difficult.

Secondly, all information processed in the human mind is processed by a grammar system of which there are two primitive categories--tautologics and relatiologics. The fact that how you think determines what you do was behind the Platonic dialogs---and the Judeo-Christian Scripture (mark on the forehead and hands is a metaphor for it) and it is something you should have learned in school. Or did you somehow believe that grammar is just the limited concept to what you learned in school?

I call bull shit on this one

Also, philosopher. I just googled "relatiologics", and it seems like you are the only one who has used this term. Congrats, you are also the first person in 2500 years to do so

Ok. I openly admit that I haven't read all of every single comment in this thread, but I do kind of agree with Mario, when it comes to your replies, Philosopher. I mean - don't get me wrong - I, myself, feel that I take a little extra effort to to butter-up what I believe are my more thoughtful responses, but you completely take it too far. Your banter falls on the level of: "I read this obscure text about what I feel is a crucial philosophical element, so I'm going to use an allusion to it in my next response", not knowing (nor caring) whether the person you are talking to will be able to relate to it, on any level. I seriously find it hard to believe that you converse this way, on a daily basis, to people in your everyday life, so (in my humble opinion) it's just something you might want to consider "dumbing down". (And by that, I mean: Not substituting a vague (yet poetic?) form of writing, for what is (quite probably) a very simple position on any given topic.)

All that being said: I don't believe dreams "predict" the future any more than I believe a cloud in the sky, which looks like a dragon, was "created" with the "purpose" of looking like a dragon.

I also do not deny the possibility. I'm simply not sold on the idea.

You call bullshit, but what argumentation do you use?

Anyway, I did what you did, googled tautologic and relatiologics, and after reading his posts, I finally understand what he is talking about. I studied formal logics, what this guy is talking about is meta-language. A language that describes another language. The logic behind logic itself. The language that describes a computer language for example.

When you use any belief system, any logical system, you must first agree on the definitions. If we do not agree on the definitions of the words we are using, we will be reasoning in circles on and on.

For example one person sees God as "a guy in the sky", the second person sees God as "the universe".

Person one can claim God does not exist, and he will be correct.
Person two can claim God does exist, and he too, will be correct.

This may seem as a contradiction, but it is only so, because the definition of God has not been agreed upon.. and so, people argue in circles forever, because there is no guy in the sky, yet there is the universe.

This is where tautologics and reliatiologics come in.. in computer science, we call it meta language.

So what you're saying is that we have to agree with what philosopher says? I mean, "Yes you are the only human in history to ever solve the Delian Quest" and "I will take one hour of my life to decipher what you're trying to say with all that confusing non-sense only meant to confuse us"?

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

You call bullshit, but what argumentation do you use?

Anyway, I did what you did, googled tautologic and relatiologics, and after reading his posts, I finally understand what he is talking about. I studied formal logics, what this guy is talking about is meta-language. A language that describes another language. The logic behind logic itself. The language that describes a computer language for example.

When you use any belief system, any logical system, you must first agree on the definitions. If we do not agree on the definitions of the words we are using, we will be reasoning in circles on and on.

For example one person sees God as "a guy in the sky", the second person sees God as "the universe".

Person one can claim God does not exist, and he will be correct.
Person two can claim God does exist, and he too, will be correct.

This may seem as a contradiction, but it is only so, because the definition of God has not been agreed upon.. and so, people argue in circles forever, because there is no guy in the sky, yet there is the universe.

This is where tautologics and reliatiologics come in.. in computer science, we call it meta language.

You missed it completely. A language of a language is self-relational.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

You missed it completely. A language of a language is self-relational.

Then it's official...nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about. Have a nice day.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Then it's official...nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about. Have a nice day.

Not everyone here is as self righteous, rude, and as stupid as you. And as egotisitical as you might be, you are not everyone's representative. However, I can understand where you are coming from, just look at all the people doing the logic thing for over 150 years now and never realizing that their systems of logics of logics violates the first principle of logic itself--relation to self is inadmissible.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

You missed it completely. A language of a language is self-relational.

Please, I didn't miss anything at all. I only formulated it in an understandable language. If I really "missed it completely" you could have atleast pointed out where I got it wrong. Too bad you're too thickheaded to discuss this topic any further as I find it really interesting.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Not everyone here is as self righteous, rude, and as stupid as you. And as egotisitical as you might be, you are not everyone's representative. However, I can understand where you are coming from, just look at all the people doing the logic thing for over 150 years now and never realizing that their systems of logics of logics violates the first principle of logic itself--relation to self is inadmissible.

You're the one being egoistical here, refusing to share your "knowledge".

You can write up a whole post defending your ego and breaking down Mario, but when it comes down to discussing to subject any further, you refuse to write more than one sentence? Wtf? To me this proves your love for your ego is bigger than your love for sharing knowledge.

What is the point in possessing a type of knowledge nobody can understand, or that you can't communicate to anybody? There is no point in that, you will take everything to your grave if you keep it up like that.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Then it's official...nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about. Have a nice day.

I Lol'd

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Please, I didn't miss anything at all. I only formulated it in an understandable language. If I really "missed it completely" you could have atleast pointed out where I got it wrong. Too bad you're too thickheaded to discuss this topic any further as I find it really interesting.

Welcome to the club (except for the finding it interesting part)

Hehe thanks I just finished reading his books, I no longer find it interesting, the reason he refuses to elaborate is because he has nothing to elaborate on.

How exactly is this related to dreams that forsee the future anyway?

Oh trust me, it has nothing to do with the topic. Sorry OP, in my experience I do believe dreams can forsee the future. I used to have many precognitive dreams when I was young. For example (one that I remember most vividly) in one dream I was playing beach volleyball with my brother and in the dream he stepped on a broken glass, but he didn't care and he just threw it away so we could keep playing. The next day we went to the beach and we were playing beach tennis, when he ALMOST stepped on a broken glass. He grabbed it, looked at it and said "That was close", then threw it away and we kept playing. Maybe not the best example, but it's the one I remember the best.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

Not everyone here is as self righteous, rude, and as stupid as you.

....said the dude with the gigantic epeen looking down on all of us, blatantly refusing to elaborate in terms everyone (or anyone at all) can understand, thus revealing his own idiocy.

And as egotisitical as you might be, you are not everyone's representative. However, I can understand where you are coming from, just look at all the people doing the logic thing for over 150 years now and never realizing that their systems of logics of logics violates the first principle of logic itself--relation to self is inadmissible.

I'm here for comic relief. If you'd stop stroking your own ego, you'd know that. As for the rest of the post...wtf? You keep claiming to be so damn smart. You have it all figured out. You went right where 2500 years of people have gone completely wrong. I see no evidence for this, save for long posts of pseudo-intellectual dribble. You remain intentionally vague, refusing to go into any substantial detail at all, and then you call all of us stupid when we can't figure out what the hell you're trying (and failing) to communicate. When someone calls you out, you go with a personal insult, then quickly change the subject. Rinse and repeat.

@ Mario:
I couldn't have worded it better myself. Well done sir.

I think I might have had a dream about this topic going well off topic. And it came to pass.

Did this shit really just go down? Mario just officially kicked this "superior brain's" ass. I mean really, this guy is apparently the best thing since sliced bread yet he lurks around a lucid dreaming website. If you really want to bitch about stuff completely unrelated, oh great philosopher, then do it somewhere where the people actually care. (which is nowhere, ass-hats are universally hated.) Is is better to be smart with an inability to communicate with the common man, or be stupid, but an excellent orator? Think about that, even though im sure you dont even check up on this topic anymore, seeing as you got your ass kicked by a bunch of know-nothing plebeians like us.

P.S.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

and justy who the fuck are you? You think your display of stupidity is special?

umadbro?

My God, this thread has to be this single fucking stupidest thing I've ever read. Credits to all involved.

Here's a quick summary for those who've missed it so far - trolls trolling people who think they're troll, and both are trolling idiots.

Okay, to those who refuse to read philosophers posts because he uses words to big for them, fuck you. Just read carefully, and use a dictionary or google. Alternatively finish primary school.

To those who read his posts, and realise that it's just another troll using pseudo-philosophy because it sounds nice, good on you, have a cookie.

To those who think people who are actually smart should dumb shit down for them to "fit in", get the fuck out of the gene pool, because it's idiots like you who have brought the world to where it is now. Learn about what they're talking about, or ignore them.

Nobody has kicked anyone's ass in this thread, because the one with the most votes is the one with the stupidest replies AND followers, rendering the whole system useless.

Everyone here either needs to simply drop out of the thread because A) their troll attempts are not working, because the victims are too stupid, B) they have no idea what they're replying to, and are trying to look impressive, or C) both.

Now, one of three things will happen here, and they are - A) People will flame me, thinking they're cool, and then the thread will continue, B) this post will be ignored, and the thread will continue, C) people will read this, see what is happening, and the world will be better off for it.

Now, of course, as we all know, only either options 1 or 2 are plausible, so here's a picture of a cat.



*Grabs popcorn*