--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > The more you know the more successful you are in accomplishing > > > your objectives. Jyotish can do this. But most of all, it helps > > > you understand yourself and the cosmos. > > > > Don't you mean "it helps you to *convince yourself* > > that you 'understand' yourself and the cosmos?" I do > > not personally believe that anyone in history has ever > > 'understood' the cosmos, and never will. That's the > > stuff of ego and hubris, and not my interest. If it's > > yours, more power to ya. > > How do you know that what you believe is true?
I don't. I do not consider *anything* I believe to be "true," in any sense. It is merely what I believe at the moment. > If you don't know, then your belief is foolish! I would suggest that the situation is reversed. Anyone who claims to "know" something that he cannot is foolish. > If you know, then who is your authority? I do not "know," and recognize NO authority. Not one, on the whole planet or off-world. IMO, anyone who trusts in "authorities" is even more foolish than the person who believes that he "knows." Are we clear now? > If it's you yourself, then why should we believe you? Excuse me? Where did I ever claim either to "know," or to ask you to believe me? I think you are projecting your *own* desires onto me. I have no need to be "believed." That is *your* hangup, and THE CORRECTOR's. I merely spout opinion, based on my belief in the moment. The next moment any of those beliefs could change. I don't give a shit whether anyone believes my opinion or agrees with it. What they believe does not affect me in any way. > > > Dreams can also help you determine what Nature is trying to > > > tell you. > > > > Again, to rephrase, "dreams can help to convince you > > that you 'understand' what you believe nature is > > trying to tell you." You answer my question about > > unchallenged assumptions with more unchallenged > > assumptions, John. This one involves a sentient > > "Nature" that is "trying to tell you something." > > Since I don't believe in a sentient Nature, I am > > not terribly interested in what it has to "tell me." > > But again, if that's your idea of a fun time, go > > for it. > > > > <snip fairytale story of Daniel that John doesn't > > seem to realize is not history> > > My questions above apply here too. I think I answered them above. You are talking *belief* and claiming it is "knowledge." I am busting you on that. IMO it's only belief, and will remain so forever, no matter how much you claim to "know" and no matter how many "authorities" you cite. But thanks for the bounceback.
