On Sep 11, 3:32 am, chazwin <chazwy...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> No, Chazzzz is not sayinf that
Yes you are, there's none so blind as he who doesn't want to see.
> you complete ****-
> wit.
In your dreams.
Chazzzzz read my lips, when you place your state of consciousness
ahead of that which it is conscious of (existence as found via sensory
perceptions), then you DO deny the use and purpose of your faculty of
sense perceptions (eyes ears nose feel touch) as the beginning to any
and all of your knowledge, you're on the road to being a Kantian /
mystic, same thing.
And when you claim the idiotic oxymoronic Kantian stupidy of "innate
knowledge" you by default automatically deny all and any use you deny
the purpose of sensory perception, i.e. you deny any and all use of
your senses, your, eyes ears nose feel touch in that piece of
knowledge.
Fact, man can not have ANY knowledge without his faculty of sensory
perception, unless of course that man is acceptiing as fact the
arbitrary whims of fools and dictating idiots, Kantianizm and all
forms of mystical crap spring to mind as two such examples.
You can not perceive nothing in reality because nothing means there is
nothing in reality to perceive,
unless of course you want to just accept the arbitrary whims of
****ing idiots like Kant.
You can not be conscious of nothing because nothing means the absense
of anything to be conscious of, unless of course you want to just
accept the arbitrary whims of ****ing idiots like Kant.
Consciouness is a state of awareness, which means there has to be
something sensory to be aware of.
e.g. I can not be aware of what is in your mind (your knowledge) until
you speak or write it, so until that point, there is nothing but your
body and its actions for me to be aware of, the rest about you is at
best a guess I can make.
You can not have any knowledge of space unless and until your senses
have sensed / perceived an area, unless of course you want to just
accept as fact the arbitrary whims of ****ing idiots like Kant.
You can not have any knowledge of time unless and until your faculty
of sense have sensed the duration of a non-constant relation****p
between two or more entities, unless of course you want to just accept
as fact the arbitrary whims of ****ing idiots like Kant.
Michael Gordge
|
