Monistic Idealism said:[Just because you trotted out some words, it doesn't actually mean you refuted anything.
I didn't just trot out words you liar, I gave arguments. Big difference... I gave arguments, you and along with a few others, failed to give a counter-argument.
Point of order: you may well believe you gave arguments.
To other people, they weren't arguments... in reality, they frequently looked like a person stringing words together specifically to evade addressing the arguments. Just evasion.
So is your perception the One True Perception as you seem to think and seem to believe other people are obliged to accept, or do these other minds count in ascertaining the truth here?
Monistic Idealism said:This is publicly verifiable... make all the excuses you want as to why this is the case, the fact is its still the case...
Indeed it is. Everything I have said is publicly verifiable.
Monistic Idealism said:None of this happened.
Yes it did, there's a perfect example of this on page 1 actually as I explained to you like several weeks ago lol
Bait and switch.
You have twice pretended that I said I am not interested in talking with you as if they were my words. You put them in quotes.
They are not quotes of mine. They are your quotes.
So you are perpetuating this lie as you have done many times in this thread. It's a convenient distraction where you can then claim you have 'refuted' something whereas 99% of the content of your post is just another control drama.
Monistic Idealism said:I never said that I am not interested in talking with you.
you made the excuse that this is why there's no response, that's what you said.
No, I didn't.
Even if you managed to convince someone else of your lie, you're obviously not going to convince me that I said something I assuredly didn't say.
This is like gaslighting, only you don't have any power here.
Monistic Idealism said:You said they're not obliged to respond, well okay that doesn't mean they gave a counter-argument to my arguments then. who cares if they're obliged or not? they still failed
I said 'they' are not obliged to respond?
But you keep putting some text in quotes from me that uses the word 'I'
So are you adapting your lie now?
And the only failure here is the 'case' you've made which hasn't convinced a single person.
Monistic Idealism said:This is what counts as a 'refutation' to you, whereas it's really not a refutation.
You literally just ignored what I said and ignored my question.
See?
You ignored the entirety of my post, wrote 'nope', referred to something else without citing *anything* then ended with an ad hominem... but now you are accusing me of ignoring your question!
You're either deluded or mendacious.
Monistic Idealism said:I cited the SEP...
Cited?
No. You wrote the words "as even the SEP explained long ago" - this does not count as a citation. It does serve as a distraction though.
Monistic Idealism said:which explained this and noted how I'm talking about direct knowledge.
Feel free to cite it if it's relevant to your refutation, otherwise stop waving your hands around.
Monistic Idealism said:Now stop dodging the question: do you even know what direct knowledge is...?
Yes.
If you want people to answer your questions, try not formulating them with faulty assumptions.
Monistic Idealism said:Saying 'nope' does not a refutation make, declaring that salmon costs 5 pounds is irrelevant.
Nice lie. I didn't just say "nope". I made a point about mind being irreducible and strong emergence being false. Stop ignoring what I say...
Another lie.
Monistic Idealism said:Exactly.
Thanks for admitting you have no counter-argument. You just say I'm wrong with no reason to believe that I'm wrong. fail
And you respond to a counter-argument by calling it 'not a counter-argument'. And having just responded to an argument with 'nope' you then hold other people to a vastly higher standard than you hold yourself to.
Thus, everyone can see that whenever you claim that no one has countered your arguments, at best reading it's a delusion on your part. But I think if they read further, they'll see it's not innocent. It's mendacity.
The reason why you lie so much is because you lack the competence to engage in any substance and you need to evade anything that fails to follow your rehearsed script.
The OP is a declaration of faith, not one of logic.