Fantastic, this provides another teachable moment for you! 😀
My comment presented something called a hypothetical situation. It is an example of how particular circumstances can lead to a specific outcome. The key takeaway is that–and I recognize this can be confusing!–it does not make any claims outside the details contained within the hypothetical.
This answers both of your questions, but let me make it easy for you: I don’t, and because I made these circumstances be true in this hypothetical situation.
I have stated my thoughts quite clearly, but allow me to do it again:
Your entire hypothesis is bunk, and you need to jump through hoops to make it work while it also immediately fails using any other example. I know you feel smart because you think philosophy matters. Which it does, but only until it runs into actual Science. You have no argument to support whatever point you are trying to make and now you default to consistent personal attacks and fart smelling because you cannot reliably justify your position.
Is that clear enough for you or am I still “proving myself cowardly to state my thoughts”? Do you have any follow up questions to make it more clear to you?
Why do you believe humans need anything exterior to hallucinate?
Why is the Unicorn being imagined different than the oasis to you?
Fantastic, this provides another teachable moment for you! 😀
My comment presented something called a hypothetical situation. It is an example of how particular circumstances can lead to a specific outcome. The key takeaway is that–and I recognize this can be confusing!–it does not make any claims outside the details contained within the hypothetical.
This answers both of your questions, but let me make it easy for you: I don’t, and because I made these circumstances be true in this hypothetical situation.
If your brain creates the illusion of a unicorn, then the presence of the illusion is real, even if the unicorn is not.
Whatever you say buddy.
It is very telling that you are unable to respond directly to what I said. 😀
Yes it is. But not the way you think.
Once again, you prove yourself too cowardly to state your thought outright. 😉
I have stated my thoughts quite clearly, but allow me to do it again:
Your entire hypothesis is bunk, and you need to jump through hoops to make it work while it also immediately fails using any other example. I know you feel smart because you think philosophy matters. Which it does, but only until it runs into actual Science. You have no argument to support whatever point you are trying to make and now you default to consistent personal attacks and fart smelling because you cannot reliably justify your position.
Is that clear enough for you or am I still “proving myself cowardly to state my thoughts”? Do you have any follow up questions to make it more clear to you?