|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Oct 10, 2022 14:28:27 GMT
If Bruce Wayne is the same person as Batman, then it doesn't mean that 'Bruce Wayne' is the same as 'Batman'. At least these two words doesn't share the same number of letters. So, if X is Y only in a logical senset, while 'X' ≠ 'Y', then we cannot identify them. We have to make a leap into semantics, and at the level of it, X and Y mean not 'X' or 'Y', but exactly to what they're referring. Thus any fact means that if x=y, then it does not the same as 'x'='y'.
By stigmating or taggin' names to things is not making names be things. Names and things are just correlating, not interacting. It's impossible to name a thing and to expect this thing to be change by this act. Of course it matters how we conceptualize things and how we combine things together in our heads, but as previously be said - the logical truths (the results of thinking) containing names don't imply names, but things (to take it semantically, not nominatively).
Symbols matter to the one who use them. However, even if a person faces a symbol, it doesn't mean for him to take a symbol as a symbol. If I see '9' it doesn't mean I see only the number nine, or the number six upside down, I can see here either a curverd line, or just someone's trace. It's not necessary for a symbol to be represented as a symbol. The most common example - is another language. If we don't know that something is a language we don't even recognize it. We might suggest there's a language, but that's about it.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Nov 25, 2022 19:22:56 GMT
I think I agree. This is truly strange and not easy to comprehend (for me), but a human is more a system, than a chaotic agglomeration. But what is quite weird is that "pre-organization". Actually, I think it's explainable why atoms and molecules of a human are cooperating. It is easily. A human body has plenty of (I don't know how many) molecule structures which cooperate in a real time - as a dynamic force. So, if there's an intrusion into a whole body, they're activisating and do their mission to complete the injured places. That is why they keep the body as a whole all the time. I would compare a body to a town: all those firemen, policemen, medical workers and so on - they work cooperatively to sustain the life of the town. If there were no police, no administrations, and so on, no towns were possible. That is why they keep towns being united and workable, and by the same any organism is working. The cells - are tiny police, medics, and so on. So, there are no "pre-existence", there are just a bunch of necessary cells and cooperative work of them. Yes, The Town Of People Working To Sustain The Town Is A Good Example Of How Atoms / Molecules Work In Unison.
However, It IS Pre-Existent, Because The Neuro-Transmitters Inside The Eyes Were Created Long Before The Actual Human Body, Before Earth Was Created, Before Much Was Created, Meaning Everything Was Intelligently Planned (Pre-Existent).I cannot agree with any pre-existing things nevertheless. An eye is what many living creatures have, but there are no one typical example for various species. How to compare a bat's, a crocodile's, a chameleon's, birds', and a human's? An eye is material product of senses: as a reflector locator that came (transformed) from ears. (If you want I can tell about this in details.)
|
|
|
Post by IM LITERALLY NEO on Nov 26, 2022 7:41:20 GMT
Yes, The Town Of People Working To Sustain The Town Is A Good Example Of How Atoms / Molecules Work In Unison.
However, It IS Pre-Existent, Because The Neuro-Transmitters Inside The Eyes Were Created Long Before The Actual Human Body, Before Earth Was Created, Before Much Was Created, Meaning Everything Was Intelligently Planned (Pre-Existent). I cannot agree with any pre-existing things nevertheless. An eye is what many living creatures have, but there are no one typical example for various species. How to compare a bat's, a crocodile's, a chameleon's, birds', and a human's? An eye is material product of senses: as a reflector locator that came (transformed) from ears. (If you want I can tell about this in details.) If You Zoom In On The Human Eye, The Design Around The Pupil Is Mirroring The Design Of A Nebula, The Eye Was Designed In The Image Of The Universe, And The Human Body Is 0% Human 100% Universe (Cosmic Body). This Is All Pre-Existing.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Nov 26, 2022 9:24:13 GMT
I cannot agree with any pre-existing things nevertheless. An eye is what many living creatures have, but there are no one typical example for various species. How to compare a bat's, a crocodile's, a chameleon's, birds', and a human's? An eye is material product of senses: as a reflector locator that came (transformed) from ears. (If you want I can tell about this in details.) If You Zoom In On The Human Eye, The Design Around The Pupil Is Mirroring The Design Of A Nebula, The Eye Was Designed In The Image Of The Universe, And The Human Body Is 0% Human 100% Universe (Cosmic Body). This Is All Pre-Existing.No. Firstly a cell, and after a living specie had to search for new elements to feed itself. But it's better to use as many possibilities as it can be reached, so firstly ears and noses were appeared, and then in some of those holes there were the receptors which located the most higher wave signals. The first creatures didn't see the diapason of waves we're seeing now. They were more like mole or rats, or even dogs. Later the system of our eye became more and more elastic, until the ability of tuning the echo locator had finally gotten the ability of accomodation. Since that the eyes became to transform into our present ones. The process was too long, and it it true that an eye is one of the newest elements in organic systems. The perfect tool an organic system obtained when it became controlling, not just reflecting things. Sorry, but your thesis is broken. When I wanted to watch Saturn via my telescope, I couldn't do it, even having not a bad model. Yes, mine was plainer, but the way to see planets or stars isn't just what we used to think. Oh, no. Thank God, before it I got a book of one good Kharkiv astronomer-amator, who cared about such secrets; and in his book I found a way to finally see my beloved Saturn. I got to firstly to keep eyes in darkness for about ~25 minutes, then I got to watch the planet, of course, previously adjusted the location of it in the sky, and !! I should to start watching quite left or right of the planet, because – to see it, I had to use my focal sight abilities. Those abilities we usually use when we don't think about that; for example, during the play in basketball or tennis.
|
|
|
Post by IM LITERALLY NEO on Nov 28, 2022 18:47:38 GMT
If You Zoom In On The Human Eye, The Design Around The Pupil Is Mirroring The Design Of A Nebula, The Eye Was Designed In The Image Of The Universe, And The Human Body Is 0% Human 100% Universe (Cosmic Body). This Is All Pre-Existing. No. Firstly a cell, and after a living specie had to search for new elements to feed itself. But it's better to use as many possibilities as it can be reached, so firstly ears and noses were appeared, and then in some of those holes there were the receptors which located the most higher wave signals. The first creatures didn't see the diapason of waves we're seeing now. They were more like mole or rats, or even dogs. Later the system of our eye became more and more elastic, until the ability of tuning the echo locator had finally gotten the ability of accomodation. Since that the eyes became to transform into our present ones. The process was too long, and it it true that an eye is one of the newest elements in organic systems. The perfect tool an organic system obtained when it became controlling, not just reflecting things. Sorry, but your thesis is broken. When I wanted to watch Saturn via my telescope, I couldn't do it, even having not a bad model. Yes, mine was plainer, but the way to see planets or stars isn't just what we used to think. Oh, no. Thank God, before it I got a book of one good Kharkiv astronomer-amator, who cared about such secrets; and in his book I found a way to finally see my beloved Saturn. I got to firstly to keep eyes in darkness for about ~25 minutes, then I got to watch the planet, of course, previously adjusted the location of it in the sky, and !! I should to start watching quite left or right of the planet, because – to see it, I had to use my focal sight abilities. Those abilities we usually use when we don't think about that; for example, during the play in basketball or tennis. The Human Eye's Connection To The Nebula Of The Universe Is A Fact, It's Not Up For Debate, There Are Clear Pictures That Show The Resemblance Side By Side, Just Like Roads Resemble Blood Cell Pathways, And Cities Resemble Nervous Systems, While Hairs On Your Skin Resemble Trees, The Micro / Macro Only "Look Different" For Those That Haven't Connected The "Differences", I.E Eye / Nebula Image Emulation.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Nov 28, 2022 20:57:28 GMT
No. Firstly a cell, and after a living specie had to search for new elements to feed itself. But it's better to use as many possibilities as it can be reached, so firstly ears and noses were appeared, and then in some of those holes there were the receptors which located the most higher wave signals. The first creatures didn't see the diapason of waves we're seeing now. They were more like mole or rats, or even dogs. Later the system of our eye became more and more elastic, until the ability of tuning the echo locator had finally gotten the ability of accomodation. Since that the eyes became to transform into our present ones. The process was too long, and it it true that an eye is one of the newest elements in organic systems. The perfect tool an organic system obtained when it became controlling, not just reflecting things. Sorry, but your thesis is broken. When I wanted to watch Saturn via my telescope, I couldn't do it, even having not a bad model. Yes, mine was plainer, but the way to see planets or stars isn't just what we used to think. Oh, no. Thank God, before it I got a book of one good Kharkiv astronomer-amator, who cared about such secrets; and in his book I found a way to finally see my beloved Saturn. I got to firstly to keep eyes in darkness for about ~25 minutes, then I got to watch the planet, of course, previously adjusted the location of it in the sky, and !! I should to start watching quite left or right of the planet, because – to see it, I had to use my focal sight abilities. Those abilities we usually use when we don't think about that; for example, during the play in basketball or tennis. The Human Eye's Connection To The Nebula Of The Universe Is A Fact, It's Not Up For Debate, There Are Clear Pictures That Show The Resemblance Side By Side, Just Like Roads Resemble Blood Cell Pathways, And Cities Resemble Nervous Systems, While Hairs On Your Skin Resemble Trees, The Micro / Macro Only "Look Different" For Those That Haven't Connected The "Differences", I.E Eye / Nebula Image Emulation.Okay. It is your opinion. It's a plausible one, and an interesting one. But I was impressed to know that our eyes became as some kind of accommodation system to locate waves. We're all surrounded by waves, and the tiniest species 'knew' that be just feeling the vibrations. Those vibrations allowed them to us it along with their holes in their bodies, through which any elements swallowed or merged with those species. Then - much later - many species had 9 holes: one for eating, one forreleasing, one for sperm or something like that, two for ears, two for nose, two for eyes, and one for an umbilical cord. But we haven't been having always those 9 holes altogether as different. It's kinda weird why we've got two, but not one holes for smell, while it's simple to explain why many species have two ears and two eyes - the same - to locate the waves better. That is why it is easier to imagine us - species - as wave locators, than those symbolic weird creatures. I do not believe in symbols, because it is a very late development. 30-40 yers ago people didn't think about that. So, that's just fashionable thing. After 5-10 years this trend will be vanishing, and the true Darwinism and science will be ruling the world again!
|
|
|
Post by IM LITERALLY NEO on Nov 29, 2022 19:44:28 GMT
The Human Eye's Connection To The Nebula Of The Universe Is A Fact, It's Not Up For Debate, There Are Clear Pictures That Show The Resemblance Side By Side, Just Like Roads Resemble Blood Cell Pathways, And Cities Resemble Nervous Systems, While Hairs On Your Skin Resemble Trees, The Micro / Macro Only "Look Different" For Those That Haven't Connected The "Differences", I.E Eye / Nebula Image Emulation. Okay. It is your opinion. It's a plausible one, and an interesting one. But I was impressed to know that our eyes became as some kind of accommodation system to locate waves. We're all surrounded by waves, and the tiniest species 'knew' that be just feeling the vibrations. Those vibrations allowed them to us it along with their holes in their bodies, through which any elements swallowed or merged with those species. Then - much later - many species had 9 holes: one for eating, one forreleasing, one for sperm or something like that, two for ears, two for nose, two for eyes, and one for an umbilical cord. But we haven't been having always those 9 holes altogether as different. It's kinda weird why we've got two, but not one holes for smell, while it's simple to explain why many species have two ears and two eyes - the same - to locate the waves better. That is why it is easier to imagine us - species - as wave locators, than those symbolic weird creatures. I do not believe in symbols, because it is a very late development. 30-40 yers ago people didn't think about that. So, that's just fashionable thing. After 5-10 years this trend will be vanishing, and the true Darwinism and science will be ruling the world again! This Is Simply Not True, Ancient Art And Literature By Manuscript, Canvases, Hieroglyphics, Papyrus, Stone, Etc. Alone Proves This Is Not True, But Moreover The Universe Itself Uses Symbols To Abstractly Convey Itself Intelligently, We Mirror That.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Nov 29, 2022 22:49:49 GMT
Okay. It is your opinion. It's a plausible one, and an interesting one. But I was impressed to know that our eyes became as some kind of accommodation system to locate waves. We're all surrounded by waves, and the tiniest species 'knew' that be just feeling the vibrations. Those vibrations allowed them to us it along with their holes in their bodies, through which any elements swallowed or merged with those species. Then - much later - many species had 9 holes: one for eating, one forreleasing, one for sperm or something like that, two for ears, two for nose, two for eyes, and one for an umbilical cord. But we haven't been having always those 9 holes altogether as different. It's kinda weird why we've got two, but not one holes for smell, while it's simple to explain why many species have two ears and two eyes - the same - to locate the waves better. That is why it is easier to imagine us - species - as wave locators, than those symbolic weird creatures. I do not believe in symbols, because it is a very late development. 30-40 yers ago people didn't think about that. So, that's just fashionable thing. After 5-10 years this trend will be vanishing, and the true Darwinism and science will be ruling the world again! This Is Simply Not True, Ancient Art And Literature By Manuscript, Canvases, Hieroglyphics, Papyrus, Stone, Etc. Alone Proves This Is Not True, But Moreover The Universe Itself Uses Symbols To Abstractly Convey Itself Intelligently, We Mirror That.Maybe you're right, and I might be wrong. Yes, the ancient preserved images, etc are proof that I'm wrong. But I was trying to say something quite different: I wanted to say that there's a fashion to study or not to study the symbols. For me each symbol is just a wave, or a gathering of matter, or something material. I don't believer any ideal things to exist. I would say materialism is closer to God, than idealism. Why I'm rejecting any idealism? First of all, I believer there are no non-man-made teachings. Even materialism - is our own view. But it's okay for this view, because the materialists are not trying to fool anyone, while the followers of idealism, like Plato, wanted to get all the power, and become a powerful priest. Have you seen that fascinating movie "Mist" (2007)? There was a woman - a religious psycho, who set people against each other, and make them being fools.
|
|
|
Post by IM LITERALLY NEO on Nov 30, 2022 18:18:50 GMT
This Is Simply Not True, Ancient Art And Literature By Manuscript, Canvases, Hieroglyphics, Papyrus, Stone, Etc. Alone Proves This Is Not True, But Moreover The Universe Itself Uses Symbols To Abstractly Convey Itself Intelligently, We Mirror That. Maybe you're right, and I might be wrong. Yes, the ancient preserved images, etc are proof that I'm wrong. But I was trying to say something quite different: I wanted to say that there's a fashion to study or not to study the symbols. For me each symbol is just a wave, or a gathering of matter, or something material. I don't believer any ideal things to exist. I would say materialism is closer to God, than idealism. Why I'm rejecting any idealism? First of all, I believer there are no non-man-made teachings. Even materialism - is our own view. But it's okay for this view, because the materialists are not trying to fool anyone, while the followers of idealism, like Plato, wanted to get all the power, and become a powerful priest. Have you seen that fascinating movie "Mist" (2007)? There was a woman - a religious psycho, who set people against each other, and make them being fools. The Problems Of The Modern World Ultimately Stem From Hedonistic Materialism, It's Not Even That Difficult To See, It's Crystal Clear That Materialism Is What We Were Told Not To Give Into, We Are Not Meant To Be Materialists, We Are Supposed To Be Humanists And Learn How To FEEL, Not Just Think; I FEEL, Therefore I Am, Not I THINK, Thinking Alone Without FEELING Does Not Lead To Any Universal Benefits.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Nov 30, 2022 20:41:25 GMT
Maybe you're right, and I might be wrong. Yes, the ancient preserved images, etc are proof that I'm wrong. But I was trying to say something quite different: I wanted to say that there's a fashion to study or not to study the symbols. For me each symbol is just a wave, or a gathering of matter, or something material. I don't believer any ideal things to exist. I would say materialism is closer to God, than idealism. Why I'm rejecting any idealism? First of all, I believer there are no non-man-made teachings. Even materialism - is our own view. But it's okay for this view, because the materialists are not trying to fool anyone, while the followers of idealism, like Plato, wanted to get all the power, and become a powerful priest. Have you seen that fascinating movie "Mist" (2007)? There was a woman - a religious psycho, who set people against each other, and make them being fools. The Problems Of The Modern World Ultimately Stem From Hedonistic Materialism, It's Not Even That Difficult To See, It's Crystal Clear That Materialism Is What We Were Told Not To Give Into, We Are Not Meant To Be Materialists, We Are Supposed To Be Humanists And Learn How To FEEL, Not Just Think; I FEEL, Therefore I Am, Not I THINK, Thinking Alone Without FEELING Does Not Lead To Any Universal Benefits.Well, what's so bad in hedonistic materialism? It's just a way Epicurus preached. I would become such a follower: eat, sleep, walk, play games, boring time, reading time, bath, sex, rock'n'roll, whooaa... It's super cool! My own opinion is that - it's not enough hedonism in the world. If we have more sex, than we've got, there would be much more love. Contrary to this, all those lgbtq+, politics, institutions, facilities, plants, corporations are taking out all our goods. Just remember those God bless time of Internet 12-20 years ago - that was awesome time, when none stupid nosy corporation rats snooped their noses into that Web-heavens. Even this forum - is just a tiny splinter of all those marvellous cosy places those years.... I would say we all have forgotten all those pleasures. We've used to be slaves of all those yt cruel and unfair politics, fb damned policies, twitter weirdness, and so on. Where is that freedom we had been bathing all those years? It's gone as soon as the Internet became more socialized, and common.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Dec 1, 2022 16:38:27 GMT
The problem is that if the everything is also pointing to something else, then the everything isn't it. There must be things which don't point to something else. On the other hand, the everything cannot not be pointing to anything, because it cannot assume itself as itself, and in turn the everything doesn't have any directions at all, that finally is a contradiction for it – and therefore it lacks something. I suppose symbols to not be other things, than symbols. If a symbol is symbol, then whatever it is the symbol component in it is not the thing itself, while rather an outer element. If it occurs for a certain thing to be a symbol, then it doesn't transform to a symbol, it keeps being the thing, and a symbolic component is just an outer, so the thing ≠ a symbol. Symbols may share the same form as things do, but a form isn't a symbol either. I guess a symbol – as you rightly said has a direction. So, technically it can be described as this: Each time taking X we refer to S, or where X occurs it has to be replaced with S, the S is a symbol for X. Where 'X' is whatever it is, and 'S' is a symbol. 1. If all things point to something else then there is an infinite regress/progress which makes every thing a relative center point. This center point is contradictory as it is the stand between of one thing which contrasts to another thing; the center point is empty of characteristics because of it being the contrast itself. 2. If all things point to something else then there is an infinite regress/progress which results in an indefinite state. 3. If all things point to something else then each thing is empty in itself. This results in the infinite regress/progress being empty in itself when observed as a whole. Infinite regresses/progresses result in infinite regresses/progresses and the regress/progress becomes indistinguishable from anything else. Re: 2. If any thing refers to something else, then there need not be an infinite regression// think of a circle: any point of it can refer to some other point. etc......
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 1, 2022 17:06:30 GMT
The problem is that if the everything is also pointing to something else, then the everything isn't it. There must be things which don't point to something else. 1. If all things point to something else then there is an infinite regress/progress which makes every thing a relative center point. This center point is contradictory as it is the stand between of one thing which contrasts to another thing; the center point is empty of characteristics because of it being the contrast itself. 2. If all things point to something else then there is an infinite regress/progress which results in an indefinite state. 3. If all things point to something else then each thing is empty in itself. This results in the infinite regress/progress being empty in itself when observed as a whole. Infinite regresses/progresses result in infinite regresses/progresses and the regress/progress becomes indistinguishable from anything else. I meant not 'all things', but 'everything' as something whole and united as some kind of a system. I always divide 'everything' and 'all things'. For me, there are two concepts: 'all things', and 'everything', and 'all things' doesn't equal to 'everything'. So, 'everything' should point to something else, so - to itself. But! if there are none 'something else' as a contrary to 'everything' that how can 'everything' be defined? Briefly, for me any set, any thing, or anything, exists only if it is linked to anything else. Yes, this may turn this to the endless process, but... it may not. I don't really know for the time being. If 'everything' doesn't exist, then there is no existence at all, then there's only nothing, but since 'no thing' is also 'something' it's a contradiction. However, we cannot imply from that that 'everything' exists, but only - that 'something' exists. And that 'something' may be 'everything' just for itself. I'll explain: let's say a class has 20 pupils. If all 20 pupils are at school, in the classroom, then there are 'everything' of them, or 'all the pupils'.
|
|
|
Post by IM LITERALLY NEO on Dec 1, 2022 19:46:04 GMT
The Problems Of The Modern World Ultimately Stem From Hedonistic Materialism, It's Not Even That Difficult To See, It's Crystal Clear That Materialism Is What We Were Told Not To Give Into, We Are Not Meant To Be Materialists, We Are Supposed To Be Humanists And Learn How To FEEL, Not Just Think; I FEEL, Therefore I Am, Not I THINK, Thinking Alone Without FEELING Does Not Lead To Any Universal Benefits. Well, what's so bad in hedonistic materialism? It's just a way Epicurus preached. I would become such a follower: eat, sleep, walk, play games, boring time, reading time, bath, sex, rock'n'roll, whooaa... It's super cool! My own opinion is that - it's not enough hedonism in the world. If we have more sex, than we've got, there would be much more love. Contrary to this, all those lgbtq+, politics, institutions, facilities, plants, corporations are taking out all our goods. Just remember those God bless time of Internet 12-20 years ago - that was awesome time, when none stupid nosy corporation rats snooped their noses into that Web-heavens. Even this forum - is just a tiny splinter of all those marvellous cosy places those years.... I would say we all have forgotten all those pleasures. We've used to be slaves of all those yt cruel and unfair politics, fb damned policies, twitter weirdness, and so on. Where is that freedom we had been bathing all those years? It's gone as soon as the Internet became more socialized, and common. Hedonistic Materialism Is What Lead To The Sex Rings And The Sinning Among The Mass To Target The Innocent Of Our People To Taint Them And To Make Them No Better Than The Hedonistic Materialistic System. It's A Wrong Way Of Seeing Things; It Is The OPPOSITE Attribute That Makes Us Less Of A Philosopher, And More Of A Loser. The Aspects You Speak Of Have Lead To The Majority Of ALL WARS, The Same WARS You Hate. To Say You Love Hedonistic Materialism, Is To Aid Your Enemy And The Long Out-Dated Hedonistic Materialistic Culture That Plagued The Minds Of Our People For Eons Across Time. You Know Not The Dangers Of Hedonistic Materialism, I Do; It Is The OPPOSITE Of Necessity, And A FUNCTIONING Society / Reality Must EXIST Before Sex Is Even Considered, Things Must Function, To Want Sex In A System That Does Not Function Has Completely Lost Sight Of The Function Of Sex, Sex Requires Function To Be Sex, Else It's Not Sex, It's Something Worse Than Death.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 1, 2022 23:30:39 GMT
Well, what's so bad in hedonistic materialism? It's just a way Epicurus preached. I would become such a follower: eat, sleep, walk, play games, boring time, reading time, bath, sex, rock'n'roll, whooaa... It's super cool! My own opinion is that - it's not enough hedonism in the world. If we have more sex, than we've got, there would be much more love. Contrary to this, all those lgbtq+, politics, institutions, facilities, plants, corporations are taking out all our goods. Just remember those God bless time of Internet 12-20 years ago - that was awesome time, when none stupid nosy corporation rats snooped their noses into that Web-heavens. Even this forum - is just a tiny splinter of all those marvellous cosy places those years.... I would say we all have forgotten all those pleasures. We've used to be slaves of all those yt cruel and unfair politics, fb damned policies, twitter weirdness, and so on. Where is that freedom we had been bathing all those years? It's gone as soon as the Internet became more socialized, and common. Hedonistic Materialism Is What Lead To The Sex Rings And The Sinning Among The Mass To Target The Innocent Of Our People To Taint Them And To Make Them No Better Than The Hedonistic Materialistic System. It's A Wrong Way Of Seeing Things; It Is The OPPOSITE Attribute That Makes Us Less Of A Philosopher, And More Of A Loser. The Aspects You Speak Of Have Lead To The Majority Of ALL WARS, The Same WARS You Hate. To Say You Love Hedonistic Materialism, Is To Aid Your Enemy And The Long Out-Dated Hedonistic Materialistic Culture That Plagued The Minds Of Our People For Eons Across Time. You Know Not The Dangers Of Hedonistic Materialism, I Do; It Is The OPPOSITE Of Necessity, And A FUNCTIONING Society / Reality Must EXIST Before Sex Is Even Considered, Things Must Function, To Want Sex In A System That Does Not Function Has Completely Lost Sight Of The Function Of Sex, Sex Requires Function To Be Sex, Else It's Not Sex, It's Something Worse Than Death.I want to ask you, have you read Epicurus? Because what Epicurus said about henodistic is more close to what you're saying, than many think about it. I want to say that we're talking about different aspects. I didn't want to say that, you know, we have to have sex all the day (well, it's not so bad, if you truly love someone), but about having some goods. Today people can afford many goods; the past wasn't like that. Even in 50's not everyone could afford a good typewriter. The same as about many other things, including, for instance stomatology. Have you ever made a visit to a stomatologist? They used earlier N 2O or so called 'funny gas' to make a patient be out of pain during the surgery. But that way isn't so safety. Anyway, this is just one of many examples. I want to say that we're surrounded by technology. Previously you talked that magic existed (maybe I confuse something, because I can't remember everything, so you might not talk that, but anyway), while even the most skilled astrologists today uses computers or smartphones. Not being able to refuse it - we cannot skip the hedonism! It is impossible! The best way to get rid of hedonism is to get a girl and spend weeks with her having sex for days. Get a grass, get plenty of Jack Daniels, and so on, and to invite friends to this super party. And to have that party by days, until everyone will be completely out. Another way is to just drive your car through all the country visiting every buggy little town, meeting their people, escaping police, grand theft auto, etc. There's also an option to get hired on some extreme jobs... I guess there are plenty way to fun. By the way, have you ever done any pranks? Phone calls? Have you skateboarded? What the most extreme thing you did in your life?
|
|
|
Post by IM LITERALLY NEO on Dec 2, 2022 5:19:25 GMT
Hedonistic Materialism Is What Lead To The Sex Rings And The Sinning Among The Mass To Target The Innocent Of Our People To Taint Them And To Make Them No Better Than The Hedonistic Materialistic System. It's A Wrong Way Of Seeing Things; It Is The OPPOSITE Attribute That Makes Us Less Of A Philosopher, And More Of A Loser. The Aspects You Speak Of Have Lead To The Majority Of ALL WARS, The Same WARS You Hate. To Say You Love Hedonistic Materialism, Is To Aid Your Enemy And The Long Out-Dated Hedonistic Materialistic Culture That Plagued The Minds Of Our People For Eons Across Time. You Know Not The Dangers Of Hedonistic Materialism, I Do; It Is The OPPOSITE Of Necessity, And A FUNCTIONING Society / Reality Must EXIST Before Sex Is Even Considered, Things Must Function, To Want Sex In A System That Does Not Function Has Completely Lost Sight Of The Function Of Sex, Sex Requires Function To Be Sex, Else It's Not Sex, It's Something Worse Than Death. I want to ask you, have you read Epicurus? Because what Epicurus said about henodistic is more close to what you're saying, than many think about it. I want to say that we're talking about different aspects. I didn't want to say that, you know, we have to have sex all the day (well, it's not so bad, if you truly love someone), but about having some goods. Today people can afford many goods; the past wasn't like that. Even in 50's not everyone could afford a good typewriter. The same as about many other things, including, for instance stomatology. Have you ever made a visit to a stomatologist? They used earlier N 2O or so called 'funny gas' to make a patient be out of pain during the surgery. But that way isn't so safety. Anyway, this is just one of many examples. I want to say that we're surrounded by technology. Previously you talked that magic existed (maybe I confuse something, because I can't remember everything, so you might not talk that, but anyway), while even the most skilled astrologists today uses computers or smartphones. Not being able to refuse it - we cannot skip the hedonism! It is impossible!The best way to get rid of hedonism is to get a girl and spend weeks with her having sex for days. Get a grass, get plenty of Jack Daniels, and so on, and to invite friends to this super party. And to have that party by days, until everyone will be completely out. Another way is to just drive your car through all the country visiting every buggy little town, meeting their people, escaping police, grand theft auto, etc. There's also an option to get hired on some extreme jobs... I guess there are plenty way to fun. By the way, have you ever done any pranks? Phone calls? Have you skateboarded? What the most extreme thing you did in your life? If I Can Escape It, Others Can As Well. Many, Billions Even, Are Tempted By It, It's One Of The Most Tempting Aspects Of Reality, Its Mere Existence Is To Test Our Will Power And Integrity As Beings, Once The Universe Begins Its Next Operation, All The Material World Will Fall, And All Those That Got Stuck To It Will Fall With It Like Flies And A Fly Trap Of Honey.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 2, 2022 9:17:21 GMT
I want to ask you, have you read Epicurus? Because what Epicurus said about henodistic is more close to what you're saying, than many think about it. I want to say that we're talking about different aspects. I didn't want to say that, you know, we have to have sex all the day (well, it's not so bad, if you truly love someone), but about having some goods. Today people can afford many goods; the past wasn't like that. Even in 50's not everyone could afford a good typewriter. The same as about many other things, including, for instance stomatology. Have you ever made a visit to a stomatologist? They used earlier N 2O or so called 'funny gas' to make a patient be out of pain during the surgery. But that way isn't so safety. Anyway, this is just one of many examples. I want to say that we're surrounded by technology. Previously you talked that magic existed (maybe I confuse something, because I can't remember everything, so you might not talk that, but anyway), while even the most skilled astrologists today uses computers or smartphones. Not being able to refuse it - we cannot skip the hedonism! It is impossible!The best way to get rid of hedonism is to get a girl and spend weeks with her having sex for days. Get a grass, get plenty of Jack Daniels, and so on, and to invite friends to this super party. And to have that party by days, until everyone will be completely out. Another way is to just drive your car through all the country visiting every buggy little town, meeting their people, escaping police, grand theft auto, etc. There's also an option to get hired on some extreme jobs... I guess there are plenty way to fun. By the way, have you ever done any pranks? Phone calls? Have you skateboarded? What the most extreme thing you did in your life? If I Can Escape It, Others Can As Well. Many, Billions Even, Are Tempted By It, It's One Of The Most Tempting Aspects Of Reality, Its Mere Existence Is To Test Our Will Power And Integrity As Beings, Once The Universe Begins Its Next Operation, All The Material World Will Fall, And All Those That Got Stuck To It Will Fall With It Like Flies And A Fly Trap Of Honey.I see. You don't read what I write. Only finding one phrase, and you think that that's it. What I was saying was contrary to you. I also asked you many questions previously, but you haven't answered them.
|
|