Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 17, 2023 8:39:07 GMT
You know, it's pretty often to hear from many different people, especially via video channels that there are such deities as West, East, government, bureaucracy, celebrities, culture, hip-hop, and so on. There are millions if not trillions of them. Each of terms is awful. Of course, two discutants are able to get each other if one sends to anoher not a 100% symbol, and the receiver get only 50% of it. (So, in the result the specific weight of the message is not so bright; it might be about 15-20%.) But despite all the obstacles the discutants can conversate without many troubles. So, again, if one of the discutants shows a middle finger to another person, the receiver might only partially see this symbol, and as soon as it happens the rage or negotiation between them is set on. Thus, the idea is that the concepts may be blurred or gazed, and not seen clearly. The same is about words - sometimes we don't even sure what exactly we've heard, or what exactly we've read. In my case it happens so often: I read the text, and after reading it many times I can't repeat the text, the message. Instead of it, I can barely utter the meaning of the text, etc. And I am sure that such a technique makes us being blind to the exact things, and make us be more idealism concentrated. Because, for an idealist, the world is only the words.
To try to resist it instead of looking for some meaning or interpretation we have to repeat the text without any addition, transformation, or somethine else. We have to copy&paste, and never change the messages. Our thoughts are our uttered sentences. No changing, no extra thoughts allowed, no nothing... Yes, this strategy doesn't seem to be good. There are many bad points in it, and no doubt for many it must be obvious. On the other hand, such a way of interaction between people is quite natural. Instead of using meaning or some kind of sense in our messages, we just use symbols completely and change those symbols the same way as people could show to each other the items, and our language would be the same as showing each other only items. For example, I can show a hedgehog to my friend, and he can show me a parrot. What does it mean? - It means what it means - one person showed the hedgehod, and another one showed the parrot. That's it. No meaning is needed here. However, in our life we add so many additional concepts, that I suppose most of them are being fictionally created.
That's why the South, the North, corporations, whites, and so on - are just fictional. Yes, it is possible that there is a white person, but this way of saying s**ks. Instead of pronouncing that we would have to show a white person, not saying anything. Language spoiled us by flooding our reality with that unreal deities as blacks, woke, counter-culture, and many many others. By looking throught the window, or travelling, or listening to the birds' singing, or working at the farm, etc - there are plenty of good work, we can save our brains from that very fictional scenario. And without those manufactured concepts the life is simplier and less blurred.... Also, I want to say that I might be wrong. Surely, many times here I used punch-phrases. The life might be even more complicated, than only removing those concepts back. I don't know is there any kind of a sieve for the concepts. I thought it might be like what I'd been trying to describe. Anyway, it's possible to guess about such things. I guess it's worth to do it.
To try to resist it instead of looking for some meaning or interpretation we have to repeat the text without any addition, transformation, or somethine else. We have to copy&paste, and never change the messages. Our thoughts are our uttered sentences. No changing, no extra thoughts allowed, no nothing... Yes, this strategy doesn't seem to be good. There are many bad points in it, and no doubt for many it must be obvious. On the other hand, such a way of interaction between people is quite natural. Instead of using meaning or some kind of sense in our messages, we just use symbols completely and change those symbols the same way as people could show to each other the items, and our language would be the same as showing each other only items. For example, I can show a hedgehog to my friend, and he can show me a parrot. What does it mean? - It means what it means - one person showed the hedgehod, and another one showed the parrot. That's it. No meaning is needed here. However, in our life we add so many additional concepts, that I suppose most of them are being fictionally created.
That's why the South, the North, corporations, whites, and so on - are just fictional. Yes, it is possible that there is a white person, but this way of saying s**ks. Instead of pronouncing that we would have to show a white person, not saying anything. Language spoiled us by flooding our reality with that unreal deities as blacks, woke, counter-culture, and many many others. By looking throught the window, or travelling, or listening to the birds' singing, or working at the farm, etc - there are plenty of good work, we can save our brains from that very fictional scenario. And without those manufactured concepts the life is simplier and less blurred.... Also, I want to say that I might be wrong. Surely, many times here I used punch-phrases. The life might be even more complicated, than only removing those concepts back. I don't know is there any kind of a sieve for the concepts. I thought it might be like what I'd been trying to describe. Anyway, it's possible to guess about such things. I guess it's worth to do it.
