Theme: Truth
-
DEFINE “YOU” If I put your ashes in an urn, is that you? If I put your dead body
DEFINE “YOU” If I put your ashes in an urn, is that you? If I put your dead body in a casket is that you? If I read your written words, isthat you? whenever you use the word ‘is’ you are engaged in a self or other deception, because it means “i don’t know how this exists”. When you use the word ‘you’ as referencing the physical body, or ‘you’ as the potential interaction of mind and body, or ‘you’ as the acting interaction between mind and body…. which are you asking? Because ‘is’ and ‘you’ questions aren’t philosophical questions, their grammatical errors positioned as a pretense of philosophical sophisms. I consist of the consequences of the continuous operation of my body, and in particular my brain. the written word consist only of potential experience until a mind puts it into motion by reading it. the body consists of biomass until a brain causes it to move. A brain consists of reactive nerves, until the that experence we call mind emerges from the continuous persistence of states. Just as we cannot observe the frames of video, we cannot observe the cycles of changes in state of the mind, and so we ‘average them’ through the persistence of stimuli across cycles. We do have a sense of self awareness that functions pre-cognitively, and can best be understood as that moment you awake in the dark and are unaware of your circumstances. It is this awareness of changes in state and like and dislikes that is ‘I’? Well, that is governed by genes. Is that ‘I’? Or am ‘i’ the combination of those genetic biases, that very simple state monitor, or at the other end, am ‘I’ that combination of body and memory in motion that you experience as a set of contsant relations ‘me?’. To the mentally ill person ‘i’ consists of a body in its current state. To the observer ‘i’ consists of a set of patterns of behavior given the experiences. To others (norm, law), ‘i’ consists of the rights and obligations to the host body. etc. -
DEFINE “YOU” If I put your ashes in an urn, is that you? If I put your dead body
DEFINE “YOU”
If I put your ashes in an urn, is that you?
If I put your dead body in a casket is that you?
If I read your written words, isthat you?
whenever you use the word ‘is’ you are engaged in a self or other deception, because it means “i don’t know how this exists”. When you use the word ‘you’ as referencing the physical body, or ‘you’ as the potential interaction of mind and body, or ‘you’ as the acting interaction between mind and body…. which are you asking?
Because ‘is’ and ‘you’ questions aren’t philosophical questions, their grammatical errors positioned as a pretense of philosophical sophisms.
I consist of the consequences of the continuous operation of my body, and in particular my brain.
the written word consist only of potential experience until
a mind puts it into motion by reading it. the body consists of biomass until a brain causes it to move. A brain consists of reactive nerves, until the that experence we call mind emerges from the continuous persistence of states.
Just as we cannot observe the frames of video, we cannot observe the cycles of changes in state of the mind, and so we ‘average them’ through the persistence of stimuli across cycles.
We do have a sense of self awareness that functions pre-cognitively, and can best be understood as that moment you awake in the dark and are unaware of your circumstances.
It is this awareness of changes in state and like and dislikes that is ‘I’? Well, that is governed by genes. Is that ‘I’? Or am ‘i’ the combination of those genetic biases, that very simple state monitor, or at the other end, am ‘I’ that combination of body and memory in motion that you experience as a set of contsant relations ‘me?’.
To the mentally ill person ‘i’ consists of a body in its current state. To the observer ‘i’ consists of a set of patterns of behavior given the experiences. To others (norm, law), ‘i’ consists of the rights and obligations to the host body.
etc.
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-10 15:54:00 UTC
-
The Cult Of Non-Submission
The chinese don’t even consider judaism/christianity/islam as meaningful. They look at the truthful things – even if truth is nearly impossible for them. They will us it whenever possible to gain competitive advantage. While the chinese place no value on human life and too much value on face (preservation of the dominance hierarchy), the are worthwhile competitors, as are the Japanese and the Koreans. Western man loves a competitor. The problem is, that we are being invaded and undermined from within, while they are not. We are fighting a two front war. The one for leadership against the east asians, and the one for leadership of our own against our Jewish and Catholic underclass priesthoods. And unfortunately, while we love a good competition with a quality competitor – nothing is more thrilling. We do not like whatsoever, being undermined by our own, and those whom we allow in our domain. No more tolerance. Ever. Zero Tolerance for Submission. What is western man? What is aristocracy, but the Cult of Non-Submission? -
The Cult Of Non-Submission
The chinese don’t even consider judaism/christianity/islam as meaningful. They look at the truthful things – even if truth is nearly impossible for them. They will us it whenever possible to gain competitive advantage. While the chinese place no value on human life and too much value on face (preservation of the dominance hierarchy), the are worthwhile competitors, as are the Japanese and the Koreans. Western man loves a competitor. The problem is, that we are being invaded and undermined from within, while they are not. We are fighting a two front war. The one for leadership against the east asians, and the one for leadership of our own against our Jewish and Catholic underclass priesthoods. And unfortunately, while we love a good competition with a quality competitor – nothing is more thrilling. We do not like whatsoever, being undermined by our own, and those whom we allow in our domain. No more tolerance. Ever. Zero Tolerance for Submission. What is western man? What is aristocracy, but the Cult of Non-Submission? -
THE CULT OF NON-SUBMISSION The chinese don’t even consider judaism/christianity/
THE CULT OF NON-SUBMISSION
The chinese don’t even consider judaism/christianity/islam as meaningful. They look at the truthful things – even if truth is nearly impossible for them. They will us it whenever possible to gain competitive advantage.
While the chinese place no value on human life and too much value on face (preservation of the dominance hierarchy), the are worthwhile competitors, as are the Japanese and the Koreans.
Western man loves a competitor. The problem is, that we are being invaded and undermined from within, while they are not.
We are fighting a two front war. The one for leadership against the east asians, and the one for leadership of our own against our Jewish and Catholic underclass priesthoods.
And unfortunately, while we love a good competition with a quality competitor – nothing is more thrilling. We do not like whatsoever, being undermined by our own, and those whom we allow in our domain.
No more tolerance. Ever. Zero Tolerance for Submission.
What is western man? What is aristocracy, but the Cult of Non-Submission?
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-10 13:26:00 UTC
-
well, I can’t help you there, because non contradiction tells us very little if
well, I can’t help you there, because non contradiction tells us very little if our premises are false. π Anyway. I”m working. later…. lol
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-10 01:55:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/962143019809017856
Reply addressees: @brabakr @RevengeCoach
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/962137775716757505
IN REPLY TO:
@brabakr
@curtdoolittle @RevengeCoach The ones indeed. Non contradiction applies only to true Christianity.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/962137775716757505
-
βIt is a dogma of the Roman Church that the existence of God can be proved by na
βIt is a dogma of the Roman Church that the existence of God can be proved by natural reason. Now this dogma would make it impossible for me to be a Roman Catholic. If I thought of God as another being like myself, outside myself, only infinitely more powerful, then I would regard it as my duty to defy him.β β Ludwig Wittgenstein from another poster -
Blocked from Quora for truthfully answering questions. lol We will have our own
Blocked from Quora for truthfully answering questions. lol
We will have our own platform. We must. π
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-09 11:26:00 UTC
-
Superiority and Inferiority of genes, cultures, norms, traditions, information,
Superiority and Inferiority of genes, cultures, norms, traditions, information, institutions is simply empirical: the more suppression of parasitism the greater the truth, the greater the trust, the higher the velocity, the more frequent capital punishment, the better. #Trump
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-06 16:47:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/960917887614636033
-
Other Peoples cannot produce high-trust high-truth societies.Even their language
Other Peoples cannot produce high-trust high-truth societies.Even their languages impede it.This is the secret of the west, Sovereignty, Truth, Trust, Markets resulting in Eugenics. Master Races are produced by culling the bottom expanding the middle and improving the top. #Trump
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-06 16:45:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/960917408474128385