jusdeadphunky
Forum Elder
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 2222
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
 Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 5:29 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
excellent share.
truth must always be spoken to power. &
1st and foremost always be true to yourself and own conscience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I don't think people are ever false to themselves or their consciences. I think that they're just unwilling to admit to themselves and others how limited their personal autonomy is. And it's not limited because of external factors; it's limited because they want it to be limited. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lester
Forum Elder
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I have to disagree, people love to lie to themselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jusdeadphunky
Forum Elder
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 2222
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Lester wrote: | | I have to disagree, people love to lie to themselves. |
agreed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | I don't think people are ever false to themselves or their consciences. I think that they're just unwilling to admit to themselves and others how limited their personal autonomy is. And it's not limited because of external factors; it's limited because they want it to be limited. |
i think that many know it and admit it to themselves they are just flat out punks. And some people are like you say in denial.
Also people are usually not able to balance or understand which to apply of the four areas of thought: spiritual, rational, logical, and emotional
they are too easily confused. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| thelast007 wrote: | | the four areas of thought: spiritual, rational, logical, and emotional |
What sort of bullshit pseudoscience is that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | thelast007 wrote: | | the four areas of thought: spiritual, rational, logical, and emotional |
What sort of bullshit pseudoscience is that? |
just when i was starting to think you were smart...
it's common sense to those of us that common sense comes easy.
You either choose an action rooted on rationale, logic, emotion, or spirit thinking.
an example:
If someone you love ask you to borrow $50,000.
An emotional thinker will think I love them and therefore I want to lend them the money. It they are not paid back they will be emotionally hurt because they feel betrayed as a loved one or will thnk so what they are family and because of that bond they will even lend again.)
A spiritual thinker will think is it good to lend. And no matter what it is better for spiritual/ religious reasons to lend to this loved one because it is what is right in god's eyes or makes them feel better inside.
and rational thinker would lend based on the person's ability to pay the money back and not even look to consider any other options
And logical thinker considers the reason for lending the money and may or may not lend on logic. They would think logically if i lend will i have to lend again? this may be a crutch so this would not be a good thing to lend him money. or if i lend he will be able to make more money and will not have to borrow again. and based on that path of thing will lend or not lend.
(if you only consider what has already been written will you ever discover anything new exton? take your head out of a book and look at the world and observe sometime. that's what the writers did. you might even come up with an original thought one day. you never know.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brandal
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 551
Location: NC
|
| Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| hmmmmmmm......., perhaps you ARE the last 007 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| thelast007 wrote: |
it's common sense to those of us that common sense comes easy. |
You should know better than to defend yourself with the "oh but it's common knowledge!" nonsense.
| Quote: |
You either choose an action rooted on rationale, logic, emotion, or spirit thinking. |
Those are artificial divisions that we as a culture make up. In reality, actual thought shows no such divisions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | thelast007 wrote: |
it's common sense to those of us that common sense comes easy. |
You should know better than to defend yourself with the "oh but it's common knowledge!" nonsense. |
Considering you have never proven yourself to be the victor in any dialogue I have had with you I think you should know by now you will have to do better than going around the explanation of the sense. And actually address what was explained and actually makes sense by presenting something that reveals it does not make sense and is actually "stupid" as you claimed. however you have not done that.
I think the best you can do at this point is shut up or admit you should not have called it stupid without knowing the explanation. and calling something stupid before you hear the explaination is stupid in itself.
| exton wrote: | | thelast007 wrote: |
You either choose an action rooted on rationale, logic, emotion, or spirit thinking. |
Those are artificial divisions that we as a culture make up. In reality, actual thought shows no such divisions. |
Reality is relative. Who is an authority on it?
Unless you can site a study in which those four areas have been in one study as a standard of separation you cannot come to such conclusion.
(I clearly see you are officially a joke.)(please excuse the "shut up". i must shamefully admit my vocabulary is limited. i'll work on it.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| thelast007 wrote: |
I think the best you can do at this point is shut up or admit you should not have called it stupid without knowing the explanation. and calling something stupid before you hear the explaination is stupid in itself. |
You're not the first one to think along those lines. Most people, actually, think somewhere along those lines. Of course, the actual categories differ from person to person. You claim four categories; some people claim two, or three. I've never talked to someone who believed in five, but i'm sure such a person exists somewhere.
| Quote: |
| exton wrote: |
Those are artificial divisions that we as a culture make up. In reality, actual thought shows no such divisions. |
Reality is relative. Who is an authority on it? |
Irrelevent: authority is proof of nothing.
| Quote: |
Unless you can site a study in which those four areas have been in one study as a standard of separation you cannot come to such conclusion.
|
You're assuming that those "separate areas" exist independently at all, as opposed to us just (wrongly) believing that they both exist and are independent. If they don't exist separately, then you can't very well base a study on them as you propose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | thelast007 wrote: |
I think the best you can do at this point is shut up or admit you should not have called it stupid without knowing the explanation. and calling something stupid before you hear the explaination is stupid in itself. |
You're not the first one to think along those lines. Most people, actually, think somewhere along those lines. Of course, the actual categories differ from person to person. You claim four categories; some people claim two, or three. I've never talked to someone who believed in five, but i'm sure such a person exists somewhere. |
your point is...........?
| thelast007 wrote: | | exton wrote: | | exton wrote: |
Those are artificial divisions that we as a culture make up. In reality, actual thought shows no such divisions. |
Reality is relative. Who is an authority on it? |
Irrelevent: authority is proof of nothing. |
you are to supply the burden of proof as to why it is stupid. you still haven't. so i repeat you might start explaining/stating an explaination or follow the previous advice of zip your lip.
| exton wrote: | | thelast007 wrote: |
Unless you can site a study in which those four areas have been in one study as a standard of separation you cannot come to such conclusion.
|
You're assuming that those "separate areas" exist independently at all, as opposed to us just (wrongly) believing that they both exist and are independent. If they don't exist separately, then you can't very well base a study on them as you propose. |
You still can't determine nor will you know nor can you say unless you study it with those 4 factors as the basis. Supply the burden of proof as to why it is stupid.
exton just stop carrying on ridiculously and give clear reason for your statement which you wisely edited the word "stupid" out of.
You can begin like this:
That is stupid becasue___________________________
____(here is where you type the idea or reasoning that reveals why it is stupid)_____________________________________________
_________________________________________________.
we both understand the ideas already. Now you explain why it is stupid as you stupidly typed and wisely edited out or just STFU.
Last edited by thelast007 on Fri May 18, 2007 1:27 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| thelast007 wrote: | | exton wrote: |
You're not the first one to think along those lines. Most people, actually, think somewhere along those lines. Of course, the actual categories differ from person to person. You claim four categories; some people claim two, or three. I've never talked to someone who believed in five, but i'm sure such a person exists somewhere. |
your point is...........? |
You claim i stated somethign without hearing the explanation.
You are wrong.
| Quote: |
You can begin like this:
That is stupid becasue___________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________.
we both understand the ideas already. Now you explain why it is stupid |
That is stupid because: it's a poorly thought-out assumption stated as fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | thelast007 wrote: | | exton wrote: |
You're not the first one to think along those lines. Most people, actually, think somewhere along those lines. Of course, the actual categories differ from person to person. You claim four categories; some people claim two, or three. I've never talked to someone who believed in five, but i'm sure such a person exists somewhere. |
your point is...........? |
You claim i stated somethign without hearing the explanation.
You are wrong.
| Quote: |
You can begin like this:
That is stupid becasue___________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________.
we both understand the ideas already. Now you explain why it is stupid |
That is stupid because: it's a poorly thought-out assumption stated as fact. |
not an assumption. you can link all ideas to those four differnt areas.
explain why you can't? linking something is linking something.
if that is the case positive and negative thinking is stupid.
conscience and nonconscience thinking is stupid
id and non id thinking is stupid.
freud's five part personality thinking is stupid.
intelligent thinking and non intelligent thinkig is stupid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
