GENIUS FORUMS

Greetings!

I trust that here aphoristic writing is an acceptable form of philosophy. Other "philosophical" boards I have been associated with are full of tedious Mr. Magoos who are so slow and plodding that they don't even notice the movement of thought at all.

Theory and evidence - Data is not evidence. Theory bestows the halo of evidence upon data, as one christens a chair a chair by sitting upon it. But theory is built upon evidence, as one is supported by the chair. The relation is a circle, with an arc of impression and an arc of construction. The notion that evidence impresses itself upon us arises when the arc of construction is veiled, and the notion that we have any grounding or necessity on which to construct evidence arises when the arc of impression is veiled.

Without truth, the surface of this circle is frictionless; the movement of value is impossible. Without the movement of value, truth is impossible to notice -- or rather, it doesn't notice us. Truth is a hawk that only notices movement. The horrible power of its dive cause us to forget this; those who have in the past been hit the hardest are the most forgetful.

How is value and truth? How do they come about if they both require the other first?

The idea behind their function is the catalyst: A notion is simply the precognition (or retrocognition) of a value and a truth combined; only to be deciphered later in time.

The search/intent is where value arises from; the truth is their chaotic synergy.

The only way to distinguish between a good thinker and a bad thinker is by the speed of his thought: that is his only retort to the schaedenfroh birdie on his windowsill, chirping "What do you matter? What do you matter?" We cannot approach the spiritual while we are constrained by any dichotomizing idealisms. Perhaps that is all of philosophy.

The abyss between fact and value is well-hidden. Despite their symmetry, the hierarchy of truth over value is easier to problematize. -- "What is the value of truth?" "Why should we be silent on that which we cannot speak?" I see much less experience of the inverse dilemma -- people seem more content to linger on "commitment" than on "usefulness": a symptom of a decadent age. Commitment is to usefulness what the hierarchy of value over truth is to the inverse. They are equally mendacious sidesteps, redefinitions -- hiding in the pocket of a different word.

Life is not a circle -- it is a double helix. I have delimited the dimension of the spiritual: height and depth. The third dimension of life that passes through the two axes of truth and value. NOT a synthesis, but a passing through at an infinite velocity: a wholly otherwise passing through. The piercing of the interpretive circle, the leap across the abyss, the infinite logical velocity of the family resemblance. This is the spiritual.

Sighard wrote:The only way to distinguish between a good thinker and a bad thinker is by the speed of his thought...

Obviously you feel Hitler didn't think very fast

We have all been well trained to be human parrots of information brainwashed into us in school. We are trained to accept the views of others over our empirical view because, obviously, our personal take on reality is not good enough, right? Some supposed 'great philosopher' deserves more of our praise than our own personal conclusions, right? So they who brainwashed us would have us believe.

The big trick was to get us to accept ideas brainwashed into us as OUR OWN original ideas and we all fell for the trick. How many of you have ideas about reality that are AT LEAST rather original? How many of your ideas about reality are based on empirical experience rather than ideals that have been brainwashed into you? Original thinkers are the very backbone of great discoveries and are usually ridiculed by the brainwashed 'parrot' thinkers who are usually certain they are crazy.

JonathanDavies wrote: Consider what would have happened to you in school if you stood up and boldly told your science teacher: “You are teaching us the THEORY of evolution as fact. Why should I blindly believe your evidence? It is not proof. I don’t see how you are any different from organized religions. You expect us to blindly believe you on what could very well be manipulated evidence!”

C’mon. If you dared to boldly confront your science teacher in this critical thinking manner YOU FAIL!! And you would most definitely be permanently labeled a disruptive influence to their covert brainwashing.

And brainwashing it indeed is! A brainwashing that most, if not all, of you suckers have fallen for hook, line & sinker! I say you wouldn’t know a true genius even if he posting in your forum of the covertly brainwashed. True geniuses are usually only recognized as so…after they are dead

The truth is valuable to the wise. The unwittingly brainwashed by the Illuminati agenda reject any view that goes against their psychological programming. However, In your hearts YOU KNOW how you would have been treated in the Illuminati controlled scholastic system if you were a bold critical thinker of what they were trying to brainwashing you with. It would not have been pretty.

Lately, I've been reading that there were eight American presidents before George Washington. The way the Illuminati have trained the hapless drones to teach American history I would not be too surprised at all.

Supposedly, 1776 is the year the Bavarian Illuminati, under Adam Weishaupt, officially established themselves. I wouldn't be surprised AT ALL if I eventually find that year had NOTHING to do with American independence WHATSOEVER!

Eight American presidents before George Washington. Is it true? Why not ask the people who brainwashed supposed history into you in the first place. What do you think they will say, eh?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/582763/posts

So, who can you really trust today? I was shocked to find this out about Michael Richards (Kramer) who recently screamed the ‘N’ word at a comedy club:

"Personal life

Richards is a Freemason and also a 33° member of the Scottish Rite. He has been very active in preservation of Masonic research."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Richards

*I imagine it takes a lot of study and work to get this high up in the Illuminati Scottish Rite Freemasons. He must have been working at it all those years while filming Seinfeld.

So, what is the real “value” of what was presented to us as “fact” in the Illuminati created scholastic system? What exactly should we blindly trust from what they brainwashed us to believe, eh?

"Cosmic" Kramer?

JonathanDavies:

Does your personality make any difference as to whether or not a statement is true? Of course not. A conclusion cannot be both true and personal. You and the rest of your conspiracy theorist ilk reek of confusion and desperation.