If a chick wants to wear make up...that's her meaning...why beat her up for it?
there are sooo many things wrong with this sentence, frank . . . .
What would cause a women to think her features need enhanced or covered-up? -- that, the less of what's ordinarily there, the better. What would make a female do this? There's more up under this than whatever. You should be basing your value judgment on what's up underneath all this.
What do you think in general, you know as a human, of this sort of project as one of meaning for any human being? For shitsake, frank, who wishes such a project as this for any human being as their meaning ?
And, weirdly, you can get a lot smell out of words by their context. I can listen to "cunt and bitch and sheep and slit" and stuff just fine, depending on the surrounding thinking, but your chicks and your prior gals sends up a real puff of attitude that doesn't even recognize itself yet.
Frank - whoever you are - that is the best summation of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer I've ever seen. -And your post is about the only radiantly beautiful piece of intelligence I've seen on-line in years. Thank you.
Otherwise, you have to mount an argument for the general human impulse to stay ignorant; make that look better than awareness and thinking and the valuing of truth over comfort.
As Frank says, truth is something you make up. Even in science it has a short half-life - so make up what you will. If you want to call general curiosity and thinking 'ENLIGHTENMENT,' well then, good for you. If you want to think women are stupid cunts, good for you. I'm not against people thinking and being creative - I just don't put a special term to it or think it has a final conclusion that separates one person from all others.
You can create your own reality by projecting goodness, then a fundamentalist Islamic group who hates your society sends a man strapped full of explosives to an event you and your entire family are attending...and puts a damper on your "truth".
If you deny that there's absolute truth, that you can create your own truth, then you're saying that the absolute truth is that you create your own truth. You negate yourself.
The absolute truth is what is always true. You think there's no truth in this world? Step outside and pick up a blade of grass. Drop it. It will always go back down to the ground again. The fact that you cannot change it by willing it proves that there is truth which you need to realize. This is simpler than simple! Anyone who denies that absolute truth exists needs to begin thinking NOW. This is supposed to be the most advanced stage of the human race, and people still think that nothing is true?
Well then how did you come about? There's no cause for you? It blows my mind to think of no truth...because there always must be truth. Anything that IS, IS truth.
unwise, don't assume you know everything. You look at everyone's ideas as if they aren't up to your level, whereas your ideas are probably the lowest level I've seen in a while. Humble yourself and don't come back to philosophy for another couple of years.
Hearing someone proclaim himself to be enlightened because he says so is like believing Frank Jones is Napoleon notwithstanding he's in the mental ward.
I am in agreement with you that blind faith isn't the smartest attribute to have. But there's a difference between passing everything by, and experimenting with ideas. On one hand, you shun every kind of learning and you stay with your knowledge of the world. Lets say you believe the earth is flat, because that's generally your experience. You hear about the world being round and doubt it, because it'd initially take some belief. So you remain ignorant.
On the other hand, if you approach new ideas with caution but allow yourself to test them out, you can become very smart. You would listen to the man telling you the world is round, and you'd soon find out how stupid you were.
So doubting someone's claims is good. Of course it's not logically sensible to just believe someone who says they're enlightened. It's good you don't. But it's really bad for you that you don't see for yourself what the person's talking about.
The path to wisdom is a combination of faith and doubt.
And frank...you may invent your meaning, but what invented YOU? You aren't God, and don't pretend to be. You're a speck of a human, living for a speck of time. You're hardly anything and you think you have as much power as to control this world, and to create truth?
Sschula - Isn't it the duty of a true philosopher as yourself to help those of us who do not see the light? Why ask me to leave?
You said a very clever thing that clever philosophers say when you pointed out that my disbelief in universal truth is itself a declaration of ultimate truth. Maybe I can clarify - I only believe in what seems true to me - and this can change with time as it has many times. As far as I can tell I am dreaming you and this world. Perhaps I am making it all up because I have noticed that I do the same thing at night when I am asleep....people appear, cities, cars, merchants, philosophers.....etc. Since you cannot prove to me that you exist outside of my dream, I can only take my own experience to be important and the basis of my opinions. I believe myself that the world is round, but it may be spherical (edit: I mean elliptical), egg-shaped or distorted in some way. My opinion will change as new experience comes in.
Last edited by unwise on Sat May 13, 2006 12:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
As Fred said we are free to Construct our own 'Meaning Mansions'....
As Fred said why, like the Nihilists, construct a 'Mansion of Despair...'
If a chick wants to wear make up...that's her meaning...why beat her up for it?
Meaning is relative...subjective.
It's up to you.
You won't find Absolute Truth.
And the thing about Your Meaning...You are Making it up..
Get the Joke?
You're evidently not seeing the contradictions in what you are saying here.
For example, you started off stating what you think is the absolute truth - namely, that all meaning is subjective. This is your perception of "the way things are". Everyone creates their own meaning. This, in your view, is absolutely and unshakeably true.
So for you to then turn around and say there is no absolute truth is laughable.
Secondly, the idea that we create our own meaning (which I agree with) doesn't have any implications for the issue of whether Truth exists or not. To me, knowing the Truth is extremely meaningful. I love knowing it and I love sharing this knowledge with others. Other people don't find this very meaningful, which is fair enough. Even though the Truth is absolutely real, the valuing of it is subjective.
I'm not sure why "unwise" is all excited about your post. All you've done is regurgitate the standard postmodernist dogma. She must have heard it a thousand times before, surely. It literally makes me want to sleep I've heard it so many times. It's like listening to a dull priest in a pulpit drone on and on.
Having said that, I always love the sight of a postmodernist laughing at religion. It really tickles my fancy and makes me want to collapse into mirth. The irony of it is just too much. It's like watching Anglicans laughing at Catholics for believing in God. Priceless.
Sschula - Isn't it the duty of a true philosopher as yourself to help those of us who do not see the light? Why ask me to leave?
I don't have any duty. I do seem to like showing people about philosophy, though. I don't know if there's some commandment written in stone saying that anyone who finds enlightenment needs to help others find it. In fact, if someone were to deeply uncover it initially, they would be of no help to anyone else because without some delusion, there's no way for a sage to feel compassion for the seeker's suffering. Without delusion in the philosopher's mind, there's no way for them to even recognize that there ARE seekers. Luckily for you, I have delusion and I enjoy talking about finding truth.
I asked you to leave because I think that being in the world for some time after meeting with a true philosopher is essential to absorbing and integrating the truth of philosophy. I think that if you stay here, without changing the state you're in, you won't understand the truth that's typed out here. It helps if you go and think about it, while you do the things you do in your everyday existence....going to clubs and dancing, attending business meetings, going to church on Sunday...whatever you do. Slowly but surely, the seeds of wisdom take root and begin to sprout.
It's nothing magical or anything...that's just the way it works. It probably has a lot to do with psychology.
I only believe in what seems true to me - and this can change with time as it has many times.
What causes those changes?
As far as I can tell I am dreaming you and this world. Perhaps I am making it all up because I have noticed that I do the same thing at night when I am asleep....people appear, cities, cars, merchants, philosophers.....etc. Since you cannot prove to me that you exist outside of my dream, I can only take my own experience to be important and the basis of my opinions. I believe myself that the world is round, but it may be spherical, egg-shaped or distorted in some way. My opinion will change as new experience comes in.
I'm not trying to convince you that I exist outside of your dream. To do so would be to lead you into delusions upon delusions. I'm trying to convince you that in order for a dream to exist, reality must exist in the first place. What could possibly cause a dream, but real things?
Perhaps you're actually sleeping on a bed, dreaming of me typing these words to you. When you wake up, I may become a faint memory you have...very miniscule and unimportant in your daily life. You could sit up, walk around, have breakfast, take a shit, go to work, etc....and really, what would I, this silly philosopher in one of your dreams matter? You may as well believe the same about me in waking life.
If this is a dream, then in waking life you will still be comprised of a body...you may still have emotions and thoughts...all of which APPEAR to your mind. You identify and label each thing, in that waking life after you wake up from this. Yet what I'm saying is that your waking life, in which you recognize things, is a mirage. It's a brief expression of the universe, which will change no matter how hard you try to hold onto it.
Knowing this, analyze yourself and see that you aren't at all the same as you were when you were born. And you will die. How can you even call yourself "me" when that thing is constantly something else? You said yourself that you're always changing your opinions. Well, what are YOU? What is it that says, "I want a piece of candy"? What is it that's wanting the piece of candy? You? When that desire leaves, where are you?
You can call the changing body yourself, but when it dies and is buried in the ground and changes into soil, are you still that? At what time is "you" no longer you? Before you were born, when you were in your mother and father as an egg and sperm...and before that, before they were born...were you there?
You cannot create truth. You can't look at things and place your point of view on it, hoping that by doing so it will correlate with your point of view. Because what are you? You're a mirage. You're a delusion to yourself.
I hope that you understand what I'm saying, and realize that there is a permanent truth called reality. We live in it, and it's pretty easy to begin understanding. Look on David Quinn's website and read Wisdom of the Infinite. All of what I'm saying now comes from that book.
You said a very clever thing that clever philosophers say when you pointed out that my disbelief in universal truth is itself a declaration of ultimate truth. Maybe I can clarify - I only believe in what seems true to me - and this can change with time as it has many times.
If you don't know whether it is true or not, then why proclaim it to others as though it were true? Isn't this being dishonest? Aren't you scared that you may be misleading them?
As far as I can tell I am dreaming you and this world. Perhaps I am making it all up because I have noticed that I do the same thing at night when I am asleep....people appear, cities, cars, merchants, philosophers.....etc. Since you cannot prove to me that you exist outside of my dream, I can only take my own experience to be important and the basis of my opinions. I believe myself that the world is round, but it may be spherical, egg-shaped or distorted in some way. My opinion will change as new experience comes in.
What qualifies a truth as being "true" is that, once discovered, it can never change over time. It doesn't matter what experience will bring in the future, the truth in question will always be unchallenged.
An obvious example is the truth that everything we experience is finite and limited in extent. In other words, any kind of experience that we have is always an experience of a finite phenomena of some sort - e.g. trees, clouds, space, other people, feelings, thoughts, etc. Each of these things has a limited form in the sense that they don't constitute the totality of all there is. They have boundaries and are distinguishable from other things.
This is a truth which is always true, regardless of whether we are dreaming our experiences or not. And it will always remain true, no matter what our future experiences will be. In short, it is absolutely true.
There isn't any misogyny on this board, apart from what the likes of you and suergaz bring with you. Could there be a more misogynistic act than trapping a woman in the emotional bonds of marriage? It's hard to think of one.
I remember suergaz being obsessed with marriage the last time he was here - and still so, it seems. His hatred of women must be immense. He won't feel content until he manages to tie one down completely.
Personally, I'm all for freeing women from their lowly state and helping them become more conscious and wise. My whole life is based around this aim. But its very difficult to accomplish because most men just want keep women down in their place and have them remain frozen in the form of nice, attractive marriage partners. How selfish and hateful is that?
Misogyny is 'hatred of woman/women'. I could have simply said I don't sympathise with misanthropy, but women and 'woman' seem to be in question at genius forum. You have admitted to a pathological hatred of women. What do you remember me saying of marriage and what are you suggesting it has to do with this matter? You're not trying to say I'm 'pro-marriage' are you? Are you angry that intelligent women see right through you?!
You have admitted to a pathological hatred of women.
Didn't they teach you irony at school?
What do you remember me saying of marriage and what are you suggesting it has to do with this matter? You're not trying to say I'm 'pro-marriage' are you?
Maybe I'm confusing you with someone else, but I seem to remember you getting excited a number of times at the thought of marriage. Perhaps you have grown out of this phase?
Are you angry that intelligent women see right through you?!
Most of them would have to out of sheer self-defence, wouldn't they? They don't identify with the non-womanly part of themselves, and don't have the desire to develop it and use it for spiritual purposes. They are firmly locked into the concept of being a woman. It is in their interests to nullify the philosopher of wisdom. And men, smitten by pussy, gladly help them do it.
Not all intelligent woman are like this, thankfully. So I still hold out some hope for the female species.
Dave, I realize you were joking when you wrote of your pathological hatred of women, but such a joke demands a little more (joking) does it not?
I remember writing on marriage. It's possible you're confusing me with another.
Most of them would have to out of sheer self-defence, wouldn't they? They don't identify with the non-womanly part of themselves, and don't have the desire to develop it and use it for spiritual purposes. They are firmly locked into the concept of being a woman. It is in their interests to nullify the philosopher of wisdom. And men, smitten by pussy, gladly help them do it.
Not all intelligent woman are like this, thankfully. So I still hold out some hope for the female species.
What is a philosopher if not of wisdom? The superfluity here always astounded me (to be generous in expression). Ultimate reality, absolute truth, well why not philosophy of wisdom. Thrilling. Let's reinvent the language as though we'd lost it. The concept of being a woman, or a man for that matter, locks one down to nothing more than the certainty of sex. If one is nullified by sex, one has effectively been conquered by it.
I agree that a philosopher can really only ever be a philosopher of wisdom. But the world thinks differently. It calls the pedantic crossword obsessives in universities "philosophers", so one is forced to to come up with a different label.
I also agree that if one is nullified by sex, one has effectively been conquered by it. But in the case of most women, no conquering has ever taken place. This is because most women never try to go beyond being a woman. The idea doesn't even occur to them. Striving to be a successful woman is all they are ever interested in. It is literally a fulltime occupation.
I see no future in pursuing hermaphroditism.
Nor do I. The goal should to be go beyond both man and woman altogether. But one does need to be highly-masculine to make this happen.
You're evidently not seeing the contradictions in what you are saying here.
For example, you started off stating what you think is the absolute truth - namely, that all meaning is subjective. This is your perception of "the way things are". Everyone creates their own meaning. This, in your view, is absolutely and unshakeably true.
So for you to then turn around and say there is no absolute utside truth is laughable.
You keep 'chuckin' your script at me Dave'...without properly reading what I say...can you wash your Fixed Ideas from your sleepy eyes and go read it again...
You can create your own reality by projecting goodness, then a fundamentalist Islamic group who hates your society sends a man strapped full of explosives to an event you and your entire family are attending...and puts a damper on your "truth".
Yes, 2 Competing 'Relative Truths'....what's new?
Frank - whoever you are - that is the best summation of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer I've ever seen. -And your post is about the only radiantly beautiful piece of intelligence I've seen on-line in years. Thank you.
I share your Excitement and Joy 'unwise'....our Hearts are yet to be poisoned....you and me can build and live in our lovely Meaning Mansions ...we are Literary Philosophers...Meaning Makers 'spinning' delightful structures...
Our Meaning is our Invention...our Craft...it's all we have...
And the Forms we 'spin' lack inherent existence...Time returns them to nothingness....and this does not despair us for it's not the beautiful forms we spin that 'sings our Hearts'...but the freedom to spin...
Step outside and pick up a blade of grass. Drop it. It will always go back down to the ground again.
Put the same blade of grass under an electron microscope after you're over the fun of seeing it blowin' in the wind..
Perhaps your brain is 'wired' to 'see' a blade of grass...you keep thinking appearances are real...
I agree that a philosopher can really only ever be a philosopher of wisdom. But the world thinks differently. It calls the pedantic crossword obsessives in universities "philosophers", so one is forced to to come up with a different label.
Forced? Ones meaning can and will be made clear in context. The world doesn't think, it prefers to believe. Be thankful it desires! Impatience with the world, or with language, are not the best tools to change the world with.
I also agree that if one is nullified by sex, one has effectively been conquered by it. But in the case of most women, no conquering has ever taken place. This is because most women never try to go beyond being a woman. The idea doesn't even occur to them. Striving to be a successful woman is all they are ever interested in. It is literally a fulltime occupation.
Most men don't strive to be more than a 'successful' man either, why the focus on women?
suergaz:I see no future in pursuing hermaphroditism.
David: Nor do I. The goal should to be go beyond both man and woman altogether. But one does need to be highly-masculine to make this happen.
I see no reason to go beyond the sexes. Nor do I undertsand how this could be at all possible without death.
you and me can build and live in our lovely Meaning Mansions
Why are you here, then?
Put the same blade of grass under an electron microscope after you're over the fun of seeing it blowin' in the wind..
What would that do? Prove that nothing is true, and you make up your own reality? I doubt that you could make up a million tiny smilie faces in the eye piece of that microscope. Perhaps on LSD, or with a horribly strong imagination. What would that accomplish, though?
Prove to me that you create your own reality. I dare you to. I'll tear it down.
Perhaps your brain is 'wired' to 'see' a blade of grass...you keep thinking appearances are real...
Of course my brain is wired to see a blade of grass, when there's a blade of grass in front of me. If it wasn't wired that way, how could I be typing here? I'd be pretty stupid if I couldn't recognize a blade of grass.
The more I examine something, the more it tends to disappear into nothingness as though it does not really exist. The more I look into a 'fact' the more unreal and untrue it seems to me. Yes, I must be dreaming, all the time. In this dream time itself becomes confused in synchronicity - cause and effect are disturbed. Drop a blade of grass? All sorts of things can happen. Am I in an elevator, a plane, a spaceship? From what planet should I drop the blade of grass and observe? Is the grass green? Is this a universal truth?
If there is anything that seems real to ME - and I make no case for anyone else - it is that the 'I' part seems consistent. There is someone who exists - or is dreaming. Yet, on the other-hand, the sense of 'me' is extinguished when I sleep soundly. So it goes back to nothing also.
You say things happen one item at a time, but I have heard of all sorts of experiences with people on drugs or some people who are wired so that they hear sounds when they eat or colors when they hear. This is a bizzaro world, man.
The more I examine something, the more it tends to disappear into nothingness as though it does not really exist. The more I look into a 'fact' the more unreal and untrue it seems to me.
Give me some examples.
Yes, I must be dreaming, all the time. In this dream time itself becomes confused in synchronicity - cause and effect are disturbed.
How are cause and effect disturbed?
Drop a blade of grass? All sorts of things can happen. Am I in an elevator, a plane, a spaceship? From what planet should I drop the blade of grass and observe? Is the grass green? Is this a universal truth?
Dropping a blade of grass to see that it will fall was basically just me trying to relate to someone who doesn't understand any truth. I was mostly aiming that one at frank. You, on the other hand, seem to be a little stronger minded than that little feather.
Universal truths definitely exist, and I see you are searching for them. You mistake this dreaming idea for a universal truth. It isn't, because you can't even tell if you're dreaming or awake. It's a possibility, but that's all it is.
If there is anything that seems real to ME - and I make no case for anyone else - it is that the 'I' part seems consistent. There is someone who exists - or is dreaming. Yet, on the other-hand, the sense of 'me' is extinguished when I sleep soundly. So it goes back to nothing also.
I know what you mean. It seems like the only thing that's consistent is your self. If you truly believe that you are a universal truth, that if you're dreaming this world and you are the most real thing here, then I suggest you search for what it is exactly you are.
In your daily life, when you think "I like pudding", think about what exactly likes pudding. If you get angry, and you say "I'm PISSED!" What's pissed? Who is pissed? Can you point at it? Does "it" exist at all?
You say things happen one item at a time, but I have heard of all sorts of experiences with people on drugs or some people who are wired so that they hear sounds when they eat or colors when they hear. This is a bizzaro world, man.
Clearly, I am making all of this up.
Yeah, some people are poorly wired. Luckily, you seem to experience the world like most other people. That's what philosophy is designed for...you. Not a person who tastes the color blue, because their neural pathways are messed up.
Check out the link I gave, and think about it. I don't think I'm a good enough person to talk to about all of this.
The more I examine something, the more it tends to disappear into nothingness as though it does not really exist. The more I look into a 'fact' the more unreal and untrue it seems to me.
If a "fact" becomes unreal when you look more closely at it, then it wasn't really a fact to begin with. Rather, it was an illusion.
A fact is unshakeable and unchallengable by definition, no matter how closely you look at it.
Yes, I must be dreaming, all the time. In this dream time itself becomes confused in synchronicity - cause and effect are disturbed. Drop a blade of grass? All sorts of things can happen. Am I in an elevator, a plane, a spaceship? From what planet should I drop the blade of grass and observe? Is the grass green? Is this a universal truth?
None of this matters, as every experience is a direct manifestation of Reality itself, regardless of whether we are dreaming or not.
You need to go a little deeper with your thought here. At the moment, you are only stopping halfway.
You say things happen one item at a time, but I have heard of all sorts of experiences with people on drugs or some people who are wired so that they hear sounds when they eat or colors when they hear. This is a bizzaro world, man.
I didn't say that things happen one item at a time. Rather, I said that all we ever experience is finite phenomena. A drugged-out person hearing colours or seeing sounds is no differnet. The sounds and colours he experiences are still finite phenomena.
Again, there isn't an experience under the sun that can possibly challenge this truth. It is impregnable.
This is a bizzaro world, man.
It's not as bizarre as you are wanting it to be.
Truth does exist and facts are real. It would be unwise of you to ignore this.
DQ: You're evidently not seeing the contradictions in what you are saying here.
For example, you started off stating what you think is the absolute truth - namely, that all meaning is subjective. This is your perception of "the way things are". Everyone creates their own meaning.
So for you to then turn around and say there is no absolute truth is laughable.
f: You keep 'chuckin' your script at me Dave'...without properly reading what I say...can you wash your Fixed Ideas from your sleepy eyes and go read it again...
Why do you persistently call every view you disagree with a "script"? It makes you sound dismissive and close-minded.
I had another read of your post and my opinion hasn't changed. You said, in essence, that everyone creates their own meaning and that there is no absolute truth. It's still poppycock.
You can create your own reality by projecting goodness, then a fundamentalist Islamic group who hates your society sends a man strapped full of explosives to an event you and your entire family are attending...and puts a damper on your "truth".
Yes, 2 Competing 'Relative Truths'....what's new?
These are really just competing world-views, not relative truths. At bottom, there isn't any such thing as a relative truth. There is only absolute truth, which is true in all possible worlds, and illusion. Nothing else.
unwise: Frank - whoever you are - that is the best summation of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer I've ever seen. -And your post is about the only radiantly beautiful piece of intelligence I've seen on-line in years. Thank you.
f: I share your Excitement and Joy 'unwise'....our Hearts are yet to be poisoned....you and me can build and live in our lovely Meaning Mansions ...we are Literary Philosophers...Meaning Makers 'spinning' delightful structures...
Our Meaning is our Invention...our Craft...it's all we have...
And the Forms we 'spin' lack inherent existence...Time returns them to nothingness....and this does not despair us for it's not the beautiful forms we spin that 'sings our Hearts'...but the freedom to spin...
And thus truth has no place in your world. Truth would only hamper your freedom to spin delightful fantasy-worlds.
How are you different from the fundamentalist Christian who also rejects truth for the sake of living in a fantasy world?
Prove to me that you create your own reality. I dare you to. I'll tear it down.
I 'grab' some meaning out of thin air to support my structure.
I like what the poster 'bert' says about this.
Bert says 'Word is Bond'.
That 'structural' statement supports my meaning.
It then becomes I DO what I SAY.
I SAY 'Good, Wise Family Man' is a great possibility for me.
I then DO 'Good, Wise Family Man' to the best of my ability.
I SAY Musician (as a hobby) is a great possibility for me.
I then DO Music to the best of my ability.
I can't see how you can tear it down unless you kill me.
Word is Bond...gets the desired Meaning 'out there'...the Beauty of the Form of course is dependant on factors like Talent...co-operation from Others...
I SAY 'Good, Wise Family Man' is a great possibility for me.
I then DO 'Good, Wise Family Man' to the best of my ability.
I SAY Musician (as a hobby) is a great possibility for me.
I then DO Music to the best of my ability.
This is a philosophy forum, not your mum’s kitchen! This stuff might impress her, but it sounds very much like plagiarism to me: as it sounds very similar to, “I think I can, I think I can†said The Little Engine That Could.
* * *
I’ve got a new mantra for you to try: Thinking is important.
One could say I'm a misogynist, but I doubt a misogynist would walk into a Coyote Ugly bar and feel pity for the souls of the female dancers/bartenders.
The problem with having feelings for women, even pity, is that these very feelings are a direct cause of women being trapped in womanhood. When a man has any emotional attachment to Woman: love, hate, pity, delight, desire, respect, etc., these emotions create the circumstances that women exist in. Ceasing to feel anything for women means that they can become free.
Women are the worst misogynists. Before a man will degrade her, she'll degrade herself. She'll apply face paint, put chemicals in her hair, flatten it with hot metal, put on jeans which accent the place she poops from, wear shirts that are low (as to attract men to her milk sacks), put on torture shoes (aka high heels). Her body is a prison which she constantly adds more bars to.
It is impossible for a woman to be a misogynist, since that would require her having a static idea of what Woman is, which she hasn't. Also, misogyny comes from fear, and women fear nothing. “Go with the flowâ€, is Woman’s motto. The ‘flow’ comes directly from the minds of men into women. So if the ‘flow’ at the moment is for women to look as you describe above, then they will do it with gusto. If the ‘flow’ is veils and potato sacks, then you’ll see women of all ages, shapes and sizes walking down the street wearing just that. Oh, and would they feel degraded by wearing such a costume? Not on your life! Women are in the male-slave business, they don’t need ideals like integrity – they’re happy to let men play at that.
We, as a world culture, need to stop being taught and learn to start thinking. While it is kind of scary to assume that the human race could end with the onslaught of wisdom (due to people quitting relationships), it's also kind of scary to think about the consequences of maintaining stupidity.
“Quitting relationships†is a great idea if you truly love women, and sadly, the only men who express this love, are philosophers. Of course, it is a natural consequence of understanding Nature that you also understand Woman. Knowing that womanhood is not the true Reality of woman, philosophers are able to release her from this burden by releasing her from their own minds.
There is some work to be done.
Yes, for the survival of our species, Woman must be eradicated from the mind of man.
The problem with having feelings for women, even pity, is that these very feelings are a direct cause of women being trapped in womanhood. When a man has any emotional attachment to Woman: love, hate, pity, delight, desire, respect, etc., these emotions create the circumstances that women exist in. Ceasing to feel anything for women means that they can become free.
I agree that if you feel nothing for women they can become free, but I don't agree that feeling pity for women keeps them trapped. If the pity came from delusion, such as feeling pity towards a woman who isn't beautiful, that will only keep her trapped. However, if I feel pity coming from the truth, it may set her free. If I look at her, and see only components of makeup, flesh, hairspray, ignorance....and point out what she is to her, it may cause her to realize the truth.
I do realize, though, that my feelings of pity aren't based on absolute truth. In truth, there is only a mirage of a soulless woman dancing on a bar in a tank top...and a mirage of my pity for her.
It is impossible for a woman to be a misogynist, since that would require her having a static idea of what Woman is, which she hasn't.
You're right. In order to hate something, you must recognize it.
Also, misogyny comes from fear, and women fear nothing.
On the other hand, I think women fear a lot of things.
“Go with the flowâ€, is Woman’s motto. The ‘flow’ comes directly from the minds of men into women. So if the ‘flow’ at the moment is for women to look as you describe above, then they will do it with gusto. If the ‘flow’ is veils and potato sacks, then you’ll see women of all ages, shapes and sizes walking down the street wearing just that. Oh, and would they feel degraded by wearing such a costume? Not on your life! Women are in the male-slave business, they don’t need ideals like integrity – they’re happy to let men play at that.
You're almost right. No one likes suffering, though. No one likes to be a loner, or dumped by another person, or told that they're useless. A person can pretend to not care, and seem as if they have no fear. They can go on with their pointless lives, going to bars at night, going to church on Sunday, going to work all day...but I guarantee they'll be thinking about it, and trying to come up with ways to overcome it.
It's just that with women, something magical happens that cause them to rarely seek out the actual way to relieving their suffering. They just think "I'll drink more...I'll pray more...I'll work harder." Same with men. None of us like to feel crappy; none of us like to not know the way out.
I am positive that no one in this world is content. Everyone seeks a way out, whether they show it or not. It may be subtle, and seem as if they don't even care. Just look at how hard some people work, though. What are they escaping, with their smiles and enthusiasm? Look at the way women pretty themselves up...what are they avoiding by doing so?
On some level, I'm betting they know exactly what it is. And I'm also betting they want the promises of enlightenment.
“Quitting relationships†is a great idea if you truly love women, and sadly, the only men who express this love, are philosophers. Of course, it is a natural consequence of understanding Nature that you also understand Woman. Knowing that womanhood is not the true Reality of woman, philosophers are able to release her from this burden by releasing her from their own minds.
Personally I've found it tough. It's easy to think of the truth throughout the day, but it's hard to make yourself not be attracted to what you're attracted to. It's easy to stay out of relationships, but hard to stop thinking about women in that light. It's hard to make your philosophy perfect...it's hard to attain yoga.
