Might indivudalism represent levels of superficiality when(........)?
Might indivudalism represent levels of superficiality when using positive, negative descriptive words? Might everything be validated because it exists? There's social relevance, intellectual property that may at least partially represent an indivudals indviduality but might it represent a level of superficiality?
Might it? Thoughts?
Examples:
"Metal music is AWESOME!"
"Metal music sucks..."
Are the descpritive words really even relevant?
Might it? Thoughts?
Examples:
"Metal music is AWESOME!"
"Metal music sucks..."
Are the descpritive words really even relevant?
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
Likewise, the least important and/or luxury aspects in one's life are the generally thought ideas, because they're in the edge and haven't decided that if they add to one's being or harm the said person. The taste of music borns from there, for example, whichever genre you choose it always adds to one thing and harms another, so choice between people is almost random, hence the variety. So if one aims for a social place they build a like for techno and R&B (or other edgy genres for other social groupings) but this also affects their individualism in a negative way. And if one aims for creativity and inspirations they usually choose classical music or metal music, yet this usually ends up with hatred and irritation towards every other people that doesn't care about creativity or quality.
It's not as random but it's so detailed (for taste of music the variety source starts from goals, and this might be extended to the REASON of having determined goal and this can also be extended to one's full lifetime of behaviors) you might call it random because human mind isn't capable of thinking that convoluted.
I really enjoyed reading your insights.I think you took it even further, and it's given me more to think about. LOL which means I am going to look at your post in several different lights.
Thanks for the great response, bro.
Rather Dashing, simple but effective post, thanks for sharing.
The reason of it is that I always try approacing the problem starting from its source, yet this backfires at me in one point since I'm rarely able to come up with actual questions to answer. Unlike me you approach stuff you see around, take a subject or example, ask "Why does THAT exist?" and try to branch it out from there. Your questioning is great but you think your reasoning is not enough. I think this is why you ask such semi-philosophical questions in a forum you know that's full of different people and their opinions. Glad we help each other, though.
Anytime dawg.
Is this the reaaal life
MOMMA life had just begun....
Those are two lines I remember:D
Momma.... ooOOooo...
this part is my favorite:
anyway the wind blows, nothing really matters
PS: Sorry for double post, couldnt edit using my mobile phone's browser
Well, I think we're forgetting how to "enjoy" (y)ourselves.:p
I haven't even had sex yet...so that's one reason I won't kill myself, just one of many...:)
The concept of afterlife is something created by human's imagination in fear of his death and therefore can't be a valid truth. Even if there is an afterlife, it's something human being can't imagine (due to having nothing to base it on, realistically) - you know like they say, "Despite all the power of human imagination, no one could imagine a kangaroo". Still, the most likely scenario is that every being when dies just shuts down like a computer. Best case scenario: energy derived from it transforms into some other form of energy and sooner or later finds itself in another living being. But I'll take my chances while I'm alive as a human, thank you.
I think like it's there for ethical reasons, forcing people that can't accelerate theirselves to behave like civilized people by showing them something that they can be afraid of, alas Hell.
But yeah, it cannot be a valid truth nevertheless.
Those ethical reasons are constantly tampered with by humans themselves, kind of invalidating the reason why they should be there. For a more well-known example: the Crusades and the massacre in Jerusalem (and, well, other atrocities). All the Crusaders should've gone to Hell, but they were doing that because they knew (well, they were told by Pope himself) that they would go to Heaven regardless of what they do (heck, the more they kill - the better even! And the Pope is an emissary of God on Earth, so of course he's telling the truth...). And the nobles wanted some land to rule, of course.
Which is why I like ethnical mythologies. They're more natural than the artificially created Christianity (easily used to force one's will on believing people). And they actually represented the culture of the people, instead of trampling it. Though even then there were humans who could find how to use the beliefs to their advantage.
Well, from my standpoint, I see it like the system of "afterlife payback" was first used as an ethical brake for everyone; but then some smartpants saw that it can also be used in their favor as well so they corrupted the already-manmade-but-innocent-by-nature religion to create ease at ordering people do something. The religion wars were in the past and we also built a wayaround for such a thing to never pop up again, namely education, but it has also been exploited by such people.
Ethnical mythologies are written/portrayed rules of shared likes and dislikes of a bunch of people. I find it unnecessary and limiting, it did force every individual to act in one way and it was against individualism. I don't like ethnics or history in the end because the way I see it, there was always either a war or strategy that was always against individualism.
Well, this system's like communism - technically a good idea, but the implementation... Not the best one. Of course, it's not exploited on the scale as it was in the past. But there are still many localized exploits, so to speak. Thousands of them.
They're written NOW (well, what we know of them, anyway). At the time ethnical mythologies were a bunch of contradicting points of view on the world - so it actually was more for individualism than against it.
You'll not be responsible for my suicide, i'll make it look like Bender forcefully pushed me inside of a Suicide Booth ...
I watch Futurama on occasion. I bought the first and second season on DVD. I was watching the new season but lost track of it, don't know if it's still going now.
The new season will continue to broadcast in 2011.
Incidentally, one of the new season's episode, 'Lethal Inspection', became one of my favorite Futurama episodes - it looks into the questions of death, life and one's mortality, and the episode is both funny AND touching. And features one of my favorite endings. Spoilers, be ware.
I like The Late Phillip J. Fry more.
emotions.
Why do you live for death? You should make the most of what you know for certain you have. Live your life now. Life sucks at times, but it is also marvelous. You have access to a computer, and just by that you have a leg up in the world.
This is a claim that many people make when they've been raised in this thought process. I recall when I was still a religious individual I would make the claim that I would easily kill myself if I found out that none of it was true. I'm completely nonreligious now, and I've learned to appreciate life a lot more because of it.
If you really do have issues and such, please do go see a shrink. I'm dead serious.
Another thing, sorta a pet peeve of mine, one can't prove that there is no afterlife because you can't make an assertion out of lack of an assertion. The one that should be demonstrating proof are the ones claiming any sort of afterlife. And even then, what afterlife?
The point is, when YOU die - you WON'T know that you died. Just like you don't know that you're asleep until the last minute when dreams start pumping into your head and you weak up (death is not called eternal sleep for nothing). When YOU die, it's OTHERS who have to live with your death. It's others who will be saddened by your death, it's others who will grieve. YOU won't know or feel jack shit.
So anyone's who's complaining about the meaning of life or something - should stop doing that and start thinking about making significance in the life of other people - because THAT significance is how you will be remembered. And if you manage to make other people happy while doing what you like doing in this life while you live - if you manage to balance the selfishness with selflessness (I think that both extremes are pretty bad on their own) - that makes you a happy person, and that makes your life, whatever it is/was/will be (a life of a clerk, a game developer, an engineer, a janitor, of a simple married man/woman) worth living.
That's what I think about living and dying.