Sympathy is the seat of justice.
Anonymous asked: do you ever, like, man, get torched?
i smoke weed on occasion. weed smokes me on occasion.
A cup of Kenton:: You're a huge douche.
You’re mistaken. I may come off as on. Because people go shit crazy over things I post on tumblr, but I’m not. Odds are, if you’re saying this, you don’t actually know me. Recently it’s because I argued with a guy who was outstandingly incorrect, but people still found his shrouded-nothing to be…
i agree with you about the alexander mcqueen thing.
You ever get stoned, man?
You kidding. Every day. I need it. I’m not happy without it. I have no real character.
This is logical.
disco
I feel the same way about disco as I do herpes.
Binge Thinking: woe is me
…Who are you? You are so deep and … deep.
i am you and i am me and i am she and i am he. shall we not focus on what separates us and rather focus on what we share? we are a collective conscious, in our most fundamental state. our very existence is evidence that our consciousness…
Wow. I can’t tell you how much bullshit this is. But what the hell, I’ll do it anyway. We’re humans because we’re separate. We don’t transcend our nature. We aren’t a collective. You’d give more credit to bees, and ants, I’d think. Everyone, however, is afraid of separateness, hopefully that’s the case with you, and you’re not just rambling nonsense. It’s funny that you mention that we’re collective in our most fundamental state, because that’s when we’re least collective. Humans as humans. We share, either to gain back, or strengthen our moral economy. We have the potential to think beyond ourselves, sure, to conceptualize tomorrow, to remember yesterday, and to visualize our own death. But we can’t escape it. We aren’t this everlasting collective you pulled out of your ass. We’re deniers of our own nature. We like to think we’ll live forever, but we won’t. We attach ourselves to symbols, like a flag, or a cross, and that helps us cope, but only because we need to, because we have to deny it, repress the notion all together. And we know that to repress doesn’t mean to simply put away, and forget where. It means to exert constant effort to keep it down. We aren’t like fish who let our “friends” die and float to the surface, or hell, then maybe eat them. We bury our dead. Not because we’re a collective, but because we praise the individual, the hero. So keep rambling. Someone will believe it. But art isn’t just a lie. It’s a lie that tells the truth. And yours, I’m sorry to say, is empty of it. You blatantly contradict yourself “abstraction, and perception” as if you yourself don’t even know what you’re saying. Which, frankly, I’m quite ready to believe. Let’s hope this second part is a joke. Because I thought your first post in this thread had some merit. I even let out a chuckle. But the rest, is just, half-well decorated nothing.
my response was simply intended to spark thought and reflection. i consider myself a novice in the philosophy, but my contention was to outline the basic premises of Phenomenology, something which i have briefly learned about. founded by edmund husserl, it studies phenomena in terms of a “collective conscious.” i’m not saying it is valid, i just believe in the value of exposing people to other schools of thought in order to provoke contemplation. it’s essential to analyze ideas, especially ideas as abstract as consciousness, from all points of view, whether or not you agree with it. that, i hope, you will concede.
oh, and you forgot to cite ernest becker in your rant. give credit where it is due.
More Zilboorg than Becker. Oh and you forgot capitalization and a metric ass-load of commas, but then that’s semantics. I’ll end with this: “Dude, 2+2 is 3” “No, actually 2+2 is 4.” “Yeah, but I wanted to expose you to the idea that 2+2 is 3. And besides, you weren’t the person that first decided that 2+2 is 4, so hmph!”
actually, i have used commas correctly. you, after perusing your blog, seem to misunderstand their function. but yes, you got me on the capitalization! i really need to watch out for that! its really unintentional! i love your quote, though. seriously. that kind of discourse and argument leads to productivity and progress. its the basis of knowledge, or at least nuances in knowledge. do you not agree?
Actually it’s just a summary of why you’re an idiot. And again with semantics… Whose to say you’re allowed to be “intentionally” incorrect and I’m not. (Even though not capitalizing is nothing but incorrect, while commas suggest pacing and inner voice, but sure, whatever floats your boat).
Now, I have no Idea who you are, so don’t think that I care what your opinion is of me. But you’re just so wrong, that I had to speak up. The argument ended a few posts ago. Now we’ve devolved into discussing things of non-issue. It’s a bit annoying. Can’t you go lick your wounds, light a joint, and talk about how you’re the walrus, the eggman, somewhere else? Or do you really have something to prove to someone you chose to remain anonymous to? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not asking you to reblog the answers to these questions… capishe?
rationalizing a post riddled with comma splices as a more accurate depiction of your “pacing” and “inner voice” does not make up for the fact that it is grammatically incorrect. grammar is a set system for a reason.
Binge Thinking: woe is me
…Who are you? You are so deep and … deep.
i am you and i am me and i am she and i am he. shall we not focus on what separates us and rather focus on what we share? we are a collective conscious, in our most fundamental state. our very existence is evidence that our consciousness…
Wow. I can’t tell you how much bullshit this is. But what the hell, I’ll do it anyway. We’re humans because we’re separate. We don’t transcend our nature. We aren’t a collective. You’d give more credit to bees, and ants, I’d think. Everyone, however, is afraid of separateness, hopefully that’s the case with you, and you’re not just rambling nonsense. It’s funny that you mention that we’re collective in our most fundamental state, because that’s when we’re least collective. Humans as humans. We share, either to gain back, or strengthen our moral economy. We have the potential to think beyond ourselves, sure, to conceptualize tomorrow, to remember yesterday, and to visualize our own death. But we can’t escape it. We aren’t this everlasting collective you pulled out of your ass. We’re deniers of our own nature. We like to think we’ll live forever, but we won’t. We attach ourselves to symbols, like a flag, or a cross, and that helps us cope, but only because we need to, because we have to deny it, repress the notion all together. And we know that to repress doesn’t mean to simply put away, and forget where. It means to exert constant effort to keep it down. We aren’t like fish who let our “friends” die and float to the surface, or hell, then maybe eat them. We bury our dead. Not because we’re a collective, but because we praise the individual, the hero. So keep rambling. Someone will believe it. But art isn’t just a lie. It’s a lie that tells the truth. And yours, I’m sorry to say, is empty of it. You blatantly contradict yourself “abstraction, and perception” as if you yourself don’t even know what you’re saying. Which, frankly, I’m quite ready to believe. Let’s hope this second part is a joke. Because I thought your first post in this thread had some merit. I even let out a chuckle. But the rest, is just, half-well decorated nothing.
my response was simply intended to spark thought and reflection. i consider myself a novice in the philosophy, but my contention was to outline the basic premises of Phenomenology, something which i have briefly learned about. founded by edmund husserl, it studies phenomena in terms of a “collective conscious.” i’m not saying it is valid, i just believe in the value of exposing people to other schools of thought in order to provoke contemplation. it’s essential to analyze ideas, especially ideas as abstract as consciousness, from all points of view, whether or not you agree with it. that, i hope, you will concede.
oh, and you forgot to cite ernest becker in your rant. give credit where it is due.
More Zilboorg than Becker. Oh and you forgot capitalization and a metric ass-load of commas, but then that’s semantics. I’ll end with this: “Dude, 2+2 is 3” “No, actually 2+2 is 4.” “Yeah, but I wanted to expose you to the idea that 2+2 is 3. And besides, you weren’t the person that first decided that 2+2 is 4, so hmph!”
actually, i have used commas correctly. you, after perusing your blog, seem to misunderstand their function. but yes, you got me on the capitalization! i really need to watch out for that! its really unintentional! i love your quote, though. seriously. that kind of discourse and argument leads to productivity and progress. its the basis of knowledge, or at least nuances in knowledge. do you not agree?
Binge Thinking: woe is me
…Who are you? You are so deep and … deep.
i am you and i am me and i am she and i am he. shall we not focus on what separates us and rather focus on what we share? we are a collective conscious, in our most fundamental state. our very existence is evidence that our consciousness…
Wow. I can’t tell you how much bullshit this is. But what the hell, I’ll do it anyway. We’re humans because we’re separate. We don’t transcend our nature. We aren’t a collective. You’d give more credit to bees, and ants, I’d think. Everyone, however, is afraid of separateness, hopefully that’s the case with you, and you’re not just rambling nonsense. It’s funny that you mention that we’re collective in our most fundamental state, because that’s when we’re least collective. Humans as humans. We share, either to gain back, or strengthen our moral economy. We have the potential to think beyond ourselves, sure, to conceptualize tomorrow, to remember yesterday, and to visualize our own death. But we can’t escape it. We aren’t this everlasting collective you pulled out of your ass. We’re deniers of our own nature. We like to think we’ll live forever, but we won’t. We attach ourselves to symbols, like a flag, or a cross, and that helps us cope, but only because we need to, because we have to deny it, repress the notion all together. And we know that to repress doesn’t mean to simply put away, and forget where. It means to exert constant effort to keep it down. We aren’t like fish who let our “friends” die and float to the surface, or hell, then maybe eat them. We bury our dead. Not because we’re a collective, but because we praise the individual, the hero. So keep rambling. Someone will believe it. But art isn’t just a lie. It’s a lie that tells the truth. And yours, I’m sorry to say, is empty of it. You blatantly contradict yourself “abstraction, and perception” as if you yourself don’t even know what you’re saying. Which, frankly, I’m quite ready to believe. Let’s hope this second part is a joke. Because I thought your first post in this thread had some merit. I even let out a chuckle. But the rest, is just, half-well decorated nothing.
my response was simply intended to spark thought and reflection. i consider myself a novice in the philosophy, but my contention was to outline the basic premises of Phenomenology, something which i have briefly learned about. founded by edmund husserl, it studies phenomena in terms of a “collective conscious.” i’m not saying it is valid, i just believe in the value of exposing people to other schools of thought in order to provoke contemplation. it’s essential to analyze ideas, especially ideas as abstract as consciousness, from all points of view, whether or not you agree with it. that, i hope, you will concede.
oh, and you forgot to cite ernest becker in your rant. give credit where it is due.
woe is me
the days of youthful yearning have slowly rot away. i, plagued with leisure, must contrive problems so that i look interesting. weep.
Who are you? You are so deep and … deep.
i am you and i am me and i am she and i am he. shall we not focus on what separates us and rather focus on what we share? we are a collective conscious, in our most fundamental state. our very existence is evidence that our consciousness has been turned on and we are now in for the ride for as long as we like. sure, the matter that happens to be attached to my consciousness differs from yours, in more than one way, but what’s really important is not these coffins we call bodies, but the place of transcendence, abstraction, and perception; in our capacity to perceive we are but one.
krrnrose asked: Are you as good looking as Richard Gere in that picture? Ooo baby
i’ll begin with an age old quote: “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” attractiveness is the quintessential and hallmark example of the kierkegaardian subjective truth. standards of beauty are completely incoherent and irrational, thus your question is rendered obsolete. i might answer, “i am as good looking as that cheese grater.”
