Then the pizza man made him an everything pizza and the Dalai Lama handed him a large bill. After putting the money into the register and closing the drawer, the Lama asked "Can I have my change?" to which the Pizza man said "Change comes from within."
Why because they are all attention whores. They get attention this way, they are part of a club and they have rivalries. To take what I am saying seriously would undermine all of that and force them to love unconditionally and perhaps take up the torch with me and humiliate themselves in order to propagate reason in the face of the common insanity.
You look at those comments and I make references to all kinds of thinkers; Einstein, C.S. Lewis, Kierkegaard, the Popes, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Anselm. Ibn Al-Haytham, and I tried really hard to be methodical and systematic so as not to leave too many gaps for the mind to fall into. Nevertheless, they prefer comments like "Arrogance: assuming that the? universe was specially created for you, and all your personal prejudices are shared with an omnipotent and omniscient deity." Which was not directed at me because that is obviously not what I was saying. They don't want to address me, they just want to address each other because they can laugh at each other's stupidity.
I seriously spent 7 hours last night commenting on a debate between Christians and Atheists on Gogreen18's youtube channel. I must have posted 50 comments, beginning at the scientific-atheistic point of view and systematically breaking down all the cognitive barriers between it and Christianity. I debased the entire range of false doctrine in Christianity, including; marriage, free-will and everlasting life. Like I say, I spent 7 hours, and it spanned representational neuroscience as well. 7 hours and over 50 comments, and not one of them said a damn thing to me, they all kept bickering among themselves. They either don't get it, or don't want to. They more than likely just want to continue arguing with each other, that is what they enjoy doing.
See, I try variously to describe things in different ways, but my message is not common at all. You'll have to try to form a new concept of self-hood more than likely, instead of relying on your current concept or you'll just misunderstand me. Sometimes I will talk about the corticothalamic complex, the representational hierarchy of the brain, and make references to authors like Thomas Metzinger, Gerald Edelman, Guilio Tononi, Janet Twenge, Hegel and so forth, but this kind of speech is even more problematic because it is hard and people would rather think I'm arrogant than wise. You go and read 100+ books on the subject and spend years in meditation and they will just think you are arrogant, not wise. That is because their self will not allow them to recognize wisdom as wisdom, they are too damn concerned with comparing themselves. When they compare themselves to someone who appears more sophisticated they get a pang of shame for the pride they feel attached to their understanding, and they hate shame so they run away from it and try to debase the thing which caused it; me. And by debasing me they can curl back up with their own pride and go back to not thinking.
My statement is not debased simply because there have been attention whores for all of human history. My conclusion is that all of humanity has been attention whores for all of human history. But I say "All" rather loosely, it is just the vast majority.
And this isn't based on any historical development of a subculture, this is based in representational neuroscience, psychology and my own consciousness. Actually, if you take the normal level of human inquiry, description and discussion... throw that away, it bears no resemblance to what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about underscores the very nature of self-consciousness and cannot be refuted by a "You are so ignorant man" statement.
I had a good tear-up session there the other day listening to Hard Sun performed by Eddie Vedder. I happened to be driving the 401 in Ontario without sunglasses on and the sun abruptly peirced through the clouds and partially blinded me for the entirety of the song. That coincidental happening provided all the basis I needed to ascend into existential awe. Because:
Once I built an ivory tower so I could worship from above When I climbed down to be set free She took me in again - Hard Sun by Gordon Peterson
But I would not date this girl, too much into her own passions. And Barbeque scented perfume? Gross. You know food doesn't smell that good when you are satiated, and when you aren't it can make you crave food in excess of your daily requirement. You know, there might even be a connection between the amount of advertising for food and obesity. Seeing, smelling and tasting food can trigger a craving where no craving otherwise existed.
Marriage was never predicated on anything but a compromise with the sinful nature. I know the popular and traditional sentiment is that marriage is a holy sanctuary backed by God, but that is patently false when one examines the references to it in the actual Bible.
Marriage is a compromise with lust, so that the passions may be directed to one individual, rather than something like polygynandry or sodomy. It was a way of confining sexual lust to control for it's destructive properties, which include social as well as health reasons.
But, it says that "at the resurrection" which is that period of being "born again" after the "circumcision", people will not be taken in marriage or given in marriage. Because they will already be purified of all egotism.
Yea, I know, nobody reads the Bible. I mean virtually nobody even those who claim to. They read what they want.
Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others have been made eunuchs; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it. Matthew 19: 11
You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. Matthew 22: 29
^^These verses are attributed to Jesus^^
This passage is attributed to Peter:
1Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
8I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
9But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
- 1 Corinthians 7
It can be humorous how much both Christians and Atheists cherry-pick and twist the Bible according to their desires.
I am creative, but I don't like that after doing something creative the rest feels unproductive and boring. As long as I'm content to do nothing, I'm content to do nothing, but if I do something that rewards me with praise I'm apt to become addicted to it.
I've been wanting to create an independent and animated tour tunneling through the depths of the human psyche, but being that nobody actually wants such a thing, hence no thing like it currently exists, I don't actually have much incentive to do it, and I feel pretty content myself, I mean, after-all, I already get it.
Are they sure this won't result in a grand-father paradox and consequently compress time into an infinitessimally small point? (that's a joke by the way)
And just like body-modification, if no one paid any attention to it, it wouldn't happen. All of these things are done for attention. "Fear or revere me, but please think I'm special."
You know its like that ever-so-popular propaganda slogan that picked up wind in the last few decades "I'm doing it for myself." This is said when a woman is talking about the reasons for using make-up and trying to look prettier than she naturally is. "I'm not doing it for attention. I'm doing it for myself." but you aren't the one looking at it, instead you are looking at the faces of people who are looking at it, and that is where it makes or breaks you, and where you are doing it for yourself, in the reflective pool of another's mind, which is the same as doing it for attention. "Well I have to compete with modern beauty." No you don't have to compete at all, but you want to, you want to be lusted after, adored, loved, chosen, accepted, appreciated and above all preferred. But it is a very crafty delusion, I'll give it that. It comes about because in modern culture it looks bad to do things for attention, so we delude ourselves into thinking we are doing it "for ourselves". The delusion is actually, therefor brought on by the same function of the mind which makes us want to look pretty to begin with, protection of self-image and controlling appearances. It is that one silly little function that dominates most of what we do, think and feel.
The Vancouver police's malamuts are probably cheaper and, believe me, they work. The more you try to fight them, the more they sink in. I have 15 year old scars that attest to it.
My statement is not debased simply because there have been attention whores for all of human history. My conclusion is that all of humanity has been attention whores for all of human history. But I say "All" rather loosely, it is just the vast majority.
And this isn't based on any historical development of a subculture, this is based in representational neuroscience, psychology and my own consciousness. Actually, if you take the normal level of human inquiry, description and discussion... throw that away, it bears no resemblance to what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about underscores the very nature of self-consciousness and cannot be refuted by a "You are so ignorant man" statement.
Once I built an ivory tower
so I could worship from above
When I climbed down to be set free
She took me in again - Hard Sun by Gordon Peterson
But I would not date this girl, too much into her own passions. And Barbeque scented perfume? Gross. You know food doesn't smell that good when you are satiated, and when you aren't it can make you crave food in excess of your daily requirement. You know, there might even be a connection between the amount of advertising for food and obesity. Seeing, smelling and tasting food can trigger a craving where no craving otherwise existed.
Marriage is a compromise with lust, so that the passions may be directed to one individual, rather than something like polygynandry or sodomy. It was a way of confining sexual lust to control for it's destructive properties, which include social as well as health reasons.
But, it says that "at the resurrection" which is that period of being "born again" after the "circumcision", people will not be taken in marriage or given in marriage. Because they will already be purified of all egotism.
Yea, I know, nobody reads the Bible. I mean virtually nobody even those who claim to. They read what they want.
Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others have been made eunuchs; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it. Matthew 19: 11
You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. Matthew 22: 29
^^These verses are attributed to Jesus^^
This passage is attributed to Peter:
1Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
8I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
9But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
- 1 Corinthians 7
It can be humorous how much both Christians and Atheists cherry-pick and twist the Bible according to their desires.
I've been wanting to create an independent and animated tour tunneling through the depths of the human psyche, but being that nobody actually wants such a thing, hence no thing like it currently exists, I don't actually have much incentive to do it, and I feel pretty content myself, I mean, after-all, I already get it.
You know its like that ever-so-popular propaganda slogan that picked up wind in the last few decades "I'm doing it for myself." This is said when a woman is talking about the reasons for using make-up and trying to look prettier than she naturally is. "I'm not doing it for attention. I'm doing it for myself." but you aren't the one looking at it, instead you are looking at the faces of people who are looking at it, and that is where it makes or breaks you, and where you are doing it for yourself, in the reflective pool of another's mind, which is the same as doing it for attention. "Well I have to compete with modern beauty." No you don't have to compete at all, but you want to, you want to be lusted after, adored, loved, chosen, accepted, appreciated and above all preferred. But it is a very crafty delusion, I'll give it that. It comes about because in modern culture it looks bad to do things for attention, so we delude ourselves into thinking we are doing it "for ourselves". The delusion is actually, therefor brought on by the same function of the mind which makes us want to look pretty to begin with, protection of self-image and controlling appearances. It is that one silly little function that dominates most of what we do, think and feel.