Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Life in a Big City

Ya know, life in a big city just never gets boring! ;) Like today, I was walking around the streets during my lunch hour... specifically on South Michigan Ave., when suddenly the michigan draw-bridge split open! I was like, Damn, what the heck is goin on!? There was all this clanging noises, red lights flashing, cops driving up and pulling over, the traffic and intersection got jammed, city crew began gathering up at the base of the bridge... overall, it was a crazy, chaotic scene. I thought, all this DRAMA for probably just a boat passing through? Hmm... but apparently not! I went around asking the city crews just what the big deal was.. and in typical chicago attitude they refused to answer.. they didn't even say they would not answer. I just got a plain, blank, stare - like from a cow. Anyway, so the whole reporter/journalist instinct in me took over and I looked around for a News agency van... ofcourse, I thought, that this was an unusual incident, the local media would want to cover it... and sure enough, NBC 5 was there on the spot (well, it's quite convenient for NBC 5 cuz their studios are just a block north on the other side of the bridge). So anyway, I went up to one of the guys in the news van and asked him what the big deal was. He had to know, I thought... I mean he works for a NEWS agency! He told me that apparently the bridge malfunctioned and went off on its own.... it started blaring signals... and got stuck somewhere half way while rising up or lowering down. He said he was not sure of all the details yet... So, I was like... hmm, damn. Now, how do I get on the other side of this bridge so I can head back to work? Ironically, I work in the NBC Tower building which is just on the other side of the river. Well, after waiting for what seemed like too long, I decided to take the long route through Upper Wacker drive, then climb down the stairs to Columbus drive, and then walk up to the NBC Tower. On the way, I suddenly remember that HEY I HAVE A CAMERA PHONE!!! Taking pictures is what it's for!! So I whipped out my tiny little camera phone and snapped this picture of the entire episode! Hmm... so that was my lunchtime adventure! ;) Never a dull day in this big city, I say. :)

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Gay or not Gay

Few general remarks: I do not believe that "gayness" is immutable or genetically determined. I do believe that homosexuality might have some genetic basis for creating a pre-disposition or tendency. There is NOT ONE shred of sound logical argument based in rationality and reality that can honestly and successfully claim that homosexuality is immoral. All arguments currently out there are pretty pathetic variations of religious/superstitious/supernaturally based arguments or simply arguments with very bad logic. Being gay is COMPLETELY OKAY - as CHOICE and as an ACT.

Jay Leno Joke!

Jay Leno interviewing President Bush: Jay: Sir, what do you think of Jude Law? Bush: Jay, it's called the Torah. You should be sensitive about these things!

Thursday, August 25, 2005

What is the Purpose of Life?

What is the purpose of life? Why live? Every instance of contemplation begins with the acceptance of the fact that one lives. The fact that we have life is a default. Philosophically and physically, the fact of having life is an irreducible axiom. One does not question axioms, unless one wishes to get into supernatural speculation. Thus, the question "why do we live?" is a moot question similar to asking why is a circle round. So, beginning with the default that we possess life, the question comes, what do we do with it? Ultimately, you have two choices to pick from: you continue living OR you choose to terminate your existence. We all begin with the default physical property of life. But every self-aware moment of living requires the deliberate decision to choose to continue living. Thus, life is a process of volitional maintenance of existence. If one chooses to die, then there is no need to talk about a purpose for life (because the choice being made is already a negation of life and everything related to living). If one chooses to CONTINUE living, then one begins to wonder WHY continue living. The choosing of LIFE, however, requires some very specific acts to achieve some specific goals. There are certain actions which will necessarily result in death. Thus, in our process of integrating new information and beginning on the journey of life, we learn what (or who) is a threat to the choice we made to live, and what (or who) is an instrument to protect the choice that we made to live. Based on those assessments, we begin to understand that certain modes of behavior lead to self-destruction and certain modes of behavior lead to self-enhancement. Of course, these modes of behavior are not often readily apparent, and could require complex integration of knowledge with real environments. Thus, now that we understand some basic concepts of self-enhancing behavior and self-destructive behavior, we come to realize that:- based on our choice to live, we must act in ways CONSISTENT with our choice to live. Hence, we must CHOOSE to do and act in ways that will make our choice of living, a positive and fulfilling choice. Doing otherwise is acting in contradiction to your own choices. Thus, choosing to live and wanting to live but acting in a self-destructive manner is making choices that are in CONTRADICTION to the most fundamental choice that you have made (which is to live). Inconsistent choices leads to a confused, frustrated, and dissatisfied living experience that raises doubts on the virtue of living and dimishes one's own self-assessment on the worth of living. Now, choosing to act in consistency with one's ultimate choice to live, also means the salient perception of the fact that life is a PROCESS of maintaining existence. STAGNATION is NOT an option if one chooses to live. Life ALWAYS requires deliberate ACTION -- whether that action is self-generated or is derived from someone else's efforts. In order for a person to live, the person must either make their own efforts at living, or must tap into someone else's efforts and derive the benefits of their action. Now, at this point we enter the area of morality: in what situations is self-generated action moral, and dependent/derivative inaction immoral. In other words, WHY should an individual choose one form of existence over the other, i.e choose the self-generating existence over a parasitic existence? It should logically follow from the statement that life is a process of maintaining existence that either the self or someone/thing else does the ACT of maintaining existence. These acts include, among other things, the satisfaction of basic needs, the fulfillment of higher needs, and the achievement of various goals. Now, people have differing needs and goals. Each individual has certain needs that may or may not be shared by other individuals. Thus, the assessment of what can be constituted as "need" for one individual may not apply to another individual, and not even in any varying degrees. Some needs like food and shelter may seem common and universal. However, even the varying degrees of these needs create a slippery slope in assessment. The ONLY proper and MOST accurate method of assessing one's need can ONLY ORIGINATE within each particular individual themself. Every individual can only be the most accurate appraiser of his/her needs based on a rational integration of outside information, personal values, and perceived benefits or goals. Thus, no other person can judge accurately and rightfully the needs of another individual. And therefore, NO OTHER PERSON SHOULD BE REQUIRED to assess the needs or goals of another invidual - and DEFINITELY not be OBLIGATED to meet self-made needs for that other individual. So, in a situation where every individual assesses his/her own personal needs and goals for themselves, they are best equipped to conceptualize, formulate or calculate methods and means to fulfill those needs and achieve those goals. This can be done in three fundamental ways: 1) fulfill your personal needs by forcefully robbing someone else of the values you seek 2) fulfill your personal needs by trading your values with someone else in exchange for something of value that you want which they have. 3) Devising ways of producing, discovering, creating, or inventing your own objects of value inorder to fulfill your own needs. Option 1 is an irrational method that does not work in a philosophy of life based on rational ethics. In order for your own values to be protected, you must agree to respect the values of others. You cannot bear any expectation to protect your values if you refuse to accept others' equal expectation to protect their values. Option 2 is a rational and moral method of fulfilling needs. However, this method is very limited since there are only limited resources to be traded. You can only buy or sell that which already exists to be bought or sold. Option 3 is the BEST, rational and most moral method of fulfilling needs. This method forms the foundation upon which one can also practice option 2. The creation, invention, or discovery of new resources is the only most effective way to meet the increasing needs and wants of human life. It is an economic principle that human wants are plenty but the means to satisfy them are scarce. Thus, production of those resources is the only most effective way to meet the plentiful needs. Now, given that Option 3 is the best option, notice that it REQUIRES self-generated ACTION in order to maintain the process of existence and enhance the condition of existence. Option 3 constitutes all those modes of behavior that is the MOST moral and most CONSISTENT with the ultimate choice of living. The most consistent behavior with the choice to live would only be to extract the most advantageous scenario given that choice. This brings me to the answer of the question: What is the purpose of living? The answer is, the purpose of living is to be PRODUCTIVE! It is to be CREATIVE and INVENTIVE! Life is a default. What does one do with it? One SHOULD make that default fact the BEST case scenario ever! Make the fact of your existence the BEST thing to have ever happened to this earth! That is YOUR PURPOSE in life! Your purpose in life is to make the fact of your having walked this earth a VERY MEANINGFUL, VERY SIGNIFICANT, and a VERY PRODUCTIVE experience for yourself. In other words, your purpose in life is to create for yourself ALL THE CONDITIONS NECESSARY for you to be ABLE TO ENJOY TO THE FULLEST EXTENT (in a rational sense) the default fact of your existence. In one of my other blog-posts, I wrote: "Life should be enticing. Life must have some texture. You must feel your life; feel that you're living. You must be seduced and intoxicated by your life. It is only the irregularities of anguish and happiness, pain and joy, contentment and desire that creates the texture of life. Like scrubbing off your dead skin cells in the shower, so should the texture of life rub against your being and reveal the emergence of a newer, more livelier being. This is what life ought to be."

Art is:

So, that's the "art" I reproduced. The picture above is a reproduction of a reproduction of an image I saw in some book somewhere...(ugh, how second-handed!) and I thought, I could do better. The image was black and white... so I reproduced it and endowed it with color. The colors make it my "recreation of reality based on my metaphysical value-judgments"! ;) It is very Picasso-esque. I think it is brilliant. I would consider this work - Art. If it were on sale, I would buy it. Oh, and if any of you people are interested, I would sell it to you. I prefer UPS shipping, but we can talk about shipping procedures later. Let me know of your interest! :D

Strange Thoughts While Eating at McD's.

So, yesterday I was lunching at McD's... since i'm poor again for one more day (after which I shall be getting my paycheck, and will be RICH once again!! Yooo hoo oo hooo ooo Yooo hooo oo hooo ooo!) Anyway, back to my point: as I was biting into my bacon, ranch, grilled chicken club sandwhich (which had ZERO flavor but lots of texture), I began thinking about recipes and secret ingredients. I don't know how the system works here, but can any restaurant or food chain just come up with a recipe for a food item and then keep it secret inorder to maintain competitiveness? Kinda like Coca Cola keeping the recipe for Coke a secret. That brings me to ask: what about ingredients in those recipes. If a recipe is allowed to be kept secret, can a company keep the ingredients in their products also a secret? Because sometimes, it is NOT the recipe in a dish that makes the difference but the actual ingredients. So, in this case, to maintain competition, are they legally allowed to keep ingredients secret? But then, that makes me wonder: What if a certain ingredient in a recipe (or a certain recipe for a dish) happens to be harmful, unedible, or maybe have slow, long-term causes of illness -- how can the government or other private industry watchdogs ever monitor such issues if their don't even have access to those secret recipe/ingredient information? Does the FDA mandate disclosure of all food-related matters and guarantee protection of secrecy to them? I wonder. I wonder because, I wonder if anybody could add any "secret" ingredient and pass it off as edible and harmless without the actual scientists or researchers approving of these foods as edible. Anyway... that was my lunch conversation with myself yesterday.

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

View

So, that's the view from my cubicle in the tower. :)

Monday, August 22, 2005

Pasha et Jardin, Resurrected!

Pasha could see words all around him in this restaurant. He saw words being uttered, propelled into the air like shooting darts, bouncing off of peoples faces, finally falling onto to the floor. Every word fell with a clang -- like a hundred empty vessels hitting the ground in quick succession. No one really bothered to pick up those words. Everyone had taken up the task of simply spouting more words in the hopes that if enough were produced, there would be a better a chance of someone actually grasping it, and reading it. Pasha and Jardin always picked up each other’s words. In fact, it was in the perfect trade of unspoken words that they had discovered each other. When they met in person for the first time, the words they had exchanged became the faces they beheld. The meeting was merely an extension of their conversation started long ago. And today, at this table, the conversation of their life together still continued. "I know there is a purpose to life," Jardin said, "and I still feel some remnants of the joy for living I felt as a child. But I am losing it now, Pasha. My life seems to be slipping out of my hands, and trying to hold on to it is hurting me too much." His face was numb and expressionless. Pasha knew that such stoicism could only mean a pain too profound to bear any physical expression.

At Work!!!

OH MY GOD!! I think a male co-worker just made a pass at me!!! OH MY GOD! Would that be considered sexual harrassment at the work place?? Hmm... was I really harrassed? But, OH MY GOD!! -- that's all I can think of now!

Emotion versus Thinking

Another topic of discussion between my friend and I was about emotions. According to him, emotions are primal, biological, they arise with no precedent, they are instinctual. Emotions like jealousy, anger, rage, despair, joy, loneliness, etc. are all raw, instinctual emotions that arise in immediate reaction to a situation. And ofcourse, I disagree completely! Emotions are the integrated response of a person's physiological and intellectual mechanisms to certain situations. Emotions CANNOT be categorized as instinctual, biological, and unprecendented because that is NOT an emotional response. A purely biological or physiological response would be merely a SENSATION, not an Emotion. One must not confuse the two concepts together. It is important to know the definitions of these concepts. A sensation is the knee-jerk response to a situation: for example, the brain immediately lets our signals letting the hand know that it is being burned over the hot stove. Hence, the immediate physiological response is to quickly remove your hand from the hot stove. Now, the EMOTIONAL response would be the ANNOYANCE of having been burned, or the psychological pain of having suffered a burn injury. This EMOTIONAL response is an INTEGRATION of the purely physical sensation with the INTELLECTUAL COMPREHENSION of the situation, producing a response. If one is a masochist, i.e. one holds the intellectual idea that self-inflicted pain is good, then DESPITE THE PHYSIOLOGICAL SENATION OF PAIN, a masochist would respond with an EMOTIONAL STATE OF PLEASURE AND SATISFACTION. Thus, the EMOTION is the INTEGRATED response of the physical (self-inflicted pain)WITH the intellectual contexts or ideas or beliefs (masochism - pain is good) that eventually will result in the kind of emotional response (gratification). Hence, all of your emotional responses flow from the kinds of ideas and beliefs you hold. Irrational and whimsical belief systems result in irrational and incomprehensible emotional feelings (for example, feeling angry or lonely for no real apparent reason). A person who holds consistent, logical, and rational beliefs within a philosophical system that holds the right kind of values, will find that his/her emotional responses aligning itself with the rational beliefs and ideas. He/she will possess the necessary emotional strength that flows from a robust philosophical belief system. He/she will have the proper self-esteem that flows out of a recognition of rational values. Thus, emotional responses are NOT arbitrary, instinctual, or purely biological. Many times one is not aware of the subconscious ideas that one holds -- giving rise to emotions that one cannot decipher the reasons behind... yet, subconscious ideas do not necessarily confound the understanding of emotional responses. It is the illogical, contradictory nature of some of the ideas that people accept that is the true cause of confusing and incomprehensible emotional responses.

Is there anything called "Rights"?

My friend seems to be a vehement believer that there is nothing called "Rights", and that there's nothing called "morals". He subscribes to the philosophy of extreme skepticism - under which he doubts everything. The only thing he is certain of is his own existence -- and even in that, he is not certain that he exists in body, but merely in consciousness. He knows his consciousness exists, but he cannot know with complete certainty if anything else exists. Thus, he is stuck in this philosophical solipsism from which he is unable to escape. I believe that his philosophical entanglements have been created by the centuries of a very destructive indoctrination in popular culture that the mind and body are two separate entities -- that there is a mind-body dichotomy. This duality of existence was most popularized by Decartes, and is very apparent in religious traditions. The mind or the "soul" is seen as seperate and more important than the body, and that the body is seen as this strange external existence, separate from the mind and sometimes inherently in conflict with the mind. Thus, the mind is conscious and real, but everything else that is physical is subjected to doubt and skepticism. That which is physical is doubted, while that which is abstract or metaphysical is accepted eagerly as real. It seems strange to me that people can accept that existence of consciousness, and not accept that consciousness needs PHYSICAL EXISTENCE inorder to exist in the first place! And then, just by pure logic, if consciousness EXISTS, it is only because there is SOMETHING TO BE CONSCIOUS OF! To be conscious of NOTHING or of NON-EXISTENCE is a contradiction of concepts! Anyway, I talk all about existence and consciousness in another posting, so I'll let this rest here. As far as the issue of "Rights" go: it is true that there are no "God-given Rights". There are no gods to give any rights to anyone. If one wishes to exist in this world and live a life proper to that of a Human being: i.e. a life that utilizes the human faculties of volition, intelligence, rationality, etc. -- one has to have certain guarantees to live among each other. Rights arise out of a necessity to protect the values that Humans desire. Without the guaranteed protection of values, Human life on this Earth will not be qua rational life. One would have brutish, capricious, pathological Human beasts running amok on this Earth -- living lives not proper to Human life... i.e. life of reason, intelligence, volition, etc. But inorder to have Rights that would give guaranteed protection of values, we must know what values are, and which values need to be protected. The most fundamental value -- and therefore the standard by which all other values should be judged -- is the value of Human life. Without valuing life and wanting to live, all this discussion and speculation is FUTILE! If all you desire is to die, then there is no reason to talk any further about any matter of existence and life and nature. If non-existence is what you value and desire, then the only right you have to be silent and not exist. A human on this Earth has life by default. The human is already alive. Thus, the fundamental choice for that person is whether to maintain existence or to die. If one values life and existence, then one must begin to think of ways to CONTINUE existing and ENHANCING the nature of that existence and enjoying the time of one's existence. This gives rise to the CONCEPT OF RIGHTS -- the guarantees of protecting the most fundamental value which is life (life which is owned by default) and the right to all that is proper to the rational maintenance and enhancement of that life. The desire to live gives rise to the value of life, which gives rise to the need to protect one's own life, which gives rise to the concept of Rights, which gives rise to the concept of right and wrong (morals), which allows for the existence of rational Human Beings living life on this Earth. This is the philosophical system for living life on this very real Earth. It is not a philosophy of life for those who even doubt the very existence of this Earth and of their life in it.

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Blew me away

-- Edgar En el rincón que me ves llorando-- alli mi vida se esconde. Quando ya no esté mi rincón se convertira, poco a poco, en Tú rincón de lagrimas. ======= English Translation ======== The corner in which I stand, as you watch me crying-- my life is hidden there. When I am gone, my corner will become, bit by bit, your corner of tears

Tuesday, August 16, 2005

Clashing Views on Sex and Love

As per my earlier post, I believe that sex and love are mutually exclusive phenomena, that in certain instances can and do get united. My contention, however, is that, that union is NOT necessary, and is purely dependent upon the values and motivations of the individuals involved. Thus, I can choose have purely physical, animalistic sex with a person and not have a shred of romantic love for the person -- my doing so is based on my values and motivations. I do not value this person involved, and my motive is purely to get physical, momentary, sexual gratification. This sexual activity is sufficient for me in and of itself. OR, I could choose to fall in love with someone and have sex within the context of our romantic involvement. Here, sex becomes the medium of my expression of love for this person. My value is this person, my motive is to express that abstract nature of love to this person, and my action is sexual intimacy. This is the union of the purely physical (sex) with the purely abstract (love). OR, I could choose to love someone purely and fully, with all my emotional involvement, but not ever have sex with this person -- either due to a physical inabilitiy in either partner, or due to other personal volitional reasons. Thus, here the purely abstract nature of love is merely expressed in its abstract form... using verbal and non-verbal means of communicating that love. I believe love does not NEED the sexual medium inorder to be effectively communicated. I believe that your partner would know and trust that you love them even if you do not have sex with them... that they do not NEED you to have sex with them to prove to them that you love them. Sex is a great and beautiful thing to be enjoyed.. but only upon the full and eager consent of all individuals involved. This is my opinion that clearly clashes with the Randian view of love and sex. According to Rand, having only abstract love is a breach of integrity and would therefore be a vice. In her philosophical paradigm, love would be virtuous only when it is united with the physical expression of sexual intimacy. According to her, sex is to love what action is to thought. She says that we live in our minds and that existence is the attempt to bring that life into physical reality. Sex is the preeminent form of bringing love into physical reality. Clearly, there is a disagreement. And I believe, she is wrong. Based on her own premises of logic - if humans are volitional beings, every act that they perform (given conditions that allow for volition) is an act of deliberate choice. Thus, sex and love should also be subjected to those rules of choice: deliberate engagement in contexts of one's own choice and manner. To fuse sex with love as inseperable would violate the principle that humans can choose to engage in sex without falling in love, or that they can romantically love someone without needing to have sex.

My Kinda Jokes!

If metaphysics is being qua being; and if epistomology is knowing qua knowing; then metaphilosophy must be... qua qua qua. ============================ "GOD is DEAD" -- Nietzche "Neitzche is dead" -- GOD ============================ Philosophy is a game with objectives and no rules. Mathematics is a game with rules and no objectives. Theology is a game whose object is to bring rules into the subjective. ============================ The toughest question on a Final Exam in a Senior Philosophy class: "Just exactly how do you plan on making a living with a Philosophy degree?" ============================ One more question: Q. Is this a question? A. If this is an answer! ============================ How many philosophers does it take to change a light bulb? "Hmmm... well there's an interesting question isn't it?" "Define 'light bulb'..." "How can you be sure it needs changing?" Three. One to change it and two to stand around arguing over whether or not the light bulb exists. ============================ Student: "Sir..What does Crash Course in Logical Assumptions mean?" Professor: "Well, it involves taking information that you have, forming assumptions using logic, and then creating new information. Let me try to answer your question by asking you a question. Do you own a car?" Student: "Uh...Yes, I do." Professor: "Well, then I can now logically assume that you drive." Student: "Yes, I drive. " Professor: "Then I can logically assume that you drive on weekends." Student: "Yeah, I drive on weekends, I go out on dates." Professor: "Then I can logically assume that you have date partners." Student: "Well, yes, I have a girlfriend." Professor: "Then I can logically assume that you are heterosexual." Student: "Uh...hell yes! OK, I think I understand what this course is about now. Thanks a lot for your time." Once outside, his friend asks him: "So, what's it all about?" With the new knowledge he just received, he replies, "Its about using information and stuff...Let me answer your question by asking you a question. Do you own a car?" "No." "Uh...Then you're a homosexual, dude!"

Opening up Pasha et Jardin

Okay people.. whoever is reading this: I am utterly incapable of writing fiction dialogue... I just figured that out. I can write poetry or narratives... and maybe short descriptives... but I cannot possibly write dialogues. I am so bad at it. I have no clue how to have my characters say what I want them to say. I don't have any literary devices that keep a dialogue moving, and maintain the interest and novelty. I regret the fact that I did not take a single fiction-writing course in college! I'm so ignorant about literary devices. My Pasha et Jardin are starving for conversation at their lunch table. So, here is my decision -- I have decided that I am going to open up the rights to Pasha et Jardin from the point I last left off, until the point I decide to move back in and take over. So, everything that I have written as my short fiction story about Pasha and Jardin up until this moment on the blog, is fully copyrighted and unchangeable. However, from the point I last left the story... I am letting anyone reading this to go ahead and continue the story as they so wish. Also, I would even suggest that you continue the line of story created by someone else... and complete each other's line of story... collaborate with other writers and take Pasha and Jardin wherever you want... kill Pasha if you like, introduce another character if you wish, have Jardin hook up with Yazmin, or get them connected with one of your own fiction story characters...develop the plot and theme however your imagination fancies. I guess, I'd remind you, however, that for aesthetic purposes read the all that I have written so far about the characters and maintain that aesthetic quality or themes in the story... just so there is some continuation... and so it doesn't seem like a staccato story with random cut edits. I hope this idea of mine will work... I want to see how creatively these characters can live and develop. So, whoever is reading this.. hope to see you contribute. Ofcourse, you get to keep all the rights to your parts of the story... and modify/change or do whatever you want with it. Pasha and Jardin are now entrusted into your care! :)

Monday, August 15, 2005

Sex and Love

Sex and love -- they are not supposed to be related or connected. That we sometimes love the person we have sex with or that we have sex with some of the people we love should have no bearing on the fact that sex and love are unrelated, independent concepts. Sex, yes, is one of the mediums of our expression of love for a person - but that is all it is; and even in that, it is merely our choice for expression. One can love truly without the need for sex, and one can have sex with anyone without feeling any love for the person. Sex can be just like having a nice meal a day. Love is like having that nice meal in a very fine and fancy restaurant. Love is like the context or the ambience that sets the tone of the sex that occurs in it. But regardless of whether that sex occurs or not (whether you eat anything at all or not in that fine restaurant).. .the ambience remains beautiful and amazing (like the restaurant remains fancy and fine regardless of what you eat, if you eat, or how much you eat).

Friday, August 12, 2005

Looking for Things to Invent

When I was a little kid, I would literally walk around my house looking at the different things, trying to get some inspiration on my new invention! I remember clearly looking at the TV in my house and thinking, "hmm.. well, that's already invented. What can I do to make this TV better?" Then, unable to think of anything unique in my little, young brain, I would move over to the next object in the house. I remember looking at the telephone once and thinking, "well, so that's also been invented, and there's possibly nothing I can do change that". It seems so ironic now, that almost everything I had looked at in my childhood, and gotten disappointed at how I thought everything worth inventing had already been invented, is today so dramatically DIFFERENT and definitely more progressive, more complex, and more advanced! Obviously, my own little mind was quite incapable of conceiving the things we have today, or of atleast having a unique perspective into things that were there before, that have become so much more advanced and different today. I think this just goes to show how much reverence the Thinking mind of a creator should deserve. The mind that can conceive and perceive such that no one else could ever before, that mind that looks at this world and all the materials this world provides and can CLEARLY perceive the end result which is a totally new and different invention -- that mind is worthy of all worship. The only demonstrable fact of observable creation is the creation done by living beings. And of all the living beings on earth, Humans are the ones most capable of creating the most ingenuis of all creations. Thus, I believe that the act of creating and producing is the highest possible virtue that Humans can achieve. Infact, we should bear a moral obligation to achieve that virtue.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Questions Asked to us by Our Customers

This is just 10 of the most interesting questions we've received at my company from our customers. It reminds me of just how amazingly DIFFERENT each and every one of the 6 billion human beings on this planet really are! 1) How do I move my wife's dead body from New York to California without involving the funeral home? 2) How can I become an extra or a dancer in a hip-hop music video? 3) How can I bid for an Olympic medal being auctioned off in Poland? 4) Where can I buy a bidet-toilet combination? 5) How can I get rid of the frogs that are all over my property? 6) How can I get Bear from the Bear in the Big Blue House to come to my son's second birthday party? 7) How can I donate my body to Science? 8) How can I order a case of Hires root beer? 9) Where can I buy a wooden silhouette of foxes and bears? 10) Where can I get an antique perfume bottle fixed?

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Walks... There were far too few walks - by Inommable

Walks... there were far too few walks, and too much drinking to ever really enjoy his company. One lascivious plea for pleasure after another granted; granted less and less. The morning he left would be the last time he'd hide, or lie to anyone. Not even sleep swallows the languor anymore. Each time he thinks of him, each evening when his body gives in to desire, he dies a little more.

Monday, August 08, 2005

Untitled -- Your Eyes

You try to hide your love under those long lashes That shyness flirting at the edges of your eyes That innocent glance we hold Giving voice to all unspoken words Broadly smiling at me in gay abandon It beckons me into the satin-cool fabric of your woven dreams It sweeps me into a fragrant world of beauty and peace It kisses life between our moments of breathlessness It tires me with an unending ecstasy of timelessness Any longer... and I shall die Any shorter, I’d rather not live.

Anthem

"It is my eyes alone that see the world And gives it its beauty; It is my ears alone that hear the world And grants the world its song; It is my mind alone that grasps the world And gives the world its meaning." - Anthem, Rand

Seek and You Shall Find

I looked at the mountains to feel His power, And I found my own strength. I looked up to the heavens to see His face, And I discovered my sight. I went on a search for God, And I found my Self.

Byte-sized World

I find this very frustrating about American News journalism. They attempt to tackle large, complex issues like abortion, gay rights, historicity of Jesus, global politics, etc. in basically 10 minute segments of their evening news formats. And when they do those news magazine shows like Dateline or Nightline, etc. they attempt to drastically simplify these complex issues in favor of getting "hot quotes" or byte-sized information. Very rarely do we really get a truly analytic commentary or in-depth inspection into all sides of an issues that is being explored for atleast more than a 10 minute segment, and in a format that does not exploit the sensationalism of sound-byte news gathering. I feel that if the news networks cannot dedicate such time and depth to such stories due to whatever business or marketing constraints they might have, then they should simply not even made a PRETENSE at trying to exlore those issues in their regular news formats. It's amazing that within the 30 minutes of evening news broadcasts, they have to cram in about 5-6 stories, headline news, in-depth analysis, person of the week, filler talk, and commercials!! I understand that these byte-sized 10minute news formats largely developed in response the behavior of the American public. The American people in general do not want to make the effort to THINK while watching TV. TV is supposed to be escapist and sensationalist for them. They want others to TELL them what to think. They do not even care to have the journalists themselves do any much of thinking or analysis on TV, because that would make it "nerdy-news". People have a tendency to rally around slogans and catch-phrases -- sound-bytes that are provocative and sensational. They do not have the patience to sit around listening to facts and analysis or even figuring it out themselves. They impatiently watch the news, then they switch to another channel during commercials, then they impatiently watch another channel, and so on and so forth. The only saving grace of American news media is the Public Television Stations programs. I wish we had more of that. I know that when I become rich and have tons of money to give away (if I so choose to), I will definitely be giving some of my money to the PBS stations.

For the Last Time!

If you do not understand or get these concepts after this post, I shall make no more attempts to discuss this further. There is nothing more for me to say than what I have already said about the issue. “A fetus, also has the POTENTIAL to become a FULL THINKING HUMAN.” Going by this logic: A sperm has the potential to fertilize the egg, which then together have the potential to conceive a clump of cells, which then has the potential to become an embryo, which then has the potential to grow into a fetus, which then has the potential be born and become an infant baby, which then has the potential to grow up to become a FULL THINKING HUMAN BEING! Hence, the sperm and the egg has the potential to become a FULL THINKING HUMAN BEING! Hence, masturbation (deliberate or involuntary) is both criminal and immoral because you have KILLED OFF the potential to have a LIVING THINKING HUMAN BEING! Hence, monthly periods are an EVIL and should be avoided as much as possible so as to not waste the POTENTIALS of those cells to become LIVING THINKING HUMAN BEINGS! Awesome! “Funny, but I have not heard of fingerbortionists or laws to protect the rights to cut off your finger. No. Because a finger is in fact an extension of a body.” Precisely my point! If there is NO LAWS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF YOUR FINGER, then why should there be any laws to protect the “Rights” of a fetus? They are both in the very same way an EXTENTSION of the host, having existence purely due to the virtue of the host, fully subsumed in the host. The finger is NOT its whole being, but a part of the whole being – which is the whole person. A fetus is NOT a whole being but a part of the mother, existing as an extension of herself, inside of herself. Parts of the body do not have Rights. Only individual, independently existing, separate units of Human beings have Rights. “…I get hungry. Let's say that aside from vegetables, fruits, and legumes, there's a deer around readily available for me to kill and eat. Gotta eat, right? But if this deer is only different from me in that it's got a tail, or antlers or fur, then how can I justify killing it for food? Am I going to deem animals that have antlers, or something else, to be without the right to life? No. That is arbitrary and absurd. It should have the same rights as I have since it is only another animal, and a member of the same kingom, Animalia.” Are you trying to say that animals eating each other in the jungles of this world are committing immoral acts every time they kill another? That is absurd! First off, it is the way ecological balance of nature is maintained – by animals and plants eating or being eaten by another. Secondly, there can be no concept of Rights applicable to animals because of reasons I have explained. so many times already. Here is the fact: Humans are just ANOTHER SPECIES OF ANIMALS. Thus, as animals, we also engage in the great scheme of natural balance by maintaining our survival and reproductive capacities by killing other animals – just like a lion eats a deer, so we humans can eat a deer. So how do I justify killing it for food? I DON’T NEED TO JUSTIFY IT!? THERE IS NO REASON TO! Why do you think there needs to BE ANY REASON for that? As I said, Rights are NOT applicable to animalist instinctual natures. You said, “[Animals] should have the same rights as I have since it is only another animal, and a member of the same kingom, Animalia.” I don’t see how you can apply the concept of Rights to animals. The REASON Humans DO NOT and CANNOT eat EACH OTHER like other animals do, is because in regards to the Human species, and the human species ONLY, there arises the CONCEPT of RIGHTS. Rights are applicable ONLY to volitional beings that act deliberately in environments that make it possible to act with choice, among competing values that can be identified as either being consistent or enhancing to their ultimate value of life or detrimental to it. “I have to right to kill this deer, and eat it, because I have the need to eat, and from this need comes my valuing of this type of food…” Going by this logic then, I have a right to kill my mom because I have a need to have her insurance money, and from this need comes my valuing of this type of murderous action… absurd! “And why do animals not have rights? Briefly, because they are not thinking beings. They do not choose to act, and therefore are not moral beings." Going by this logic, an infant also cannot have rights “because they are not thinking beings. They cannot choose to act, and therefore are not moral beings”. And so is a retarded person, or an older person suffering from a degenerative brain disease. I don’t understand how and why you separate the biological and physiological features of the Human species from your arguments about the “mental” capacities that differentiate us as a species from other animals. How can you get the “mental” without the physical hard-wiring? IT IS PURELY IN THE PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL REALM that ALL OUR CONCEPT OF RIGHTS DEPEND UPON. Without the basic and necessary mechanisms of our physiological hard-wiring in the brain, one CANNOT EVEN BEGIN TO SPEAK OF ANY “MENTAL” CAPACITIES and therefore of any concept of morals or rights. There is no duality of the mind and the body. A Human is a HUMAN simply BECAUSE of the PURELY biological/physiological. This hard-wiring of our brains in the MOST IMPORTANT difference that separates us from other living beings. Thus, there is NOTHING like a “PARTLY HUMAN Infant” or a “NOT YET” Human infant! The fullest meaning of the word “Human” is only captured by a clear recognition of the PHYSIOLOGICAL characteristics – which IMPLIES also all your mental faculties and capacities… because without the former you CANNOT get the latter. Thus, an infant is FULLY HUMAN. Only human beings can have Rights. Thus, infants have Rights. “A baby human, is, biologically or anthropologically speaking, a human, of course. However, like I stated before, that is NOT enough to grant it rights or to differentiate it from any other animal.” Why NOT?!?!? A baby is Human but not “human enough” to have Rights?? What’s your logic?

I almost cried.

Last night, I watched the last half-hour or so of the movie "Deep Impact", and I almost cried.

Friday, August 05, 2005

Reverence for the Self

"A noble soul has reverence for itself" -- Nietzsche Even though I am an atheist, I believe that I am also a profoundly religious person. I have that intense religious reverence that is properly directed towards myself and towards living in this world. I view of my life in this world as so sacred as worthy of all actions. My life is my end, and everything else is my means to the betterment of my life as my end. I watch this world around us with such awe and amazement, at the amazing achievements of Human acts. I don't admire mountains and oceans as much as I hold with awe the spectacle of a towering skyline. The beauty is in the manifestation of a thought, an idea. Even more beautiful is witnessing the actual process of thought being transformed to reality. I watch with careful reverence at the automatic mechanisms of a garbage-collecting truck as its robotic arms and powerful motor-engine work so effeciently in conjuntion with the human direction. I am amazed at the machine and the genuis mind who created that machine. I feel that if there is anything worthy of the highest praise in this world, it should be the mind of a genuis and all that it produces.

I Hate Cingular Wireless!!

I just had to deal with a FRUSTRATING episode with Cingular Wireless customer service! I mean, are they dumb or what!? Geee... instead of them helping me out, I had to HELP THEM OUT! They called me today saying they could not verify my address for shipment. I said, "uh.. how come I get shipments from everyone else and you guys can't ship anything to me?" Anyway, so I decided, I offered to go on USPS website and verify the address on that site FOR CINGULAR. So I did that. I verified it and told the rep that's how you do it. Then she said, oh okay... well, thanks. Now I can ship your package to you. And I was like, your welcome, is there anything else I could help you with?? I ASKED HER THAT!!! I mean, who's the customer service rep here? Anyway.. all this DRAMA after they had already LOST MY SHIPMENT ONCE BEFORE last week! Cingular just doesn't know how to get it right! I'm sorry. I just hung up from that call.. and I needed to vent!

Thursday, August 04, 2005

Pasha, contd-

As he raised his fork to his mouth, he became aware of the sounds around him. It was like a chorus of incessantly senseless chatter. "I'm on a low-carb diet now," said the woman sitting diagonally across from Pasha. She spoke through the half-chewed piece of juicy steak in her mouth as she reached out to sip her Diet Coke. Pasha noticed how easily she had spread herself on her seat – like some thick liquid spilled onto a chair, having the tendency to flow over but being restrained by its own viscosity. He quickly looked away and tried to focus on Jardin.

HAHAHA! My naive attempts at Philosophy in my younger years!

These are some of the things I wrote down in my journal during my younger years as an asipiring "arm-chair philosopher"! I was so steeped in absurdity! It's amazing!-- and funny, I think! :) "People like to feed their own egos by believing that of all the living creatures, Humans are the SUPERIOR beings. They do not like the idea that humans are in no way greater than any other creature in the Universe. That humans and their surroundings are all the same thing -- we humans exist within the fabric of the Universe -- Humans in the universe and the universe inside us and part of us. And even in that, it is all still very illusory. The true reality of our existence and of the universe is very much beyond our grasp. This is all just a illusory reflection of what might be real. Our minds cannot understand our existence totally. We do not know whether we exist in the present, since what is really the "present"? Time itself is an illusion. Some say there is an eternal "now", some say there is no concept of a "now", only a past and a future. We also do not have total and full control over our lives. We cannot control the past, and we cannot fully control the future. So our lives is haphazardly controlled by us and our destiny and surrounding forces. Life is illusory, unknown, and varying. We may be able to manipulate certain things to cause certain other things, but we can NEVER be SURE that our manipulation will work and provide us with the desired results. We would like to THINK of ourselves as masters of destiny but it would be much wiser to think of ourselves as simply, humble, lowly creatures, like a child, and let life have its own way with us." ===== My God, I was SOOO lost!! But now, I'm found! Praise the Lord! ;) Incidentally, yes I was charismatic. It was FUN! :)

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

"Que aún cuando te odio, te sigo amando..." - D. Olvera "When one has nothing in life to achieve, no goals to reach, nothing to look forward to, nothing in life to possess, one looks to someone else who has those things. And in that someone else, one sees the fulfillment of their own needs. Through that person, one can find a connection between their own life and all their failed or impossible aspirations. The other person becomes their only value in life. They become the reason and purpose to live. And when even that is taken away, then why bother going through the motions of life?"

Sayings I would say but someone else said them for me

Coming out of my mouth, these things would be dismissed as my usual style of cynicism... but I'm glad people understand the essence of what I'm trying to say to them in as "nice" words as is possible to me. Don't people ever get tired of being polite? When can we stop calling our dogs, babies, and just call them what they really are --dogs!? I know I get really tired after I have smiled for some time. Your ridiculous little opinion has been noted. I used to have a handle on life...but it broke off. Heart Attacks...God's revenge for eating His animal friends. Some people are only alive because it is illegal to shoot them. Try not to let your mind wander...It is too small and fragile to be out by itself.

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Incomplete

If you've never had a beginning to your existence, and if you will never have an end to your existence, then do you really know what it means to EXIST? Can you know what it means to exist, as opposed to not existing, if you do not even have the possibility of non-existence? Is immortality really all that its cracked up to be? I'm very glad that Eve ate the apple from the tree of knowledge rather than the tree of life. I mean, what point is it to have an endless existence of an imbecile? Such torture! But then if she had eaten an apple from both life and knowledge, even then it would seem like a damnation to the inescapable fact of immortality! There is no choice or free-will in the matter of self-existence. Seems pretty dreary to me. Hmmm... now to think about it... Eating from the tree of life and from the tree of knowledge would result in an inherently contradictory and therefore unintelligible scenario. It would NOT be possible, if one tries to make logical sense out of this situation, for Eve to have eaten both apples and experienced the gifts of both those trees. No wonder the Genesis story so conveniently gets her to eat just one apple for knowledge (thus explaining away our faculty to think and reason) and then prevents her from getting anywhere near the apple of life (thus explaining away our obvious moratality), because if she would have eaten both apples, one would reach a contradiction. And we all know, contradictions do not exist in reality!

Monday, August 01, 2005

Feasting on Seconds -- Republished

There are times when you produce or create something that truly surprises you. You wonder amazingly that you had whatever it was that needed to be there inorder to give rise to that creation. There are many things I have posted on this blog that does that for me: it surprises me. This poem is just one example of that. I post this here once again to bring it to the center of my attention. I think it serves to remind me that one is only as capable as one's own assesment of one's self. And so, I believe one should aspire to things they believe are not within their normal range of capacities, and then maybe witness an amazing suprise. =========================== Moonlight dripping quiet fog hovering shadows never letting loose In the vastness, I walk... in s l o w thinking movements crushing the tired grass ripping their hearts I ponder the ominous air And swallow the timorous sky gulp in... breathe out The wind is mocking me its taunting laughter its foreboding cries close to my ear I open my lungs blanket the wind and smother its density They watch me bare my chest My bleeding heart... I know they see with salivating eyes In hungry patience they await the silence of my being to smell my decaying body to gouge my succulent eyes and drink from the vial of my glands I look right back at them with eyes as terse as steel but my thumping heart rises in decibels deafening my ears And they see my shivering limbs Their tongues lick off the streams of my seeping blood Their low rumbles reek of impatient greed Only seconds more... I think The moon watched in embarrassed silence And hid her sadness behind her curves Let me not know the manner of my death I pray Only seconds more...

By Sasca D'Agostino -- Nothing is more true!

People go to parties, normally. I don't go to parties unless I am forced. Once I am there I hafto force myself to leave the world of my thoughts to enter into the language of the spoken word. And its like tearing myself in half. Why these pointless noises the people utter and moan. Yes, part of this avoidance of social activity is pride I assume. Part of this is shame at the utter blank-ness of many people also labeling themselves as members of the human race. If we only thought about what we said OR DID...why is thought such a rare phenomenon? I suppose if I must be one of these sheep, being the black one isin't so bad... [Ergo: Shame at the utter blank-ness of many people ALSO labelling themselves as members of the Human race. - Sasca, you stole the thoughts from my mind and gave them such precise words. I hate you for having said this before I could and in a way that I probably couldn't!]

Baby and Evil: Contradiction?

Well, let's put it this way: Sin is evil? Yes or NO? If No, then sin is either good or neutral. If sin is good, then we should all sin because it is good, and we all should do good. If sin is neutral, that means it is NOT good nor bad. Thus, if we commit a "sin" it shouldn't matter to anybody because it is a neutral act. If you say that some acts are NOT inherently sinful, but it is judged based upon the effects of the actions, then "sin" becomes a very subjective phenomena that changes interpretations through time and culture and people. Thus, Sin is either good, or bad, or neutral. But we know clearly that according to religious doctrine, one must AVOID sinning. God hates the sin, they say. Thus, Sin cannot be good because God would not hate the good. Sin cannot be neutral because God wouldn't care to judge your neutral actions (like drinking water when you're thirsty). Thus, Sin has to be BAD or IMMORAL or EVIL because God judges disfavorably against the one who sins. Thus, choosing to do the bad or the immoral or the evil, is committing a sin (according to that religious believer). However, in the case of the doctrine of the "Original Sin", the belief is that Original Sin exists from the moment a human is born on this earth. In other words, Humans are inherently stained with sin as a part of their very NATURE. Sin, as we just understood it, is NOT good, NOR NEUTRAL, but clearly and decidedly BAD. Thus, a baby is BORN with characteristics that are said to be inherent in this new-born infant that are considered decidedly BAD, i.e. of sin. The doctrine allows for no possibility of acting towards being sinful, nor any possibility of beginning with a clean-slate. The doctrine accepts as an axiom that Humans are sinful creatures, unable to escape their depraved nature. Their only salvation is to reduce themselves to dust in their pursuit of worshipping and seeking the mercy of their divine, loving, God. (Note: I have deliberately avoided using the word "evil" cuz it seems that people shy away from that word, considering it to be too loaded! That, or people have such dramatically different ideas of what they define as "evil". So, it seems acceptable to use generic definitions of good and bad to convey right and wrong, moral and immoral, good and evil).
well, its kindof a scary thing to say... to say
all i found was...
myself...

"you will seek me and find me when you seek me with all of your heart."

you never told me the real reason why you are atheist- you said it goes beyond reason- so what is it?8/08/2005 05:24:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Oh, it's a really loooong and personal story...
How am I supposed to write all about it on here!? This blog has turned into too public a forum..
And I'm not sure I'll be able to convincingly express myself through written words here on all the experiences that took me through the phases of high religiosity, through doubt, and finally to hard atheism.8/08/2005 07:49:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|well i wan tot hear it--do u want my email address, seriously...u can't cop out so easy JK8/09/2005 11:44:00 AM|W|P|Blogger innommable|W|P|oh, I see an oportunity for a story here... Confessions of an Atheist.8/09/2005 12:21:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|you can't get out of it now...hehehe...8/09/2005 01:29:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|PEOPLE! I actually have some WORK to do today at work! LOL! So, I'm not gonna be blogging much... :(8/09/2005 02:12:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|haha dude-chill did we say do it now~! LOL noooo...8/09/2005 04:32:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Oh well, let's just say, I discovered almost the entire charismatic catholic church that I was a part of, embroiled in lies, deceit and secrets.
I found this in the highest levels of the church -- allegeded leaders of the "spirit", priests, nuns, bishops, and lay people who claimed to have been filled with the Holy Spirit, and claimed to have "visions", gift of tongues, and healing powers.
My process of discovery of part accident, part a deliberate deception of my own.8/09/2005 04:38:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Incidentally, this church had HUGE HUGE numbers of people flocking to its gates every week from all over the world! On any given week, there would be more than 25 thousand people praising and worshipping at this place.
The "spiritual leaders" who ran this place claimed evidence of healing taking place, calling peoples names randomly and revealing their illnesses and saying they were now cured, speaking in tongues, etc.
I felt the effects of the "spirit" too! They said I received the "gift of tears" since I had cried like a baby... and that the electric feeling that passed through my body was the spirit moving in me.
It was pretty cool... and CRAZY! Many people attending claimed to have been healed, seen visions of Jesus and Mary, spoke in tongues, etc.
Wow! It's amazing to look back upon it and remember those days.. haw far I have come... how crazy my days were back then... steeped in mindless mysticism, the negation of our human senses and of all the concrete realities our senses could perceive.
It was essentially a negation of existence -- my own personal existence.8/10/2005 10:02:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|i knew it- i totally "felt' the bad charismatic experience vibe in you8/10/2005 10:03:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|wow-->>

just, wow...

i was raised charismatic Ergo...i know EXACTLY what you are talking about...

i feel you8/10/2005 10:22:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|so was this part of a covanent community or sword in the spirit organization or just some random following? 25 thousand??? wow...8/10/2005 11:11:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Oh, I don't know what you mean by Covenant community or Sword blah blah...
This was basically a TINY little Parish in small southern Indian village.
Apparently, one of the priests in that parish (maybe the head priest, I can't remember) claimed to have received a "vision" from God (or angels, I'm not sure) with clear directives to begin proselytizing from this parish, create an Evangelical mission there, and preach to the world.
According to his testimony of the vision, God (or angel) said that all the necessary help and materials will automatically fall into place if he is willing to follow God's will.
So he did. And that started out with a small gathering of local peoples... then the message spread through word-of-mouth. Apparently, there were way too many miraculous incidents happening there that caught people's attention.
Now that place has almost become like a HUGE CORPORATE headquarters! Someone gave away for free an ENTIRE newly constructed building that was supposed to have been used as a Hospital, to this organization which is now being used a rooms to house people coming from all parts of the world there.
The last I heard about them, they had spread wide from that initial location and was constructing underground subway shuttles to transport the faithful between services being conducted at the different locations.
The name of this place is "The Divine Retreat Center". You can google it online.
Their icon of faith is the image of the "Divine" Jesus -- a white caucasian male with long flowing blond hair, wearing a whitish robe with a red shawl pulled across his chest, and shafts of lightrays coming out of his two hands.
There was also a "bleeding" picture incident at this place that was captured on tape, which they now sell there to the faithful... who probably buy it and watch the slow, bleeding process of that picture for about a couple hours.8/10/2005 11:12:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|You felt the bad charismatic "vibe" coming from me!?!? WHATEVER, SASCA! Yeah, sure!8/10/2005 11:18:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|like is said i knew you were catholic because you had a SET Catholic definition of God you were reacting against and further, as far as charimatic you seemed very reactionary specifically against mystical-charismatic-visionary-type experiences (and you have a charismatic personality, plus your way of expressing yourself and your sarcastic charismatic exopressions praise the lord, etc etc) so i am not making it up i just got that vibe i was thinking you were very into charismatic things at one point

- listen it takes one to know one8/10/2005 11:19:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|( remmeebr i said "you must be charismatic" ??? hmmm? LOL well i was thinkin that for a while before i said it, hehe )8/10/2005 11:21:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|HAHAHA you think I'm like pulling a charismatic thing on you like reading hearts or something?? HAHAHAHA

---no no no its totally just my LOGICAL observations !!!!! LOL8/10/2005 11:23:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Hmmm.... now that you explain it that way.... hmm, I guess you're right, huh?
Damn!! I AM SO OBVIOUS! Like an open book, huh?8/10/2005 11:30:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|to me you are, only because we think the same way so i can read the language you think/live in fluently8/10/2005 11:31:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|;)8/08/2005 12:37:00 PM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|I find this very frustrating about American News journalism. They attempt to tackle large, complex issues like abortion, gay rights, historicity of Jesus, global politics, etc. in basically 10 minute segments of their evening news formats. And when they do those news magazine shows like Dateline or Nightline, etc. they attempt to drastically simplify these complex issues in favor of getting "hot quotes" or byte-sized information. Very rarely do we really get a truly analytic commentary or in-depth inspection into all sides of an issues that is being explored for atleast more than a 10 minute segment, and in a format that does not exploit the sensationalism of sound-byte news gathering. I feel that if the news networks cannot dedicate such time and depth to such stories due to whatever business or marketing constraints they might have, then they should simply not even made a PRETENSE at trying to exlore those issues in their regular news formats. It's amazing that within the 30 minutes of evening news broadcasts, they have to cram in about 5-6 stories, headline news, in-depth analysis, person of the week, filler talk, and commercials!! I understand that these byte-sized 10minute news formats largely developed in response the behavior of the American public. The American people in general do not want to make the effort to THINK while watching TV. TV is supposed to be escapist and sensationalist for them. They want others to TELL them what to think. They do not even care to have the journalists themselves do any much of thinking or analysis on TV, because that would make it "nerdy-news". People have a tendency to rally around slogans and catch-phrases -- sound-bytes that are provocative and sensational. They do not have the patience to sit around listening to facts and analysis or even figuring it out themselves. They impatiently watch the news, then they switch to another channel during commercials, then they impatiently watch another channel, and so on and so forth. The only saving grace of American news media is the Public Television Stations programs. I wish we had more of that. I know that when I become rich and have tons of money to give away (if I so choose to), I will definitely be giving some of my money to the PBS stations.|W|P|112352509777041577|W|P|Byte-sized World|W|P|8/08/2005 10:49:00 AM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|If you do not understand or get these concepts after this post, I shall make no more attempts to discuss this further. There is nothing more for me to say than what I have already said about the issue. “A fetus, also has the POTENTIAL to become a FULL THINKING HUMAN.” Going by this logic: A sperm has the potential to fertilize the egg, which then together have the potential to conceive a clump of cells, which then has the potential to become an embryo, which then has the potential to grow into a fetus, which then has the potential be born and become an infant baby, which then has the potential to grow up to become a FULL THINKING HUMAN BEING! Hence, the sperm and the egg has the potential to become a FULL THINKING HUMAN BEING! Hence, masturbation (deliberate or involuntary) is both criminal and immoral because you have KILLED OFF the potential to have a LIVING THINKING HUMAN BEING! Hence, monthly periods are an EVIL and should be avoided as much as possible so as to not waste the POTENTIALS of those cells to become LIVING THINKING HUMAN BEINGS! Awesome! “Funny, but I have not heard of fingerbortionists or laws to protect the rights to cut off your finger. No. Because a finger is in fact an extension of a body.” Precisely my point! If there is NO LAWS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF YOUR FINGER, then why should there be any laws to protect the “Rights” of a fetus? They are both in the very same way an EXTENTSION of the host, having existence purely due to the virtue of the host, fully subsumed in the host. The finger is NOT its whole being, but a part of the whole being – which is the whole person. A fetus is NOT a whole being but a part of the mother, existing as an extension of herself, inside of herself. Parts of the body do not have Rights. Only individual, independently existing, separate units of Human beings have Rights. “…I get hungry. Let's say that aside from vegetables, fruits, and legumes, there's a deer around readily available for me to kill and eat. Gotta eat, right? But if this deer is only different from me in that it's got a tail, or antlers or fur, then how can I justify killing it for food? Am I going to deem animals that have antlers, or something else, to be without the right to life? No. That is arbitrary and absurd. It should have the same rights as I have since it is only another animal, and a member of the same kingom, Animalia.” Are you trying to say that animals eating each other in the jungles of this world are committing immoral acts every time they kill another? That is absurd! First off, it is the way ecological balance of nature is maintained – by animals and plants eating or being eaten by another. Secondly, there can be no concept of Rights applicable to animals because of reasons I have explained. so many times already. Here is the fact: Humans are just ANOTHER SPECIES OF ANIMALS. Thus, as animals, we also engage in the great scheme of natural balance by maintaining our survival and reproductive capacities by killing other animals – just like a lion eats a deer, so we humans can eat a deer. So how do I justify killing it for food? I DON’T NEED TO JUSTIFY IT!? THERE IS NO REASON TO! Why do you think there needs to BE ANY REASON for that? As I said, Rights are NOT applicable to animalist instinctual natures. You said, “[Animals] should have the same rights as I have since it is only another animal, and a member of the same kingom, Animalia.” I don’t see how you can apply the concept of Rights to animals. The REASON Humans DO NOT and CANNOT eat EACH OTHER like other animals do, is because in regards to the Human species, and the human species ONLY, there arises the CONCEPT of RIGHTS. Rights are applicable ONLY to volitional beings that act deliberately in environments that make it possible to act with choice, among competing values that can be identified as either being consistent or enhancing to their ultimate value of life or detrimental to it. “I have to right to kill this deer, and eat it, because I have the need to eat, and from this need comes my valuing of this type of food…” Going by this logic then, I have a right to kill my mom because I have a need to have her insurance money, and from this need comes my valuing of this type of murderous action… absurd! “And why do animals not have rights? Briefly, because they are not thinking beings. They do not choose to act, and therefore are not moral beings." Going by this logic, an infant also cannot have rights “because they are not thinking beings. They cannot choose to act, and therefore are not moral beings”. And so is a retarded person, or an older person suffering from a degenerative brain disease. I don’t understand how and why you separate the biological and physiological features of the Human species from your arguments about the “mental” capacities that differentiate us as a species from other animals. How can you get the “mental” without the physical hard-wiring? IT IS PURELY IN THE PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL REALM that ALL OUR CONCEPT OF RIGHTS DEPEND UPON. Without the basic and necessary mechanisms of our physiological hard-wiring in the brain, one CANNOT EVEN BEGIN TO SPEAK OF ANY “MENTAL” CAPACITIES and therefore of any concept of morals or rights. There is no duality of the mind and the body. A Human is a HUMAN simply BECAUSE of the PURELY biological/physiological. This hard-wiring of our brains in the MOST IMPORTANT difference that separates us from other living beings. Thus, there is NOTHING like a “PARTLY HUMAN Infant” or a “NOT YET” Human infant! The fullest meaning of the word “Human” is only captured by a clear recognition of the PHYSIOLOGICAL characteristics – which IMPLIES also all your mental faculties and capacities… because without the former you CANNOT get the latter. Thus, an infant is FULLY HUMAN. Only human beings can have Rights. Thus, infants have Rights. “A baby human, is, biologically or anthropologically speaking, a human, of course. However, like I stated before, that is NOT enough to grant it rights or to differentiate it from any other animal.” Why NOT?!?!? A baby is Human but not “human enough” to have Rights?? What’s your logic? |W|P|112351641290648776|W|P|For the Last Time!|W|P|8/08/2005 01:38:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|i say it IS human

and by that fact

has ALL rights due to a human being8/08/2005 04:47:00 PM|W|P|Blogger innommable|W|P|What you are arguing against is not my argument, but pieces of my argument taken out of context.

And to just an ordinary girl, yeah, a baby is human according to biological or anthropological nomenclature. I've never argued against that.8/08/2005 05:29:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|"yeah, a baby is human according to biological or anthropological nomenclature."

There is no other "nomenclature" that can add any more significance or TRUTH to the fact that an infant is FULLY HUMAN primarily due to the phsyiological/biological characteristics belong to the Human species.8/09/2005 11:39:00 AM|W|P|Blogger innommable|W|P|clearly there is, Ergo8/08/2005 09:04:00 AM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|Last night, I watched the last half-hour or so of the movie "Deep Impact", and I almost cried.|W|P|112350989206102046|W|P|I almost cried.|W|P|8/08/2005 12:12:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tyrel|W|P|I read the book "Old Yeller" for the second time and I almost cried.

Such a sad story...8/08/2005 01:33:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|haha yeah that movie almost made me cry too...almost8/08/2005 01:34:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|the only 2 movies EVER to make me cry were Flipper and AI
HAHA weird i don't even like those movies8/08/2005 01:43:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|infact i think Old yeller made me cry too- or at elast come really really close..the movie, though8/08/2005 02:39:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Who are you!? Are you Sasca, or Just an ordinary girl?? I mean, if you don't wanna answer, that's cool. I'm just curious... certain things don't seem to add up, I guess.8/08/2005 04:40:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|oh yeh its sasca haha LOL sorry for the confusion8/05/2005 12:58:00 PM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|"A noble soul has reverence for itself" -- Nietzsche Even though I am an atheist, I believe that I am also a profoundly religious person. I have that intense religious reverence that is properly directed towards myself and towards living in this world. I view of my life in this world as so sacred as worthy of all actions. My life is my end, and everything else is my means to the betterment of my life as my end. I watch this world around us with such awe and amazement, at the amazing achievements of Human acts. I don't admire mountains and oceans as much as I hold with awe the spectacle of a towering skyline. The beauty is in the manifestation of a thought, an idea. Even more beautiful is witnessing the actual process of thought being transformed to reality. I watch with careful reverence at the automatic mechanisms of a garbage-collecting truck as its robotic arms and powerful motor-engine work so effeciently in conjuntion with the human direction. I am amazed at the machine and the genuis mind who created that machine. I feel that if there is anything worthy of the highest praise in this world, it should be the mind of a genuis and all that it produces.|W|P|112326543533366936|W|P|Reverence for the Self|W|P|8/05/2005 06:23:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|lol, i was tired from all the bloggin yesterday8/07/2005 04:20:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|ok- def disagree here- mountains are way moe aweinspiring then a garbage truck- yes, the mind is ingenius, but the mind is not god...which is what you make it...8/08/2005 09:01:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Well, if that's what you think. Though I don't see what your reasons are to feel awed at the sight of a mountain than seeing a garbage truck, for instance?
I mean, mountains are there -- they just are. They've always been there for as long as we've been around... and they'll be there for a while. Just static things.

When I look at an amazing creation made by us Humans, I see that which was NEVER there before... and that which is NOW there, like PUFF!! -- And these things function so amazingly -- like consider the awesomeness of a Boeing 747! I mean that hugh JUMBO JET! It is simply a MIRACLE that that heavy-mass of metal can FLY! It can fly and remain suspended inthe air and carry people across continents!
Then compare that to a bird. To the bird. I find it so anti-climactic in comparion.

When I worked a Dunkin' Donuts and I had to carry trash out to the loading zone in the basement... it was amazing to just stand there for a few moments and watch these garbage trucks so powerfully and efficiently carry the large, megaton trash bin from under the trash compactor... and load it up upon the truck... all automatically, efficiently, and powerfully. Hearing the roar of that engine is like hearing the cry of LIFE that WE created -- fully and completely! Machines are like a species of creation that is wholly been endowed with life by US... we are their Gods, their creators, their sustainers! I think that's awesome!8/08/2005 01:36:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|YOU WORKED ART dunkin DONUTSSS I TOTALLY EWANTED To i applied but they never hired me HAHAHA- i lvoe that place LOL8/08/2005 01:37:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|OH ooookay now that u clarify i understand-- yeah in that sense i see the "aweinspiring ness" of garbage truck8/08/2005 02:43:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Maybe you were too over-qualified to work at Dunkin Donuts! :)
I enjoyed my work there.. it was fun... it was hard work, but it was so much fun! And I learned so many new things... like how to sweep and mop the floor... how to count money! lol! :)8/08/2005 04:43:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|exactly i would SO have a good time workin there LOL...
(sasca/just an ordinary girl)8/05/2005 12:34:00 PM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|I just had to deal with a FRUSTRATING episode with Cingular Wireless customer service! I mean, are they dumb or what!? Geee... instead of them helping me out, I had to HELP THEM OUT! They called me today saying they could not verify my address for shipment. I said, "uh.. how come I get shipments from everyone else and you guys can't ship anything to me?" Anyway, so I decided, I offered to go on USPS website and verify the address on that site FOR CINGULAR. So I did that. I verified it and told the rep that's how you do it. Then she said, oh okay... well, thanks. Now I can ship your package to you. And I was like, your welcome, is there anything else I could help you with?? I ASKED HER THAT!!! I mean, who's the customer service rep here? Anyway.. all this DRAMA after they had already LOST MY SHIPMENT ONCE BEFORE last week! Cingular just doesn't know how to get it right! I'm sorry. I just hung up from that call.. and I needed to vent!|W|P|112326349006878557|W|P|I Hate Cingular Wireless!!|W|P|8/05/2005 12:48:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|hahaahhaha- WE JUST GOT A FLAT SCREEN TV INSTALLED BEHIND ME ON THE WALL AT WORK- but you know this actually does NOOT excite me in the slightest at all i suppose it should...8/05/2005 12:49:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|To blog or not to blog: Companies weigh pros, cons of Web journaling
As weblogs -- Just as employers are getting a handle on how to regulate personal e-mail, Web surfing and instant messaging during work hours, they must now deal with a new technology-fed phenomenon -- blogging ...
If you want, check out my secret sony ps3 blog.8/05/2005 01:14:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Huh? Who's this anonymous dude/gal? Hmm.. anyway.

So COOOL!! You've got a flat screen TV at work!! Awesome! Do you get Cable? Can you watch it while you work!?? I think that's awesome!8/05/2005 01:35:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|haha I like the anonymous person..he or she is odd in a cool way interjecting random technological-scientifc info HAHAHA wow
well i am off work now anoymous so... its ALL good!
yes, we have cable (how thrilling)8/05/2005 06:25:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|BTW, my guess is that you are visual nased n yur resonse to the TV, notice how it did nothing to make me excited, but you freaked out- you must be a visual learner, LOL- plus moajority of guys are visual i think8/04/2005 05:12:00 PM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|As he raised his fork to his mouth, he became aware of the sounds around him. It was like a chorus of incessantly senseless chatter. "I'm on a low-carb diet now," said the woman sitting diagonally across from Pasha. She spoke through the half-chewed piece of juicy steak in her mouth as she reached out to sip her Diet Coke. Pasha noticed how easily she had spread herself on her seat – like some thick liquid spilled onto a chair, having the tendency to flow over but being restrained by its own viscosity. He quickly looked away and tried to focus on Jardin.|W|P|112319433965913214|W|P|Pasha, contd-|W|P|8/04/2005 05:30:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|bleeeh i am still at work i hate you8/04/2005 05:33:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|i never said i wanned tah meet- juss asked if u knew cool places in chicago, yeh know...silly boy...plus it would have been bad--u would have had 5 catholic girls gangin up on u to convert you! haha8/04/2005 05:55:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|You have such ease with using onomatopoeias! Amazing!8/04/2005 06:01:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|why thank u-i mean, what the hell is an onkajiwfsdkjfhslkadfh?8/04/2005 06:10:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|btw i like the description of the woman, but it leaves me confused as to whether this is a good or bad thing...do we want her to be fluid and frozen in the same moment...the image of a half masticated meat in her mouth kinda throws me off.. are we liking this woman or not? liquid seems good frozen seems bad...mixed signals- oh and i mean, pardon me, what in the world is an onjhdsfgdsskf?8/04/2005 06:17:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Oh. Hmmm... good point Sasca.

I was trying to capture the image of liquid oozing out... but at the same time restrained in its location as if its frozen... so, I was trying to get dynamism and static-ism at the same time.

I describe her as not sitting, but spread herself on the chair... kinda like spilled water spreads itself on the chair... leaks and oozes...
but her body still remains intact, like a frozen drop of water... hanging as if in motion, but actually still.8/04/2005 06:19:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|And Onomatopoeia is a figure of speech. Didn't you learn this in your English grammar class?!?!
It's a figure of speech that describes the use of sounds in language... like the "buzzing" of the alarm clock! (lol!)
or the "ticking" of time.. or the "chirping" of birds... or the "whooosh" of the wind...

Or like in your case.. the "bleeeh" of frustration, I suppose?8/04/2005 06:39:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|ooooh ok, cool, no i never learned it but i am majoring in english with writing concentration so hopefully i will learn more about cool words like that...i have never taken any courses in writing or any good english courses EVER, i just do it

so i don't know any terms and stuff8/04/2005 06:40:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|thats funny u should say that

because i just learned i am an auditory learner-
only 15 % of the population is auditory-

most are visual...8/04/2005 09:08:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tyrel|W|P|well,, to add my two cents

i am a visual learner!! woo hoo...go visuals!8/05/2005 11:04:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|that explains why u don't mind hideous sounding alarm clocks!!!! ;)8/05/2005 12:02:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|How does one figure out what kind of a learner they are? How did you know it Sasca? Is there like an online test I can take? But I don't have speakers at my workplace.. so how am I supposed to test my auditory capabilities?8/05/2005 12:23:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|one can take a test i don't know if its online or not i took it from a book...8/04/2005 01:09:00 PM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|These are some of the things I wrote down in my journal during my younger years as an asipiring "arm-chair philosopher"! I was so steeped in absurdity! It's amazing!-- and funny, I think! :) "People like to feed their own egos by believing that of all the living creatures, Humans are the SUPERIOR beings. They do not like the idea that humans are in no way greater than any other creature in the Universe. That humans and their surroundings are all the same thing -- we humans exist within the fabric of the Universe -- Humans in the universe and the universe inside us and part of us. And even in that, it is all still very illusory. The true reality of our existence and of the universe is very much beyond our grasp. This is all just a illusory reflection of what might be real. Our minds cannot understand our existence totally. We do not know whether we exist in the present, since what is really the "present"? Time itself is an illusion. Some say there is an eternal "now", some say there is no concept of a "now", only a past and a future. We also do not have total and full control over our lives. We cannot control the past, and we cannot fully control the future. So our lives is haphazardly controlled by us and our destiny and surrounding forces. Life is illusory, unknown, and varying. We may be able to manipulate certain things to cause certain other things, but we can NEVER be SURE that our manipulation will work and provide us with the desired results. We would like to THINK of ourselves as masters of destiny but it would be much wiser to think of ourselves as simply, humble, lowly creatures, like a child, and let life have its own way with us." ===== My God, I was SOOO lost!! But now, I'm found! Praise the Lord! ;) Incidentally, yes I was charismatic. It was FUN! :)|W|P|112317962235805282|W|P|HAHAHA! My naive attempts at Philosophy in my younger years!|W|P|8/04/2005 01:25:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|yeh i could tell about the charismatic thing too8/04/2005 03:16:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|go to my blog right now LOL its funny! i think...8/03/2005 12:24:00 PM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|"Que aún cuando te odio, te sigo amando..." - D. Olvera "When one has nothing in life to achieve, no goals to reach, nothing to look forward to, nothing in life to possess, one looks to someone else who has those things. And in that someone else, one sees the fulfillment of their own needs. Through that person, one can find a connection between their own life and all their failed or impossible aspirations. The other person becomes their only value in life. They become the reason and purpose to live. And when even that is taken away, then why bother going through the motions of life?"|W|P|112309022089849630|W|P||W|P|8/03/2005 01:04:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|lol, jer-
you make me feel famous by posting things i have written on your blog-LOL hehe...woohoo8/03/2005 01:45:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|Umm... hello!??? Sasca dear.. this post, I came up with... except for the leading sentence in spanish. Did you happen to say the exact same thing somewhere on your blog? If so, I had no clue!8/03/2005 01:59:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|haha
no i meant the other thingy of mine you posted down there

oopsie4/03/2007 02:58:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|thats so interesting, thats my line...but how did u discover my last name?8/03/2005 09:45:00 AM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|Coming out of my mouth, these things would be dismissed as my usual style of cynicism... but I'm glad people understand the essence of what I'm trying to say to them in as "nice" words as is possible to me. Don't people ever get tired of being polite? When can we stop calling our dogs, babies, and just call them what they really are --dogs!? I know I get really tired after I have smiled for some time. Your ridiculous little opinion has been noted. I used to have a handle on life...but it broke off. Heart Attacks...God's revenge for eating His animal friends. Some people are only alive because it is illegal to shoot them. Try not to let your mind wander...It is too small and fragile to be out by itself.|W|P|112308072717743686|W|P|Sayings I would say but someone else said them for me|W|P|8/03/2005 11:41:00 AM|W|P|Blogger innommable|W|P|I think you wouldn't say these things because you'd probably get beat up, not because you're being polite.8/03/2005 01:03:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|some ppl AaaaRE only alive because its illegal to shoot them! HAHAHHAHA whoa-lol8/02/2005 11:22:00 AM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|If you've never had a beginning to your existence, and if you will never have an end to your existence, then do you really know what it means to EXIST? Can you know what it means to exist, as opposed to not existing, if you do not even have the possibility of non-existence? Is immortality really all that its cracked up to be? I'm very glad that Eve ate the apple from the tree of knowledge rather than the tree of life. I mean, what point is it to have an endless existence of an imbecile? Such torture! But then if she had eaten an apple from both life and knowledge, even then it would seem like a damnation to the inescapable fact of immortality! There is no choice or free-will in the matter of self-existence. Seems pretty dreary to me. Hmmm... now to think about it... Eating from the tree of life and from the tree of knowledge would result in an inherently contradictory and therefore unintelligible scenario. It would NOT be possible, if one tries to make logical sense out of this situation, for Eve to have eaten both apples and experienced the gifts of both those trees. No wonder the Genesis story so conveniently gets her to eat just one apple for knowledge (thus explaining away our faculty to think and reason) and then prevents her from getting anywhere near the apple of life (thus explaining away our obvious moratality), because if she would have eaten both apples, one would reach a contradiction. And we all know, contradictions do not exist in reality!|W|P|112300119669817976|W|P|Incomplete|W|P|8/02/2005 03:41:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|ergo who taught you yer theology man? LOL you really got some wacked ideas yer always slightly off in your perception of what 'the whole God-morality-thing' is all about, like you've got the basic idea of it but then yer understanding of it always jumps ship early...just hang on a second longer babe the storm is gonna clear8/02/2005 04:14:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|My theology was taught to me by the Catholic Church catechisms. :)

My philosophy is taught by Reason.8/02/2005 04:16:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Ergo Sum|W|P|And about this post... it's not really much a commentary of God, as much as it is about an investigation into the definition of concepts like "Knowledge" and "Immortality".8/02/2005 07:32:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|i was just say in ingeneral, not like sepcifically that this post is about God...well yeah but you def got them taught wrong in your catechesis tho babe8/01/2005 01:14:00 PM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|There are times when you produce or create something that truly surprises you. You wonder amazingly that you had whatever it was that needed to be there inorder to give rise to that creation. There are many things I have posted on this blog that does that for me: it surprises me. This poem is just one example of that. I post this here once again to bring it to the center of my attention. I think it serves to remind me that one is only as capable as one's own assesment of one's self. And so, I believe one should aspire to things they believe are not within their normal range of capacities, and then maybe witness an amazing suprise. =========================== Moonlight dripping quiet fog hovering shadows never letting loose In the vastness, I walk... in s l o w thinking movements crushing the tired grass ripping their hearts I ponder the ominous air And swallow the timorous sky gulp in... breathe out The wind is mocking me its taunting laughter its foreboding cries close to my ear I open my lungs blanket the wind and smother its density They watch me bare my chest My bleeding heart... I know they see with salivating eyes In hungry patience they await the silence of my being to smell my decaying body to gouge my succulent eyes and drink from the vial of my glands I look right back at them with eyes as terse as steel but my thumping heart rises in decibels deafening my ears And they see my shivering limbs Their tongues lick off the streams of my seeping blood Their low rumbles reek of impatient greed Only seconds more... I think The moon watched in embarrassed silence And hid her sadness behind her curves Let me not know the manner of my death I pray Only seconds more...|W|P|112292074159681445|W|P|Feasting on Seconds -- Republished|W|P|8/02/2005 03:04:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|i love this one just as much as i did before8/01/2005 10:04:00 AM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|People go to parties, normally. I don't go to parties unless I am forced. Once I am there I hafto force myself to leave the world of my thoughts to enter into the language of the spoken word. And its like tearing myself in half. Why these pointless noises the people utter and moan. Yes, part of this avoidance of social activity is pride I assume. Part of this is shame at the utter blank-ness of many people also labeling themselves as members of the human race. If we only thought about what we said OR DID...why is thought such a rare phenomenon? I suppose if I must be one of these sheep, being the black one isin't so bad... [Ergo: Shame at the utter blank-ness of many people ALSO labelling themselves as members of the Human race. - Sasca, you stole the thoughts from my mind and gave them such precise words. I hate you for having said this before I could and in a way that I probably couldn't!]|W|P|112290892934997086|W|P|By Sasca D'Agostino -- Nothing is more true!|W|P|8/02/2005 02:58:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|hehe- i accept yer proposal!!!! that is, excpet for the whole God thing, LOL8/02/2005 03:03:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Semperviva|W|P|[i'm sure you could express it just as well- the best expression of truth it seems comes from the LEAST 'tearing away' from how you truly feel/how you ARE- which is why i stray from grammer and syntax, not to rebel, but because they exist not in my being and i strive to express my being with the AID of letters as only a stepping stone into my soul can i do this]8/01/2005 09:33:00 AM|W|P|Ergo Sum|W|P|Well, let's put it this way: Sin is evil? Yes or NO? If No, then sin is either good or neutral. If sin is good, then we should all sin because it is good, and we all should do good. If sin is neutral, that means it is NOT good nor bad. Thus, if we commit a "sin" it shouldn't matter to anybody because it is a neutral act. If you say that some acts are NOT inherently sinful, but it is judged based upon the effects of the actions, then "sin" becomes a very subjective phenomena that changes interpretations through time and culture and people. Thus, Sin is either good, or bad, or neutral. But we know clearly that according to religious doctrine, one must AVOID sinning. God hates the sin, they say. Thus, Sin cannot be good because God would not hate the good. Sin cannot be neutral because God wouldn't care to judge your neutral actions (like drinking water when you're thirsty). Thus, Sin has to be BAD or IMMORAL or EVIL because God judges disfavorably against the one who sins. Thus, choosing to do the bad or the immoral or the evil, is committing a sin (according to that religious believer). However, in the case of the doctrine of the "Original Sin", the belief is that Original Sin exists from the moment a human is born on this earth. In other words, Humans are inherently stained with sin as a part of their very NATURE. Sin, as we just understood it, is NOT good, NOR NEUTRAL, but clearly and decidedly BAD. Thus, a baby is BORN with characteristics that are said to be inherent in this new-born infant that are considered decidedly BAD, i.e. of sin. The doctrine allows for no possibility of acting towards being sinful, nor any possibility of beginning with a clean-slate. The doctrine accepts as an axiom that Humans are sinful creatures, unable to escape their depraved nature. Their only salvation is to reduce themselves to dust in their pursuit of worshipping and seeking the mercy of their divine, loving, God. (Note: I have deliberately avoided using the word "evil" cuz it seems that people shy away from that word, considering it to be too loaded! That, or people have such dramatically different ideas of what they define as "evil". So, it seems acceptable to use generic definitions of good and bad to convey right and wrong, moral and immoral, good and evil).|W|P|112290687685874245|W|P|Baby and Evil: Contradiction?|W|P|-->