The Deep Thinks of Hong Wu - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For the discussion of Philosophy. Discuss thought from Socrates to the Enlightenment and beyond!

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be debated in this forum, but those of religious belief who specifically wish to avoid threads being derailed by atheist arguments might prefer to use the Spirituality forum.
#14890996
RhetoricThug wrote:The ego-mind, as a survival mechanism, tries to protect its investment(s). After-all, time is an illusion of energy, so forum images usually feel obligated to save-face value. Surface details will always be signs & symptoms of consciousness. What "titular image X" wrote is not the whole story, it's a fragment of everything else happening... Therefore it's a myth. Likewise, problem-solution interplay produces more meaningless banter (I reply, I reply, I reply, I reply, I=eye=ego ergo ego=eye=I in this particular case), as the very nature of Being present penetrates this very moment, we're stuck in the middle grasping at the beginning and end of it all. I'm not impressed by conceited knowledge, because it's a fleeting impression bound by its disposition. Truth be told, being present creates an information bias, and your version of Truth is a story maid for story-telling. What's the point exactly, especially when visual space is a visual bias employed by the eye? Furthermore, you do not see with thy eye, you see with thy mind. Thought itself is a constant/continuous/contagious polycentric ripple effect, with no point of origin. Figures must be abstracted from the ground, and the ground is always (r)evolving. Figures (images) become myths by virtue of time (the nature of being present).


Case in point.
#14891054
Victoribus Spolia wrote:Case in point.
Yep, you figured it out, you collapsed the wave! That's the power of observation. :lol: It's strange how the probabilistic nature of a physical system can be abstracted through an observation. We're piloting (well, some of us would like to think therefore believe that we're piloting the wave. Perhaps the wave is piloting us, and we're dancing to the rhythm (dancing with the stars) of the ever-expanding primordial multidimensional wave, since we're not separate from the wave (hint hint-we're stardust)) a wave called life/reality and therefore we're the noise/interference, sensate-slit experiments, mind over matter mammals, collapsing the existential wave of perception. Of course, we must collapse the wave in order to make sense of it (open the doors of perception, 1 & 0), we gotta partake in nitpicky particle picnics (I'm X, I'm Y, I'm Z, nom nom nom, yummy patterns of information¡!¡). Thoughts and 'truth' behave like light and matter, and quantum decoherence is based upon Being present/observation. Information passes through you, and human patterns emerge. Sociology is incidental, byproduct of the human experience. You can spend all your precious time (energy) obsessing over the effect-of-effects, but you shan't understand or measure the cause-of-causes.

Mortal Portals
Mr. Myth, diffraction pattern, Victoribus Spolia...
Enjoys living life in a classical state of consciousness
Hunting for points & gathering particles (Rated-X (marks the spot))
Straw-men are sleep-walkers, dreaming of self-fulfilling myths
The strawman is not aware of being aware
Thus strawmen construct pornographics
Smelling farts all day, surfing poop-parades from cradle to grave.

NOW align your true SELF with the wave of waves, stop inventing purpose, stop dissecting the past and projecting the future, simply BE what you really are, living Truth... Consciousness having a human experience! It's pretty simple love, we're enfolded in the unfolding~ing~ing. You can acknowledge it and still discuss/dissect fecal formulas (social myths and whatnot). I just want you to understand that you're full of fancy feces. As long as you pretend to be a human myth, there will always be an opposite myth pretending to be your opponent.


(Soundtrack)






-∞The∞Universe∞
#14891628
Victoribus Spolia wrote:So why does a potato desire a chocolate shake?
The funny man is a man with a grievance.


Knowledge creates ignorance.

Does a potato knowingly desire a chocolate shake and does a potato understand how chocolate shakes flow/unfold? I suppose you could spam Opaque Cogitations with such a question...NOW, I'm actually interested in the idea that you're not an original identity (despite Being a Self-perceiving/preserving fragment of the whole, or sole result we call NOW), but rather a compilation of the past (thinking therefore believing in the ideas you absorb and regurgitate (FYI, it's processing phenomena (the medium is the message). 'My' spark of our consciousness struggles with this as well, we're stuck inside human vessels :eek: )). How can we search for 'truth' or talk about speculative 'truth' if we're not aware of being aware? You really think you're a string of characterizations (symbolic patterns of information, encoding/decoding)? :lol: I wish to reveal a form of personal transcendence before entering the public domain, because I know the material world is in BIG trouble if mankind doesn't transcend its limited perception of what IT is. I know we're not what we think therefore believe we are, I know dat I know no-thing.

The externalized human experience (waking, eating, sleeping, love, hate, etc), or surface signs/symptoms of consciousness, must be malleable. Furthermore, what we do to others we do to ourselves. The gestalt of perception is a dialectic (figure-ground interplay, systems~within~systems~within~systems∞and∞each∞system∞a∞symptom∞of∞the∞whole∞system), sure, but not in the form of a divisive schism. The dialectic is a unification of existential perception, a feedback loop (the five Ws determine where you are in the information stream we labeled as life/reality). The ego mind denies you such insight, because of the material/biological impulses that throw you aboUoUoUt the material world like an undisciplined child learning how to swim. There shan't be a common-sense for the unification of mind & matter until man/woman/it discovers that his/her/its identity is an abstraction process (life is a process, not a conclusion). For IT is living Truth.

I wish I could converse with forum images facetoface, so we may subconsciously allow our body language to massage (y)our mind (watch carefully, my words sing with enthusiastic gyration). After-all, we're more than forum images and word-ological debauchery. Point being, I'm aware of being aware, and I want you to know that all things in the material world pass through you and program who/what you think you are/experience. You must master or know thySELF before going outward for speculative 'truth.' Energy flows where attention goes, literally/physically (tactile sensorium, sensation involves the biochemical interplay of touch, your body is a bridge and a pseudo-barrier). Next time you're out in the forest, I want you to try and listen/watch to/for EVERYTHING... Impossible, right? Well, the next thing you know, a squirrel scurries in front of you, or ground bees sting you in the leg because you didn't notice em; at that very moment, your whole world shrinks & thy mind 'focuses in' on the impulse. This is Mankind's essential illness, we're unable to control our thoughts. Civilization, organized knowledge/chaos, is an infant in its cradle. We must understand consciousness before we domesticate or intelligently guide space and the human experience.



Blame is Escapism

We're unable to examine and critique our own thoughts, so we examine and critique others' thoughts.

We're designed to learn about ourselves through each other.

One love man. We hope you can master the present before you go and retrieve the past or project the future. :rainbow:
Last edited by RhetoricThug on 25 Feb 2018 06:32, edited 9 times in total.
#14891631
^ No worries, brother. I know you've become numb to this moment, but my message will swirl in (y)our dreams. NOW will wash over us again and again and again until we disappear from this miracle we call life. My message isn't just for you, it's for everyone (We are I, I am you). Rediscover the parallelism in our posts.

Let (Y)our Consciousness Swim in the Light
You could try and numb the pain, but it'll never go away
Damage control
The same old tricks won't work no more
Smarter, stronger

You could try and numb the pain, but it'll never go away
You could try and numb the pain, but it'll never go away
You could try and numb the pain, but it'll never go away

Calls from the dark
I got hope in my eyes
No help inside
I'm a swim in the light
Mmm, she tryne pull me in
But the same old tricks can't work no more
You could…
When you're in love
Swim in the light
Swim in your love



Be seeing you,

-∞The∞Universe∞
#14903513
Sometimes in life you have to ask yourself, why am I arguing with an admitted troll whose username is SpecialOlympian and whose avatar is a retarded person.

I met this nice foreign girl who was glad to meet another person who speaks English. We made all these plans to ride my bike for like three hours to a scenic area and presumably have sex all day but this morning she got cold feet and didn't show up, I don't blame her at all.
It was a crazy plan. It's been some good times out here though.
#14903936
Hong Wu wrote:Art is a representation of something else. This is obvious with pictures but it really applies to all art, such as music which is usually meant to convey or represent certain emotions or events.

Art is a representation of totality. Great Art is that in which an artist exceeds his own ability. Individual perception of art varies. Those who experience it each relate to their own point of view. Likewise martial arts display an individuals realization of potential. Those witnessing a display interpret it according to their appreciation of their own physicality.

As to religion, we think that we share our religion with other people but it's more like a crystal and we each see one facet of it. If we could really know each other's thoughts, we might realize that practically everyone's religion is different from everyone else's.

We might also realize that each facet is in fact only a small part, inter-related to the whole of the crystal and that in seeing one we see all. The "differences" all fold together into a unity.

Zam
#14905537
I'm starting to think that the reason people declare others to be stupid/weak is because they don't have the courage to go up against a strong person. This ties in nicely with the idea where, if you really believe that someone is stupid, why are you bothering to argue with them?

I've tried many routes to, putting it simply, explain the behaviors of people who baffle me, my latest mechanism being narcissism. But who knows, maybe it's all just simpler than I realized.

After all, even (or especially) narcissism is a form of cowardice.
#14932513
Hong Wu wrote:I've reached the apex of modern art. I call it "The Way is Like a Crow in the Night Sky." It's just a black piece of paper.

Thanks Yoko, don't sing … Ok?

Zam ;)
#14932625
Hong Wu wrote:I've reached the apex of modern art. I call it "The Way is Like a Crow in the Night Sky." It's just a black piece of paper.

You're more than a century too late, Hong Wu.

Black Square
#14933071
Using a canvas is sooooo bourgeois 1965.

Everyone knows that photography combined with set pieces is the way to express the creative experience.

Like taking a picture of a woman holding up her menstrual-stained underwear.

I am going to break the current trend of discriminating against distracted men who shit their pants in public by taking a picture of a man holding up his brown-streaked whiteys.

I think I shall call it, Transcending The Regime of Expectation.
#14993604
It's not sure if it's a good sign if I already find some of what I've written here enbarrassing but why stop now?

I'm on my phone and don't have time for a full write up to do this next bit the justice I think I deserve, however, in short, it's been noted that leftist millennial are extremely "conservative" about leftism.

If we define social policies into two broad categories: inclusive and exclusive. At their current states, an in inclusive policy says "1 in 100 is good, so admit everyone from that group." Current exclusive policy says, 99 in 100 are bad, so ban all of them.

At one point the left was inclusive but today they are increasingly exclusive, only about different things than the right is.

If we note the transitions from communism to social conservatism in Russia and China, communism/leftism appears to start with broad promises of inclusivity, then it moves to exclusive policies based upon flawed premises, when those premises become untenable there is not a return to inclusive policies, there is merely a substitution of different underlying premises for the exclusive policies.

If this was the pattern in Russia and China, happening in three stages, we might surmise that western leftists are at stage two. If they are somehow forced to accept that some of their premises are wrong (and many of them seem to avoid responsibility at all costs, almost as if they already suspect it) would they return to the relatively inclusive policies of classic liberalism or would we see a Russian outcome (a reversion to Christianity) or a Chinese outcome (redefining communism until it's a socially conservative, free market friendly system)?

I think I'm onto something here because classic liberalism is almost completely dead at this point and the only models we have all seem to end on similar ways, even though the west's progress down this path has been relatively slow.

I think that this is a normal process for both individuals and groups of people by extension. You start out with an inclusive attitude, then an exclusive attitude based upon those inclusive judgments, without even realizing that you're actually becoming more "conservative".
#14993632
OK so I have a keyboard now, that wasn't so bad for a phone post though.

Tl ; dr I think the above is basically a theory for the actual process through which people become more conservative. It goes like this:
1. Inclusive policies with leftist presumptions.
2. Exclusive policies with leftist presumptions.
3. Exclusive policies with rightist presumptions.

The interesting thing about this to me is that if I am right about how this applies to most people, you don't actually realize that you're becoming more conservative over time. You may even think that you're moving further to the left because you're being more stringent but in reality, stringency isn't really compatible with broad inclusivity in the first place as we often point out.
#14994008
Hong Wu wrote:OK so I have a keyboard now, that wasn't so bad for a phone post though.

Tl ; dr I think the above is basically a theory for the actual process through which people become more conservative. It goes like this:
1. Inclusive policies with leftist presumptions.
2. Exclusive policies with leftist presumptions.
3. Exclusive policies with rightist presumptions.

The interesting thing about this to me is that if I am right about how this applies to most people, you don't actually realize that you're becoming more conservative over time. You may even think that you're moving further to the left because you're being more stringent but in reality, stringency isn't really compatible with broad inclusivity in the first place as we often point out.
^How can you limit yourself like this? <---Rhetorical question.

The reply already occurred.
#15005551
It occurred to me that in Muslim countries where they fully cover up their women, without a religious order to reproduce, little to no reproduction would be occurring because you never see a woman, never get attracted to a woman and it's generally easier not to bother.
#15005555
Hong Wu wrote:It occurred to me that in Muslim countries where they fully cover up their women, without a religious order to reproduce, little to no reproduction would be occurring because you never see a woman, never get attracted to a woman and it's generally easier not to bother.


Yeah and as corollary to that the reason that muslims are so hard on gays is exactly because in the absence of any visible women a horny guy is probably more likely to try to sate his urges with other guys, same as in prison or other strictly sex segregated environments. I lived in Iran for a bit and was rather disturbed by how often men try to kiss each other as a greeting and they don't even make their women cover up as much as Sunnis do.
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
Ukrainegate

the boy king Racist. The one we have now, […]

EU-BREXIT

As you will see in the Guardian article below, Bo[…]

Election 2020

We haven't even discussed the "Green New Dea[…]

We need to look at this conflict from a Cold War […]