My physique is already perfect. The only thing I have to do now is make it even more perfect. Which is practically impossible.
Good luck, dieting is easy. No white sugar or refined bread (whole meal only), no sweets, chocolates, cakes, soda etc. Just God’s food! Easy! - tastes better too. Veg, salad, fruit, lean meat, (no milk, milk is for babies].
Just messing around, Gnome (I did it out of nostalgia). You’re sorely missed my man. Happy new year by the way! Where you bin? This year I’m being more of a people person.
intentional suppression: one tries to suppress an idea one wishes to EXPRESS but knows would be inappropriate or embracing, and one ends up somehow messing up the sentence often in an equally embarrassing manner or giving away what one wanted to suppress anyway. Or an indication of it.
If you analyze a slip closely you can sometimes find what caused the slip [especially in yourself].
Personally, I think she's been drinking wine again . . .
Like Freud once said: ‘sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.’
A slip usually means the intentional suppression or unintentional EXpression of an idea.
I read that book on Freudian slips a few years ago: 'The Psychopathology of Everyday Life.' But my favorite book by Freud is 'Civilization and its Discontents'. And of course, his essay on Narcissism.
My parents have been married for 34 years. My father’s parents met during the war and were married for 59 years until death did them part.
That’s inspirational to me. I am convinced that my parents will be the same [now that we have almost all left the nest they seem to be buying an increasing amount of pets, however].
But are these long lasting marriages a thing of the past? It remains to be seen!!!
A load of unnecessary legal nonsense the likes of which you have above outlined [what do they have to do with love?].
The ceremony itself is beautiful, but a ceremony is always symbolic. Birthdays are symbolic of birth. Funerals of death. Weddings of the marriage between two people, which produces offspring in which they are truly married together. The offspring is a living marriage of the two. And this is what it is symbolic of. Of that which binds two together.
All the rest is fluff. It is not pointless per se to be married if you don’t want children or are incapable of having any or may have children but aren’t certain.
It does not have to come after, per se, OR necessarily before.
Ultimately marriage is not necessary to a life long commitment, and the fact that this commitment must be made legal shows that a substitute must stand in to bind the two people together forever instead of what really does. A child.
‘To marry is to half one’s rights and double one’s duties!’, as Arthur Schopenhauer once said.
Ha ha.
This is my philosophy of marriage:
Marriage is only symbolic of the union between two people who love each other and not the union of two people who love each other. Not the marriage. I’ll say that again, Marriage is symbolic of the union and NOT the union. A couple only really become married – that is to say, the eternal marriage of two beings – when together they produce a child. For from two then comes one who is a marriage of both and together they love each other in the one. Marriage is really only a symbol of childbirth and the one being born from two in and through whom the two love each other as one. Marriage is a symbol of this union and many people overlook this which confounds me. THAT is marriage. The ceremony itself is merely symbolic of this, and a child is the only true wedding ring that binds two people forever and from which there is no divorce.
Marriage without children/a child is to me pointless, symbolic of the union but not the union it is in fact a symbol of.
I live in Cyrus which is VERY noisy (particularly vehicular noise, air-conditioning noise, people talking too-loud etc) and very backward in its mentality. Some ape-like types.
I need solace and silence for intensive study, and sometimes read philosophical texts for seven hours at a stretch as apposed to the majority of my peers who merely study the masticated interpretations and by virtue of this think they are ahead of me. What is particularly funny is how twisted and untrue the scholarly interpretations of Nietzsche are and that students of philosophy accept these interpretations without having studied the works and interpreted them for themselves. They will make good book scholars one day!
P.S, certain types of music I consider to be detrimental ‘noise’, while other types to be thought-promoting. Classical music, for instance.
I prefer to observe people in public and write about my observations in private.
I admit that a certain amount of hubbub is tolerable, even conductive to a degree, but beyond a certain point I find it unbearable and distracting. I could never sit at a Starbucks and study philosophy for seven hours, for instance. Especially with speed-bikes blasting up and down the Strip!
Generally, I hate all forms of noise and distraction from study!!!
How? Well, for one, deep concentration without distraction is needed for intense study and the production of books and writings and it is the preference of many of the learned and even UNlearned.
It ties in perfectly to artistic expression of many kinds.
I have always admired a woman’s ability to IGNORE noise!
But, to my mind, the more intelligent you are, the more you can actually HEAR noise.
To the eminent mind or mind aspiring to be thus, the daily pedestrian baboon barks and shouts on public streets, the hissing air-breaks of busses, the repulsive hooting of horns and needless over-revving of engines, and even the ringing of a bicycle bell is enough to choke the last bit of life from any deep, penetrating insight as surely as the well-used hands of a serial-strangler!!! Not to mention the blaring music and over-use of bass in the boots of automobiles to rattle one’s windows and brain and instantly end any insightful or profound thought even through insulated glass as surly as an axe blade to the back of the neck! If not indeed to entirely detach the conscious brain from the body necessary to its higher functioning as sure as a trap-door in a gallows opening under the feet of he who is thereby condemned as the noose of noise ties itself resolutely around the neck of the intellect UNTIL DEAD!!!
Ladies, Detenetes and Gentlemen, Blockheads, Dullards, Fools, Knaves and Wandering Gnomes (the only form of fool that still comes as it did in the days of Kings: with jingling bells, outlandishly colored-clothes and curly-toed BOOTS!)
I bring before you a thread the precise subject of which has never been brought before you for consideration on this forum for connecting miserable and dismayed singles destined to remain miserable and dismayed!:
The obstruction of your thoughtless and inconsiderate everyday noise to all noble intellectual endeavor!!!
May all those to whom the above applies, here find themselves a scolding!
Now, I find that, as a rule, the more intelligent you are, the more you are annoyed by noise; the more susceptible you are to SOUND that in any way disrupts the processes of genuine constructive thought! By virtue of which the more intelligent you are, the less noise you tend to make and WISH was made. And the LESS intelligent you are, the more noise you tend to make, and wish was BEING made, to blot-out having to hear that you are the mindless author of even your own! That is to say, the LESS intelligent you are, the MORE you subconsciously welcome a senseless sound so that it may pass in your blank head for a semblance of thought, or upon producing your own senseless sounds (say, by drumming your fingers on a desktop during a lecture), seek an indication that you are in some way being constructive with your time that is otherwise detrimental to all! May demons know your personal living space!!!
This is not a case of noise-pollution; this is a case of inconsideration and mindlessness to the detriment of the highest types!
I look forward to hearing it. As I told you before, I am a scholar of philosophy and an exponent of it. Philosophy is a bridge between Theology and Science – I delve into evolutionary biology, quantum, energy-mass equivalence etc etc on the side.
I am not an expert in this field, and I look forward to hearing your theory.
I hope you can observe from above why the question 'does vacuum have mass' cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. It's not easy to explain these things in simpleton terms [I’m just kidding there at the end my man!].
Okay, first of all: a vacuum is ‘essentially’ empty of matter. However, a perfect vacuum (absolutely no gaseous pressure) is a philosophical concept (and it has been debated since ancient Greece). And the outcome is negative.
No vacuum is perfect, not even interstellar space [3-4 hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter]
Also . . . because of quantum. Quantum theory suggests that no volume of space can be perfectly empty.
These 3 to 4 hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter must have mass] However, there are other notions that are not fully understood: dark matter/ anti-matter . . . .
Secondly: fractals [known in chaos theory].
Thirdly: do you know anything about quantum mechanics? I am no expert on any of these things, only on philosophy, but have looked into them.
Oh - and it’s new years eve/day for Christsakes! I didn’t think this is what you wanted to ask!
EastbayRay Forum Posts (781)
Hey that was a cool reply: thanks B!
Happy New Year to you all!!!
On Noise