April 27th 2010

 For those who are ignorant that practice it (. . .do not generally agree on anything -) so instead, they speak as though to ask if being unsuccessful is trademark of another persons failure. Once the skill to eliminate that from distinction is acquired through a mental process, you have found not only wisdom, but the greatest intent the will can imagine is infinite.

I Don't know this to be apriori to anything I've ever written, as important as this stated above.^ It is a critical test to intervene with decision making abilities. I detect it on a continual level of personal growth.

===============

More specifically, almost as foolishly, people actually rather not think but believe bigamy is their best resort.

In a universe gone blind of material wealth (the slippery slope may travel to its furthest point of no reflection in a black hole), only then does heart matter in your least consumption.

In a world where material wealth increases your chances of survival benefit, you might also find, those that retreat in cowardice - an empty dare of you to stare it down in the face.

Some are eager to deny it completely without care.

================

So this might sound as if everything stated above, requires some form of imperiousness to being. However, I thought it best to break it down into parts definable.

The main premise of:

i. ignorant are those that practice (ergo) do not generally agree on anything. (i.e. easily patronized/liar)

This equates to a cause, you experience is habitually to it, as if standing in line at the checkout, until that Safeway cashier, has all but threatened by you, been in a preemptive type of readiness, they've concealed all information about you to (your name), trusted on your credit card (i.e. method of payment). Until you've chosen to pay with said commodity exchange, they prevented everything else that could possibly limit that. In so many words, it's a robotic manual, customer to cleric transaction.

The saddest part is, when I used to work at Safeway, it was by far the worst experience I've ever encountered, working behind a cash machine. Until getting used to it, the problem was not with the customers, but with my undesirable computer contaminated with my natural face to face concern with an actual human being.

So, in conclusion the first part, assumes only that between the manual dexterity of one's actual reason to purchase something, (the social contract is meant to be made via a non-existent machine processing said transaction,) to the cashier. Once this transaction is made, the process is one of mere alienation between two persons, which have no real connection.

ii. so instead, they speak as though to ask if being unsuccessful is trademark of another persons failure (i.e. "you are not as successful as I am")

So this also lead me to report, on such incredulous style of observing a simple everyday transaction, indeed has an impact over psychological nature of events. It is transient in every way possible, between various different situations which require solution to random problems.

When I see myself at a checkout, it is rather strange to me, why can't the next person before me, not just walk out and leave with their groceries, if the invalid person, said, "I resent having to meet these Patronizing Liars, I am leaving with my Groceries." Neither have they paid.

I would look at that without any form of dismissive effort. In fact I would look upon it with the same type of understanding, if it were given to me in such a context as written here.

Conclusion

A good way to look at this imposition of fatalist argument, is how the US constitution does not interfere (with gun laws) as opposed to what are civil rights (i.e. machines are not drafted as having those rights.) Therefore, there is confusion when attributing that definition into a form of double jeopardy. It is a critical distinction, between the fear of social contract, if disconcerting the very natural betrayal a person must feel having had their freedom taken from them, if not out of pleasure.

hidden beneath the cost (April 27th 2010)

 Why resort the silliness of sarcasm, to observation of the kind choice's are made, that follows your report of it.

In today's world, I've started my very own swear jar (business) credited $1mil dollars toward myself.

It is an ingenious strategic method, which will work out very nicely.

April 27th 2017

 I am not angry enough about my past to admit it as time permits I do and so I act to dismiss myself out of it meaninglessly.

So it's safe to say my past is a sad fate of bewilderment. It has lead me here to nowhere. And yet I find satire in my sad criticism of it.

I fast-forward my presence of mind entirely. And I look right through my past as some form of trickery and deceit played on me.

My past as I recollect it now is a vessel of misfortune. What I trust in what I know today is an advanced science. A trivial recollection.

When I think of my past, my inhibitions relate to many different things attached. And the liberation I partook in is a whole other matter.

When I look at my character I pick up signals, fragments of my past, and I fail to realize I am not that person any longer.

I don't know if my personality has changed because most people I know wouldn't care to notice it if I did. That is a sad fate of reality.

One can only ask for self discovery as something amazing to behold. Not a bad thing to adjust myself to. The past snickers.

- Marco

reinvention for edification

 The book is out on me.

It is documented well -

and predictable of others.

Isn't it such a wonderful thing -

that feeling you get

when you want nothing in return?

That's when the light from the sun -

is hitting you.

It hits right -

right where

it needs to be.

It's like listening to music

for the first time -

and falling in love with it

for - no reason.

I am not some cheap-trick;

what is the privilege to

this secrecy.

Marco Almeida

-The Peg

trading weakness over fatality

 What is it about this face. Not even I know. I am just happy to be who I am and what is mine (I openly think) about how awesome life can be. So I feel my way through things. "Feeling is" what should be, one's first principle in life. What do I mean by feeling? It means to be so sure of yourself as honesty is never a question of self doubt. That is not denial of a psychological fact. It is a feeling that bestows me, until I get to that place of courage in my sense own of it. Courage that is powerful in the way god made me.

I don't know why this is. I just know when I speak and what is the language I use to express myself, is feeling. If you can master feeling in what you know is your idea of yourself. Then, you master things that you never thought possible before you knew it as truth. (That's my poetic self talking.) What is factual in life is empirical knowledge.

Therefore, I feel everything. If- feeling is the self put together by centering what I feel around (me) then the truth beneath the surface of it always appears as a skill in feeling itself. Self mastery is not to be caught in this trap. You fulfill your needs without chasing your own tail. This is the goal. The meaning behind your false sense of purpose. Because, before you realized your feeling about anything in life, your idea was not yet made. What informs you of your feelings is feedback or self-psychology held as an insecurity. When you master your self-measured idea's, then you become what your feeling is.

My point is I have an awareness that is special to how I feel. And to have this feeling is something you can not absorb from the outside. It must move you. You are the centered feeling then, coming from within. It is this that feeds my conscious manner of living. What creates a feeling where feeling is freedom so profound, you believe you were meant to live for it. That is not to be confused with as making choices. Feelings are not to be chosen nor something we choose to have. Feeling is heuristic. It can also be a fractal of your experience. Psychology is your feeling in everything that relates to opposing forces. You may think you are being opposed. But the psychological lies to you. So thought is stuck. Free your mind with what you feel is acting for you to express it. The last sentence is the only rule you need to follow.

Now revert to the first rule I recited on this page. Allow for your feelings to be what limitless energy comes through you. The first rule is feeling - feeling that is not just a word any more than it is a verb. To feel is to destroy. And to destroy, is to feel so completely helpless that it makes you a victim to others opinions of you. That is how feeling works. Sartre said that experience precedes essence. The truth is your vulnerability exists before the experience arrive.

My guess is that wisdom describes is what makes you, feel.

(end.)

- Marco

Phillipians 2.3

 

Phillipians 2:3

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.

4

Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.

5

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

6

Who, being in very nature [1] God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

7

but made himself nothing, taking the very nature [2] of a servant, being made in human likeness.

April 26th 2018

 Maybe the hole in my heart

is much too heavy for my soul or maybe I'm bigger than that. All in all its a dilemma I'd wish on no one. It's an endless force of gravity. I want to reach higher for things but I just can't. Oddly I am at peace not at war with myself.

-Marco

Hidden meanings in the Heuristic self

 When I told a friend of mine today that I don't accept if my intentions are "toyed" with on no uncertain terms, and they show their true colors. I am glad to find out in the end - they are nothing worth the time it took to get to know them. All I said: was that I refuse to be underestimated (paraphrased) and he didn't want to hear me say it. For whatever reason. Moral consideration is a two way street but it's not how everyone runs the race.

There are times in life I reason out loud'. Other times I reason - I do it to privately consume what others do not know. IT takes on a life of its own.

The times I reason out loud - I do it to teach the world what it's like to have learned and unlearned from past behavior.

I use Facebook as medium to accomplish this. And I do it well.

I do it so well it gets to an ascertaining ability, that some have the right to appreciate or not. No one is forced to relate back to me.

I suppose saying things as fairly as I do my best to - does not to offend, in no intent to have offended.

I will keep posting despite the headless horseman that label these encounters as prescribed. (It's been a good day.)

What I will never accept is a person's cowardice in life. We've all been there. You know the copout types. I refuse to be one of the many - so much the few.

In conclusion - I think using Facebook as a vehicle is as real as real life gets. Everyone is not skilled at it. Other's live in a vacuum and do not know how. That is not up for me to decide. But to insult me then backpaddle based on your personal inadequacy is not mine to be guilty of. Further to finding out. What I learned today is that many feel the same way about me. I have people I love. I don't love everyone - especially the same that treat me like a criminal deviant on this medium - you know who you are.

What I said to this individual before he came back to delete his interaction with me - can be interpreted in one thing and the word isn't kind with me. It's the work of a coward. I call out cowards, but will never copout to one.

I've been accused of being a keyboard warrior with no due recourse to facilitate my views.

I've been accused of the privilege of living vicariously through Facebook, because what I write is not in touch with reality. Therefore, my lack of living like everyone else seems to bother people that read my (free) content. Because Facebook isn't reality.

Well - I guess my efforts change the way you've looked at the world.

I use Facebook as a free publishing tool because so many unlike myself know how to. I refuse to blame myself for the misgiving of other's that pretend they don't know the difference.

(end.)

April 25th 2014

 I would like to think my intentions are correct insofar I have a sensual lasting flavor that consent is real and not a participation medal.

- Marco

=============

The sexual revolution has nothing to show for it - at present the idea is that sex should be modeled as a weapon or rape culture.

- Marco

============

What beauty transcends is not feeling those vibrations which inspire you to be among a band of vultures.

- Marco

=============

There is no policy in how people must treat each other is the best way to observe everything in life.

- Marco

--------------------

Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality. - Jules de Gaultier

 

------------------

How can anyone that posts anything on twitter claim they care about what you post if what they posted is unprovoked. No logic. 

- Marco

Ask me what I think. . .

 "I am a majority share holder in my own right. To keep this short, I have an affinity to reason, I try not to give away too much of myself. It is a matter of principle, a matter of energy, a focus of my own legitimacy. Somewhere between thought I wonder where to go next but what might that answer be might it make me become." Marco Almeida Aug. 31, 2012

The Confucius (in me)

 

Zach Reg

Who defines who is the superior man? Pretty subjective - no? I say it’s me. lol

My rebuttal:

maybe it is you. I don't treat you as inferior. Even if I'm not buying what it is you maybe selling. To that end what deciphers right from wrong is not a question of authority. (Either way you look at it.) What justifies ones intent is to see things clearly and convert their ideas as true or false. An inferior would not. Trump is a great example of a salesman in this moment on a historical scale based on his propaganda and lies in his campaign to become president.

- Marco 

stranger than death

 Purpose is to live

your life as if nature 

intended.  To go in

the way which leads

you into a direction of bliss.

Poison arrow

 I trace signs only sure that they follow patterns.

And those patters are what is my memory.

In memory I begin to sing aloud.

(But only within the walls of my mind. . .)

As the echo of my voice echoes from the inside-out.

I am - casualty to everything I've ever dreamed,

it comes trough the sound,

if - in place of my personal thoughts.  

It here,

I've decided not to talk about anything.

The Symbols.

All the Words.

Many things are these.

Imagine, this proclivity I've lost for thinking.

No one else can hear?

The sound of a voice if it were lost in time -  

is more a promise to make memorable.

Memorable the voices we make - 

without it, I don't know a greater way of putting things.

Like if my voice were meant to make a difference.

I rather feel fully the information you feed me.

Because when I take the voice from within (me).

That voice will never be forgot.

(end.)

Anti matter as philosophical

 Dogmatic thinking

I believe in singularity based thought (not group influenced) centers on language as philosophically driven, that my individual sense of justice follows. Sovereign thought is very much information. To detect dogmatic thinkers who are antithesis to maintain their own nihilist ideology. This takes tremendous intelligence.

°•●○°°•

Marco

Acting as self revelation

 Acting by definition

 Fraud

April 21st, 2026 °○●○•°  You have to fight for what you believe in.  That's a rule.  A rule I measure others with as well. Most have no idea what it means.  I would rather fight for my purpose than fall in line, which means never selling my own sense of purpose manipulatively is my point here.  You talked about actors being truth tellers while you were in Winnipeg.  My bet is no one in their own mind knew what you meant. (I know what it means to be in my personal space because truth must come from within.) Even when you tried to shut me down.  But I also remember how I challenged your ideas in that seminar, and you had no idea what to respond.  I will never play follow the leader.  Nor allow it to influence my creativeness.  I speak to awareness.  I am of this idea that most people wish they had as truth tellers.  My point is we can't be truth tellers without the private nature found in ourselves traveling across a universe only acting what is a forgery of itself. Most actors in the creative process have no sense for acting. It is what Johnny Depp says: people want to fall in line with what's in front of them.  It takes a tremendous amount of courage to think of how inferior we are.  Yet the instrument we experience as being in our bodies, if we could invent something entirely atune to thought, this is what trust looks like.  Thinking of what people make you feel.  If you have this psychic ability. You see things differently than they are. There is no process unless worth fighting for.  That's the truth. Most actors are frauds. I would sooner be foolishly tempted by truth tellers than a passionless fraud of an artist. I will continue living it my way. °••○○○• Marco

Cogency vs coherence?

Dogmatic thinking

 Issuing claims that are interpreted as truth, aim to be cogently plausible, or what is coherently unproven CAN appear objectively true or objectively false as outcomes. Speaking as a philosopher myself, I know what the difference between contingency vs. probability as a means for using logic as language. If you can express thoughts using a language from which ideas produce true vs. false pretense, then this informs the senses as local. It means that dogmas as they are made through reasoning trace an illogical conclusion. This is a categorically imperative distinction. The debate should be asking: if norms in reality can be associated with AI but not be trusted as a source distinguishing our sensory experience. If sensory experience is exclusively designed for how language is structured, this distinction is made. Is there language that can not be coded as information? My point is: can AI generate language to mean something it intends as a lie in order it's saving itself. Can AI generate beliefs that factually are dogmas being learned, according to sensory experience.  

ADHD

 ADHD

I have ADHD and was clincally (not self-diagnosed).  I have been diagnosed from my early 20s and I am now pushing into my 50s.  The point I want to make is inferred from the bottom up processing of my adhd brain (which is true of how my brain functions).

I have an acute awareness of everything that most hardly even detect on a surface level.  This makes me stand out even if it means that others judgement of me is false = label me to my detriment.  It doesn't bother me and I am fine with it.  I say this because my bottom up processing, (if I am accurately portraying it here,) is that in my experience favors bottom up processing as it works to an advantage most have no idea of.  What I mean is people unaware of what my thinking entails.  Therefore, by default puts what position others take as disadvantage or inferior to a situation I am involved.  And because of this, they inversely shut out my position out of convenience, because they won't pursue my own way of thinking if it acts as beneficial.  This is conditionally how my ADHD works.

I speak as a philosopher, because I have done philosophy for almost all my adult life.

I just hope what I am reporting makes sense to someone who has ADHD, sees.

- Marco

Victory dance

 “The life of God and divine cognition may thus be spoken of as a disporting of love with itself; but this idea sinks into edification, and even into insipidity, if it lacks the seriousness, the suffering, the patience, and the labour of the negative. In itself that life is indeed untroubled equality and unity with itself, for which otherness and alienation, and the overcoming of this alienation, are not serious matters. But this in-itself is abstract universality, in which its nature, to be for itself, and therefore the self-movement of form, are left out of account. When the form is declared to be equal to the essence, it is therefore a misunderstanding to suppose that cognition can be content with the in-itself or essence, and dispense with the form—that the absolute principle or absolute intuition makes the development of the former or the exposition of the latter superfluous. Precisely because the form is as essential to the essence as the essence is to itself, the essence must not be grasped and expressed merely as essence, that is, as immediate substance or as pure self-intuition of the divine, but equally as form, and in the whole wealth of the developed form.”

— Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Phenomenology of Spirit, 1807

●°●•●•●•●•

If "in-itselfness" as Hegel puts it: is a condition for the esoteric mind (any philosopher), what this then illustrates is a lack of comprehension to the divine. = What Hegel is saying.

My point being - divinity of a philosopher's in-itselfness - happens if they claim divinity in words, through which our agreements are limited to the philosopher's "in-itselfness".  

The negation for a philosopher's in-itselfness enhances meaning, because what is the philosopher's words are tested by means of interpretation. So if there is nothing to test or treat what is divine, how would we know what acts divine survives in time.

- Marco

what is serious as thought is

 

The superlative nature of being

 I find exception to one rule as true based on what is training: whether it be

(1) focus on group experience or to the effect there is (2) an instructor to help lead my intent in learning/expectations/curiosity as promised. 

This rule I follow (and I do mean 'judge') anyone else besides myself.  If you are not in acting for the same purpose? = Which is to make another actor better than what the "me - myself - and I" - thought of ourselves before we made commitment in being vulnerable to others. Therefore, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS IN ACTING NOR TO BE AN ACTOR.  

If my experience is not elevated to a point I feel better about myself, personally.  Acting classes are a purge of my true nature as an artist.  I have seen exactly how instructors work and I tell them exactly the same thing, where my power as an artist has to be met.  It doesn't matter who.  My marks are clear to me.  

I refuse to play ignorant when it comes to what this means, to be an actor.

- Marco

April 20th 2010

 I have always kept close record, on those I trust, with a better belief than any judgment may provide. For every one person that I've never been told, that what matters is not what they think of me, but where those thoughts generated from.

- Marco

as measure as actor

 

The ascetic actor

 "The first thing you have to know is yourself. A man who knows himself can step outside himself and watch his own reactions like an observer." Adam Smith

======================

April 20th 2021

In a theoretical sense I am unsure what word is correct. Irony or tragedy. I am the furthest thing from a trend setter you can imagine.

Yet I point myself toward not being in the movie industry as an actor.

If my inhibitions are correct I find myself between tragedy and irony.

It is a tragedy not being in the movie industry for the same reason it is hard to find someone on the same level of honesty as I think of it.

Irony is a model for free thinking individuals and are born from myself as a creative.

This is the battle I feel within.

==========================

April 20th 2026

I wrote this in 2021 and it still applies.

You know. It just strikes me. It's odd that I am different - to the point - it completely makes me the actor I want to be. I might be the guy everyone sees as distorted in his thinking. But I know what is acting. That is enough. Enough to know that because I am different makes me do acting in a way that's never been done before.

The ascetic actor knows how to see through the fog.

- Marco

when the crow craws

 

April 20th 2025

 

Psalm 4:8