When people confuse being outspoken, either by their actions or otherwise in speech, which would only surmount to senseless bigotry? This being the craziest thing I can think of - is a matter of habit - where (in my mind, anyway. . .) tells me. It is a question of I have no answer to provide, myself, without the answer. (Not that there is any answer necessary.) However, that being made true, the question is in and of itself entirely a relevant one.
I find it shameful, probably even more so disbelief, that any persons 'he' or 'she', has not as much the gravity to find a common intention - or - intention common. So to speak of my world view on immaterial matters of implication (i.e. material implication) becomes rather delirious a perspective.
The book I am currently enamoured in scientific study (i.e. reading) researches this very topic very well. At what point in the human psyche, do our causes within the human realm of existence, appropriate the same existence of another cause, be it 'natural' or 'inhuman', it is a classic illustration of the normative sense of which reality fosters our outer limits. So, what is being said in the dialogue creates, a substantive amount of reasoning, to introduce, me, myself as the reader, to a longer list of qualitative measures. (The world as we think we know it?)
From what source do we exhibit the force to, our interest's as a whole, on a human level which is secular with humanity. Or - is humanity extinct already? It is a powerful rendition, of fabled narrative, into a quantity of literal concerns. Does the power of poetry, realize a proper historical articulation of fact as the main idea, subjective analysis, or circumstance.
Saturday, December 06, 2025
the jordan river
The (heights of a. . .) 'monopoly on death'
Everyone should have the privilege of punctuality. It speaks of honest participation, among other things, less capable over.
Therefore, a lot of the time it takes me to realize something, as important, though not important,
should it be fair.
The book I've been touting myself too, of late, is a alternate reality throughout the course of ordinary life under extraordinary circumstances, which altogether surround the material of death as a monopoly in which we live. Death, as a material? (It is otherwise known as immaterial for the most part.) However, the factoring-in-of-death in light of various factors, which are invisible, weigh in on society as a measure of thought. Particularly, throughout the novel are strings of detachment, wither to - our affable - if not gullibility is a part, this is a challenge for the reader to administer its plausibility. Therefore, it plays as an integral role for the reader not to absorb into the assumption, the reader, is living in an alternative satire of reality. There is no hint of sarcasm. The diminutive effect which carries on through 'death with interruptions', is the idea that death is hidden from us, not in graveyards per se, or in adverse conditions of which corruption prevails all are mortally wounded, as one might guess would indicate undertaking.
There is no protagonist or villain, Will-o-the-wisp or things that go bump in the night, violation (think of as the Grim Reaper) or drums rolling to its proverbial death march, only the influence of imagination or an opening to another door. Which the reader, I am, to speak for.
Personally, the idea of living in a world where death as a monopoly seems aggregate to whether it is, or it isn't, though it fluctuates. Much of these ideas are conveyed, through the premise if we were to live in world where nobody did die, then, what transforms through alternate reality, an induced repetition of what now happens as it already does exist today.
My commentary focuses on, how reality in which we adhere to on an everyday level, conflicts with the same purpose from which our aversion to monopolized version of this alternate reality where no one dies. So - it would mean that the mainstream idea of death, if it exists as something in an ordinary state, creates an unexplainable or unsatisfactory world we choose to live in. This proposal, gains in the form of an indisputable form of submission, though language is not one of subjective nature were we to ask ourselves, about what would actually take precedence in a world without death.
All of this^ follows the point that language, not having our benefit, is a disjointed albeit amalgamation of sinister ideals. Were we to act, without changing our ideals, language is sincerely evaporated before anything else is considered - to an eventual predisposition. That, is of - a nature so immaterial of virtue, we cannot escape the meaning -a lack thereof of language, we associate with death itself. So much so, that we disembody the trivial truths, that bind us from within that internally. In other words, we depend on death of ourselves, in some mishapping (that we've already concluded is impossible), such as the false hope of immortality. This leads us to an example of mortality (e.g. death), which can only explain, our intrinsic value.
Death, for the lack thereof in this case, death, survives above all things equally. Where no one dies, the myth that death brings about means, what carries on in fortitude? As natural as death is, in place of death, that people (i.e. unity) were to change the power structure on a secular level. This would mean that death without death as a penalty, would result in undesirable, daily inactivity, because we live in a world fostered of insurance corporation, politicians vying for affection of its people, the propaganda of television serving the masses, in an episode, of death ensuring our survival, demanding it returns to make us progress the human condition.
death, as it is meant, in lower case 'd' (not in capital upper case letter 'D'), is pronounced that it does not have a voice. That in which case, people everywhere, were to imagine death is an inhospitable reality, must be conveyed as a form of total worship, to denounce death, is to renounce eternal life. This is from which, death in case, were properly managed by church and state, that we should hold in the deepest regard for. Everything, within eventide homes, is measured by how indefinite, people, habituate these patterns as the upbringing or in apparatus. Death is restored, then, promising more than language, the status quo is met.
The thought of language is often superseded because of its intolerable cause, that on its surface, reality made to permeate - permeate the condition of refuge, into its paternal form of genius meeting intellect.
What am I thinking about when I write is from a navigated sense of where virtue lives.
- Marco
===========
"The majority of people spoil their lives by an unhealthy and exaggerated altruism – are forced, indeed, so to spoil them. They find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this. The emotions of man are stirred more quickly than man’s intelligence; and, as I pointed out some time ago in an article on the function of criticism, it is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering than it is to have sympathy with thought." - Oscar Wilde
If I had to choose between walking in another mans footsteps, only to choose a life of poverty, and that - that poverty was more meaningful than any other thing besides it, I would choose poverty less than its ignorance. - Marco
It is a funny thing, how politely we act to obtain things such as wealth, while making choices about others because they do not try hard enough. We live in an age where hypocrisy is a norm. I have a question for you, there is this guy, you may know him, is so open about his views over a facebook page, that people in turn avoid. Is it his unconscious mind or his ideas that help define why we are NOT - not what we say we are - 1- instead how can we practice, produce, participate thoughts to - 2 -inspire what we are not aware of. I am speaking on the time of quality. Quality can be both good and bad, it is quality that is a time of its own. We are all born without it, so why not tell it that, that as we follow time, we do so in terms of how quality has not dropped or not risen, but never below a point of excess. We are born 'quality' no more or no less than its kind. If you really think about that, the world becomes a drastically different place.
- Marco
====
We have traded our most basic human instincts in favor of one big episode of survivor. That is the reality here. I know how much depth I necessarily have as a human being, and what that requires - is I expect better from people. The less is more concept is totally skewed, in a world of abundance we so call have. I am speaking to the definition of whether or not we have, an awareness that people can flourish - without their egos getting in the way. That takes an immense amount of withdrawal from such a reality. People yearn for more than there is less of. What I have learned - is in keeping a valve open to both my brain inside (use of logical influence) and my spirit (critical world issues) outside. Those are powerful concepts to emerge in. That is why I am becoming an actor, because I know in my acting habits, I can make a difference in life.
It is so hard to implement what I know I have inside of me.
Through my experience, acting styles as different as they are, are just in different places.
^The same tangent applies to the needs we have toward each other in real life. The saying goes "keep it real" when in fact it should be "make it real". Few people in life know what that means. Unless you have the power to create that, it is as I have stated, people fail miserably to live with a duty to morals, the world is very deceiving that way.
This is why the pursuit of happiness equals to such bullshit in its segregation between individuals. You are told that if you work hard you can achieve anything. The reality is not so far fetched if you base it on what your autonomy means instead. > @bigcanadiano: Why will the avg person not think in terms of competition as only to serve controversial regulation defiled under justifying greed. - Marco
Marco Almeida is 
feeling heavy
Now I am at a time of my life where I think I have made a difference, being, in the way I see the world at large and how it altered my reality, which for the most part is equally as disappointing.
To my credit: I have never once copied and pasted what anyone sees ARE my ideas. However, I have sacrificed a lot in order to achieve the kinds of things related to that. Against all odds, my success at engaging with an audience as a metaphor for anonymity whereas only the recipe hasn't changed is satisfaction enough, enough to know I am released from any obligation to fear what anyone else has otherwise thought.
If you want to change the world in some way, silence is golden, and the anonymous element I branded to do just that made it so.
For whatever reason, I lost a lot of friends along this path. I have been branded a lunatic though I would not break.
I will not go back to regret it. In fact I refuse to believe in what I have suffered as result. That is a feeling you live and learn from more importantly than any other skill you can think of. It has not brought me fortune. It has afforded me no amount of greatness.
Those are words that can only be manufactured by the heart.
(end.)
Friday, December 05, 2025
Dialectic philosophy is my idea of language as it acts in non contradiction as formally presented logic. . . which the purveyor interprets as either empirical or not. What I am suggesting is that comparing opposing ideas comes across as fallacy not objective truth. Therefore, my conclusion is that to determine how language records ideas, its primary function is a negation. "The truth must be (this) therefore it is or is not. Not here nor there dependant of evidence." = dialectical theoretical application.
Maybe the better definition is presented in that way.
Dialectic is ascertainable truth which may or may not emerge based on a theoretical construct of language. Concepts are valid only if those concepts can be tested by means of dialectical theory = language itself.
My argument being, dialectic theoretically can only be defined through use of language strictly based on its idiosyncratic function.
- Marco
1- superlatives 2- the dynamic of nature 3- relevant discourse 4- super semantics (disambiguation)http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideograph_(rhetoric)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)