All intelligence is - all of it - is product of your mind leaving the body. If that is true, than it can only be true that death is life rooted in fear. That the fear of death transcends man as man himself. This as a rule: is order.

Therefore, man himself lives in seeking his life without fear to anything at any cost. Death is death's way of purging the body, but only if the mind is traced back to its original womb. This is why the body reacts. Reacting to an objective mind. An objective mind that continues to be objective, that death ends in fear based reality. That once you objectively eliminate something, the elimination of death is a trap your mind purges upon. This because cause is something death has no instruction of it. Memory is a manual written as you record it. The brain assesses danger. You react to that danger only when necessary.  

Therefore, death is an accumulation of how objectively aware you become in transcending fear based reality. - Marco

°•○●○•○▪︎

Death

Death is the deepest and most mysterious reality of human existence. It is a fact that every living being must face, yet the human mind constantly tries to escape from it. This fear arises from religious beliefs, theories of rebirth, and ideas about the immortality of the soul. But can accepting death as a fact give life a new meaning and depth?

To understand death is to understand life. Only when you face death do you truly realize the value of living. Death is the end of accumulated memory—the end of the “me,” the “my” images, the “my” experiences, and the “my” desires. This ending creates the possibility of a new beginning.

A mind that accepts death becomes free from fear and begins to live fully in the present moment. Death is not the end of life; it is an inevitable and integral part of life that gives life its meaning. To live with the constant presence of death is to live life with its full intensity and beauty.

Jkrishnamurti Study Centre

 Wilde is wrong - to be a master in the art of reality is a marksman of liars that willfully cause deception of others. That is what Wilde is saying requires talent. In truth, religion is the founding father to such things made "unacceptable.". To trace humanity is a work of purity in wisdom of a sacred time without being told.  - Marco

°••○○•°°•

"If one tells the truth, one is sure, sooner or later, to be found out."

-- Oscar Wilde

hidden meaning in the song of art

 •●•●•●•●°●

 “There is no power relation without the correlative constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time power relations”

―Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison

December 14, 2012 

I am aware of what Foucault is saying, however, it is a flawed paradox. He is speaking, about power relations as though "presupposed" as in a past tense, then reiterated, how its correlation somehow involves a constitution. If constitutional reform is to be present (not misrepresenting ­ Foucault's view) that power relations are in fact a deciding factor. (i.e. our own interpretation is a cause of power relation.) We might not as well infer power relation as a model - because our better understanding of it is a miscalculated approach. That the means of our actions each and every time (our actions) are governed, only in concept what power relation demands of us.

===========

"That the means of our actions each and every time (our actions) are governed, only in concept what power relation demands of us." (MA2012)

^This refutes everything Foucault has stated re; 'power relations'.

I highly disagree with Foucault.

"(a)If constitutional reform is to be present (not misrepresenting­ ­ Foucault's view) that power relations are in fact a deciding factor. (b) (i.e. our own interpretation is a cause of power relation.) (c) We might not as well infer power relation as a model - because (d) our better understanding of it is a miscalculated approach." (MA2012)

'a-b-c-d' - in that order.

^ Referring to 'b' how we interpret power relations in socio-political terms is the driving force of our reality based ideas. Therefore, power relations is a cause to SERVE our better interests. Foucault is saying we defer to power relations, but that is not true of our better interests.

 December 14, 2023

 

Question: how can anyone expect when someone is intentionally wrong whether it be in their mental or physical state, where they are either out of touch with reality or what are societal standards. How can a person who is detrimental in their behavior expected to understand that that behavior is wrong. So in this description to put yourself in the others mind, you know their approach to this dilemma means they will not change in their behavior or does it also mean they simply cannot compute it. Can this be debunked theoretically speaking. What in other words is normal and what determines the factors associated with so called Deviant behavior?

Now let's say for sake of controversy that a person's refusal to act in correcting themselves according to unwritten standards. Let's use Donald Trump as an example.

Does his behavior stem from a neurotic disposition which also translates into a conscious refusal. So in other words: it cannot be proven his intention is of a deliberate chauvinistic quality. Does this inquire that Trump's behavior is not limited to a rational cause and effect relationship of which is guilty or negligent.

Does Trump misuse or not abuse as an imposition for his political beliefs. Is his behavior merely political or is it intentional.

sweatpants and a t-shirt

 December 14, 2009

 

There is a chance this may sound as though, (forbidden of me to say so,) I am a failure. It's taken me a long while, since, I've realized this is the case. However, eliminated (fear is not the word I'm looking for here. . .) is that sense of what once was - "what could have been" - instead of such fantasy on my part. When I look at myself today, from what I observe today, though not what is around me i.e. I do not put myself in the center of 'the universe', almost as certainly - my clairvoyance is rusty as nail's.

I think it took me a fairer amount to denial, rather than reason's to suggest the pit of my soul - so to speak - devoured in sensibility. This aftermath is a sensibility throughout the various stages up to this point. The truth of the matter, how sad.

~m

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

It also amazes me, when people who care enough to admit to something, are often much more grown up.

Neuroplasticity

 As an actor, this is interesting because method actors trying to become a character are influenced based on living their part through actually or deliberately choosing to master how that character would function.

- Marco

neuroplasticity

Krishnamurti

metacognition

 Why not mention the secret to metacognition in its practice. Could it not be completely random. How do you know you are thinking about thinking? This is a nonspecific idea: speaking in terms for metaphysical interpretation of phenomenon. Super vague in understanding its application.

The neurodivergent individual is typical of mastery in himself. The metaphysical mind is in disproportion into acquiring this skill, as in, how we think on an unconscious level. This is how we use information on an informal level - the separation between acquisition of sensory experience that we make useful through social prejudices as a source for disambiguation. Like William Blake suggested: we merely are rearranging our prejudices and mistake it for thinking. How we attain perspectives in philosophy is neurodivergent thinking on a relative scale. This begs the question: what is metacognition.

It would appear to me that metacognition is a substitution in relating the world into a form of identifying our place in the world. If you are meta-cognizant of this in fact, in fact, your place in the world changes according to the world as it changes around you. = That would be metacognition ON AVERAGE. Anyone and their dog can. That's the main problem.

- Marco

metacognition

Metacognition - Wikipedia

pragmatic red herrings remain pragmatic

December 11, 2024

A old entry but a beauty. Lots to unpack here relative to the reality check that - that asshole Pierre Poilievre should take regarding his false anti-idealist notions (carried by Trudeau’s government) which contrary to real Canadian values - only promises to compromise the real character of Canada's right of our human condition. It speaks to our Charter. Which makes Poilievre amld everything he stands for... repulsive.

 December 11, 2008

There is no doubt now that Michael Ignatieff, has since been preeminently foddered as the future leader of the Liberal party of Canada. It is quite astounding to me, how historic the coalition between NDP, Liberal, and BQ will fester. I have to say, it will be something quite honestly, most exciting to watch. Not that Jack Layton (who coincidentally also) made an agreement in principle with the same Conservative leader in S. Harper which brought the Liberal minority government to its knees, is taking down the same leader by sleeping with the same enemy. How quickly the plot thickens, that J. Layton turns the socialist notion into a game of possum - while the rest of the NDP are playing devil's advocate. It is curious to say the least. At first glance, Layton is much of a cowboy wearing an eyepatch, but clever in such a disguise as if one were to say of it, an agenda is clearly withdrawn from major points at the polls. If one were Layton, within a window of post 2000-present the government has changed from Liberal, to Conservative, now a coalition. A major reason which launched these political maneuvering has been a result of the NDP influx of voters apathy. If I were Layton, I'm thinking either I'm strengthening the role of the constituencies within Canada's socialist fabric, therefore - I'm dong my job. However, what if Layton also decides the NDP's future is intact based on a false pedigree, the two bickering parties within the pond - making room for the NDP to escape with the cookie jar out the backdoor. Really, that is the model of any true form of socialist reprieve. What we can say is Layton has truly communicated his act effectively enough to creep, claw and itch his way into the societal spectrum on a much smaller scale.

The other tells me, Layton has done absolutely nothing, remotely as if playing Tim the Toolman Taylor's sidekick Al (but without the beard) - sponsored by Binford.

It really is remarkable. What's in a name, anyhow.

If Layton gives the NDP a fighting chance, then Ignatieff somehow foils the coalition agreement renouncing 'no-confidence' vote would be outright shocking. But whatever. I still would be shocked nonetheless. Stephen Dion is a thing of the past, which typified a poor style of being an efficient enough communicator which the Conservatives asundered almost as gracefully. Not that 'bad' communication is anything new in politics, what we're seeing is a less than versatile but hostile political climate taking precedent. I suppose the Partisan political wagon took another breech, and beat the horses to death yet nobody notified the authorities. The last time a coalition government took precedent was never before modelled, so everything hereafter is quite clear to everyone we've had political breeches happen. A political wagon of this kind is totally new to us all - or at least until the wheels fall off (which is to say it's a matter of when Mr. Ignatieff). Just say when.

My-Fractured biography of a candid rewritten rancor

 December 11, 2012

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.

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.

===========

Turning against the machine-made audition of beliefs

===========

Failure is the truest form of man himself; it flies in the face of conventional wisdom without any explanation being necessary. Some live to outgrow failure in order that only substantiates their value, self worth, success. Success is not the opposite of failure - success is an invention that man is a fool to, its been made to reek havoc on the sublime activity of a reality gone blind. People hide from failure all the time, true success is in exposing such impostors.

^when you really think about it, in a future reincarnation of yourself, if you were told you could witness two things about yourself (because you recall none of it to act as proof of yourself): would you choose to see your "successes" or "failures". Which one is the wiser of the two is the question. Is your lack of failure a success in what you decide to expose about your life story - if it was all ordained. Then, you were to wake up as if from a dream life, it became an actuality. Truly think about that.

This is all you need to know:

"Which one is the wiser of the two is the question. Is your 1- lack of failure 2- a success in 3- what you decide to expose about your life story - if it was all ordained."

Would you rather lead your life through a lack of failure, only to see how (success) is ts benefit to you. Pretty simple. How do you answer that question, it could be as hard as a yes or no type response. The task is, do you train yourself through failure or do you feel success measures all cause. Is it not much more concerning to question failure than to question success. In my view success acts as a mock priority in today's day and age. When in actuality, failure is rejected in almost every aspect of the world we live in.

===========

Kelley Hirst
Perhaps there is no failure--just giving up..:)

Dec 4 at 5:52pm ·

===========

Interesting analogy, I will take it one step further though (not to disagree with you here, but I digress. . .) there is no such thing as success. Not even in giving up. Let me give you an example:

^That is all completely comprehensive. In short: failure is more important than success. It is much more difficult to deal with, honestly.

If I have not succeeded in the arguments I presented, how would I know the truth, unless I lived and breathed what success has brought me to this point in my life. My other side of this, is the succulence of success.

Now - here is an example of myself:

You see me in acting class, do you really think I am mad at myself during the course of my time spent there. I am willing to bet, using myself as an example, people suspect I am somewhat void, emaciated (which I will get to later.) I love myself in that class when everyone probably think I am struggling, my struggle is the beauty of it. I am who I am. I take more pride in failing then anything else other in life. I am a show off when it comes to failure, that the world around me learns how important it is, that they forgot about winning all the time. (i.e. people are conditioned to think that failing is unacceptable)

Yet, you would think all this time, I was blind as a bat not to see how opposite of emaciated I have become.

So, what you see is not a measure of success, all failure is - is giving up on fear based mentality.

(end.)