Friday, January 31, 2025

Divine Intervention of man vs boyhood

 


“If there is any substitute for love, it is memory.” Joseph Brodsky





Marco Almeida 2025
The Peg 

Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, January 28, 2025

The sound of memory

 I will never need a woman

- in my life... unless,

I meet her - unexpectedly.

I live in a singularity.

I have a twin.

I lead a double life.

"I was right." -

In shattering illusions...

that in my dreams - 

I will never put up for sale.


-Marco Almeida 

The Peg

Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Monday, January 27, 2025

Resetting my identity in reinvention

 "The soul is a cause, the body matter.

Everyone is a part of the great cosmic web of causes operating on matter; the ubiquity and impersonality of this takes away fear of death"

- Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations", Notebook 5:13

“Skepticism is the first step towards truth.”
     Denis Diderot

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFVf423S0L-/?igsh=cTMwZ3lycnU0Mjg5

Johnny Depp

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/19kqjmgUpb/

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/18hG6e3fUN/


https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1E6nzcbh6x/

To be a philosopher king is not easy.  It takes years and years of practice, evaluation, testing, retesting and more so developing your process to communicate a langauge as its own style, mechanics, method and technique.  And ultimately how we assign meaning to things. The theory matches everything we claim to know apriori. In my mind, philosophy is a long term solution to consciously having aimed a gun to your own head.  And resetting everything you ever thought back to 0. It takes imagination and a huge amount of it.  To subvert this notion of mine, is this question "what is philosophy".  Especially if you do not care to defend yourself without living in a vacuum.  You get the idea...

I was inspired to write this tonight.  It has been a result of capturing why I had read from another post in another philosophical page I follow.

The query was about the poster who stated, as the master of his own domain, philosophy being his acquisition of choice - only meant he can prove to understand the meaning of life .  Bringing to light it is a controversial subject to study.  Therefore, ridiculed.

I could not have been in more disagreement.

My (shortened argument) for why philosophy makes significant difference to acquire as knowledge.

I exist.  I am here for a reason.   This is the end goal.  Stating it without contradiction.  "I am here for a reason."  (That in and of itself - is philosophy.)

To ask what is your purpose - is - a noble cause.
It is a first (as I argue) principle in all philosophical inquiry across the spectrum. Whether abusive or not.  Whether western idealism or not. To side or dismiss the value of "I am here for a reason" in philosophy - on such a valid premise, would be a preposterous rejection of philosophy on grounds of superstition.

After all I have learned, coming into contact with my personal journey.  Philosophy makes a difference in life.  Doing philosophy is not for everyone.  But it is a pedantic endeavor when mastered. My reason for this argument is that.
Posted by at No comments:

The parameters of consciousness

 






Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, January 26, 2025

Mental slavery as creative character to freedom and language

 Cognition operates as a vehicle for the creative circuitry inside of you.  It's all connected.  Then it fumbles.  - Marco Almeida 2025

Friday, September 15, 2006

Watermelon Heads

Absorbed in gods will with the rules of responsibility;

acting as you shoot for the stars.

This epic thought;

cracking on attributes of skill?

Acting gods will!

The rules -

the rules

- of maturity.

A mental:

cognitive preperation.

To my satisfaction the shoes fit.

I've already ironed out my hardened ability,

through given respect.

Marco Almeida 2025


°¤☆¤


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DENFCbpOskP/?igsh=azk2YnYybmozdmhz


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DCr_MVDPPgw/?igsh=MTZmZGUxM3N6OTdqcQ==

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DDXrUBCzfJI/?igsh=aWNzYmVoeGszd2gx


Today would have been David Lynch’s 79th birthday.
Posted by at No comments:

Weakness - confusion - and darkness into language...

 January 26th 2025

Justice

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/15YMmmdf3K/

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1PiZcRjncV/

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/19614dwgX3/

On the nature of intellect vs intelligence 





https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFSAtCgiZGA/?igsh=MXh0OTl3ejdvcGhlaQ==


Penelope Tabualevu in math it cannot deviate from what's expected as an end.  So I will never be able to compute errors.  Which is what makes us human.  Philosophy creates that paradox for us to understand our limitations.  All AI is programmed to perform are methods in retrieving and regurgitating information.  It is but on repeat.  It cannot assign error to things. Why. Because AI learns to play only by rules that it follows to follow its commands.  These rules govern their behavior toward us on a machine level.  Not a result of human understanding.  Which is what people get worried about... that only if computation can learn on its own.  Where does that leave us as indivividuals.  With or without machines if machines can learn the power of autonomy at this stage... 2025.... in its most primitive state.
- Marco Almeida 2025

Consider the number 2. What is it? The number two is simply one more than one. It is defined as 1 + 1.  Every number is defined as one more than the number that precedes it.  Starting with 1, we can then define every number by repeatedly adding  one to whatever we got before.

There is no actual thing that is a two. We can talk about two, and we  seem to be referring to an object, but this is a trick of the mind. We  can have words which are symbols for things that do not exist. Harry  Potter and Spiderman for example are names for people who do not exist.  These names are symbols, just like all other words. All words are metaphors in that they are something that stands for something else.

Comments? (Author unknown)

Chët Andersen there are rules that govern mathmatics (as we already know.  Laws are far less complex because we can infer from laws using logic as an empirical means to achieve a common set of standards or to that very end understand the laws we create as a function.)  The latter is the difference between math and philosophy.  In computer science theory 1's and 2's are to infer practical programming.  1s being true and 2s being false is a basic element, although as it is learned in instruction the patters with association to a binary system consists of coding 0s and 1s - are both consistent with 0s being positive and 1s being negative to that effect.  The patterns or codes of this binary programming create a specific pattern to reach a verdict or final cause because of 0s and 1s decipher this.  Binary instruction gets to be much more sophisticated and complex. - Marco Almeida 2025

https://meta.purplehillsbooks.com/docs/Ontology/numbers-arent-real










Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, January 25, 2025

The problem with neurotic thinkers

 January 25th 2025


Let's not bullshit here.  The question of god is as prevalent and is relevant in philosophy and most philosophers are at odds with?  In its infancy and at the very least philosophical inquiry can be rooted and should be considered truth.  In this case the truth for many begins with the question of god.  To decode our personal journey in life, what are morals, in what helps us understand why we are the way are, how philosophy shapes our lives  - it all contributes.

As to how I see the posts from other philosopher's of the many groups on FB I am in. Each one have compaints about god and religion entering the discussion.  God is not a dirty word and when you have a concept that deals with that subject.  You can as a philosopher attempt to debunk god if the chance presents.

I have given to group administrators my own ideas.  (Ideas pertaining to god.) I consider myself fairly sophisticated writer and I'm in a nonspecific weight class in offering (truth) using instruction through philosophy.

My questions of god rejected.

I encourage everyone.  That is my point.

I encourage the questioning.  Especially when searching for answers no matter the challenge.

I accuse anyone that intercepts the fundamentals and dynamics of sharing their ideas, whom cop out.

In my experience the experimentation of doing philosophy even if the appeal to ignorance (an obvious fallacy) is commited.  It is my duty as an incumbent to reconsider my own position on god.  To dismiss it would be baseless on the same grounds I have mentioned herein.

In conclusion.  The entitlment (*looks around the room*) of each and every philosopher including the admins are guilty of purging only themselves.  You look foolish doing so.

°••●○○•••

These ideas of God, continually projected to ignite religious debates always go the same route, just bait to insight, multiple perceptions being cast…
    How could this game be stepped up? (Author unknown)

°••°°°•○○•••

I find it intriguing that when people talk about the universe being created by an intelligence, they often equate that intelligence with a god. 

The term "god" carries significant cultural and religious baggage. Take the Christian God, for instance—stories in the Bible depict him as frequently angry, even committing acts of genocide. 

Why is it that when we discuss the possibility of an intelligence behind the universe's creation, so many automatically assume it would align with the concept of a god? (Author unknown)


°••●○○•••

“Beauty is nothing other than the promise of happiness.” - Stendhal

Happiness is purely a subjective construct.  Even a criminal can be happy and murders.

°•○●•°°°

"The first duty in life is to be as artificial as possible. What the second duty is no one has as yet discovered."
--from "Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young" published in "Bloxam's" magazine by Oscar Wilde

"Only those who truly love and who are truly strong can sustain their lives as a dream.[...]Life throws stones at you, but your love and your dream change those stones into the flowers of discovery. Even if you lose, or are defeated by things, your triumph will always be exemplary. And if no one knows it, then there are places that do. People like you enrich the dreams of the worlds, and it is dreams that create history. People like you are unknowing transformers of things, protected by your own fairy-tale, by love."

― Ben Okri, The Famished Road

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFQTClxv2iA/?igsh=djF2bGR2bXozNXpy









“Neither observation nor reason are authorities. Intellectual intuition and imagination are most important, but they are not reliable: they may show us things very clearly, and yet they may mislead us. They are indispensable as the main sources of our theories; but most of our theories are false anyway. The most important function of observation and reasoning, and even of intuition and imagination, is to help us in the critical examination of those bold conjectures which are the means by which we probe into the unknown.
Every solution of a problem raises new unsolved problems; the more so the deeper the original problem and the bolder its solution. The more we learn about the world, and the deeper our learning, the more conscious, specific, and articulate will be our knowledge of what we do not know, our knowledge of our ignorance. For this, indeed, is the main source of our ignorance--the fact that our knowledge can be only finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite.”
Karl Popper, 'Conjectures and Refutations'.


Idk.  I always always recycle my minds eye.  I feel curious all the time.  I don't find myself to be ignorant of my own ignorance. Being straight fire ignorant though is a whole other amount of indifference... some would consider ignorance a rejection or consequently the rejection of differences.  Such as thinking differently.  However, if one thinks outside the lines of rules, laws or norms it becomes easy to. Easy to solicit some of which are ideas.  Others if those same ideas are obscure or abstract in reasoning.  But infallibly we are bound to the unknown.  Which in my mind is curiosity.

Are we equals or in some cases held as unequalled accordingly.  Some call it chauvanist psychology.  That we blink to fast.

In my mind, an example of this is the MAGA movement.  Some might argue they are ignorant as do I.  A clearer example of thinking outside the lines.  That to betray the idea of conventional thought, MAGA rejects all those that disagree with their own ideas.  I could be wrong. - Marco Almeida 2025

●°○°○○●•●°

Math and numbers, like unicorns or gnomes, are human constructs—symbols we’ve created to make sense of the world. While math appears objective due to its consistency and ability to predict and describe natural phenomena, it is ultimately rooted in human cognition and agreements about its rules. Numbers have no existence or meaning outside the frameworks we’ve built, just as unicorns and gnomes derive their meaning from cultural imagination. Their distinction lies in their utility, not in any inherent reality, making math as much a symbolic system as any other story or sign. (Author unknown)


Even mathematics have a problem with neurotic thinking.  But only in dealing with numbers.  I can be obsessed with philosophy.  But the transfer of ideas into language we can ALL decipher and  understand is not the same as numbers.  Formula, theory and equations are just as important in doing philosophy as are the laws or rules followed in any variation of subject.

I speak in terms of a pursuit.  My quest to be an arist in my thoughts and in my words.

I maintain that creating takes obsession.

I respect that. 

Marco Almeida 2025

Narcissism is an orientation in which all one’s interest and passion are directed to one’s own person: one’s body, mind, feelings, interests… For the narcissistic person, only he and what concerns him are fully real; what is outside, what concerns others, is real only in a superficial sense of perception; that is to say, it is real for one’s senses and for one’s intellect. But it is not real in a deeper sense, for our feeling or understanding. He is, in fact, aware only of what is outside, inasmuch as it affects him. Hence, he has no love, no compassion, no rational, objective judgment. The narcissistic person has built an invisible wall around himself. He is everything, the world is nothing. Or rather: He is the world. ~Erich Fromm

From: The Art of Being]

"We don't have access to the world itself, only our impressions of the world." I hear this a lot. And I'm starting to wonder whether it's the sign of a kind of arrested development, a young child's early awakening to a world that really does exist without us, that really does have its own properties and qualities, a world that we can percive with greater or lesser degrees of accuracy. (Author unknown)

It is a rather romantically sophisticated version of narcissism Fromm aserts. In my mind... I always thought about narcissistic behavior equates to my psychological dismissal of it. Like it doesn’t have inherent worth in a world that rejects . (Narcissism) - Marco Almeida 2025

°●°••●°●•

Irrational idea—the idea of “ultimate reality”. Why? Reality is reality. It is a concept which refers to everything, every thing that exist. The concept is so wide, so vast, that a single person would be able to identify and discovery in the whole life span. There is no such ultimate reality as a concept. What is ultimate? Final? You as a person is a reality, one of the reality in the so vast and wide space of the universe and one of the many things that exist. Both knowing and believing are the acts of the thinking mind. But the thinking mind is not automatically rational. It is so easy to be irrational in thinking. To be rational in thinking is a free choice, to exert a mental effort to be rational which starts by asking questions: what is it? why? how? That is how we active our thinking mind to be rational. To believe is an act of the thinking mind. It is an act which proceed after the thinking mind choose either to be rational or irrational. The rational thinking mind leads to knowledge and believing that makes the persons belief grounded on truth. On the other side, irrational thinking mind does not leads to knowledge but fantastic imagination and believing that makes the person’s belief NOT grounded on truth. That is the big difference. Knowing and believing as the acts of the mind either rational or irrational. What is you choice? That is your personal decision. (Author unknown)

□☆¤•▪︎•¤¤•○ 

I decide my rules my way.  In a manner of speaking.  I reserve my judgment.  It is those ideas or a personal reset.  A process recalibration. Processing reality is exhausting.  Which is what makes us phlosophers and why I have developed this as a skill.  Logic dictates my views bkth invertly as well as psychologically.  I speak with perusasion and my mental state is programmed to challenge norms in society which society dictates.  (The norms in my mind I have collected.)

The following is what I found rules my search for the truth I create...

Aristotle is credited with the three laws of logic, as well as a set of rules for living a good life. 

Laws of logic

Law of identity: A statement that is true must always be true 

Law of non-contradiction: A statement cannot be both true and false 

Law of the excluded middle: A statement must either be true or false

-Marco Almeida 2025

°¤¤¤¤□□□•○○■■

Marco Almeida We humans do not process reality. We IDENTIFY the what is in reality. The process of identification involves our thinking mind and the senses. Reality is there-so many things to identify, vast, wide that we could hardly do it in one single individual lifetime. That is why knowledge can be store, transfer from generation to generation to be revise, amend, and expand. (Author unknown)


I am not rejecting your reality.  Am I? This proves each side of,  both points we are here making.  What I am suggesting is that all of us equally go through  a process, maybe an unconscious process, of filtering.  We subconsciously divide reality to subvert reality so to suit our own way of being conditioned.  On your terms we identify.  On my terms we are existential.   Are both not obejctive realities.  At the very least we subverting reality is to challenge the status quo. I think that is clear in what I identify with. - Marco Almeida 2025




I think I was made to love, not to be loved. I know that sounds sad, but that's the only experience l've ever had.

I have loved people so deeply that could never return the favor. I adored bodies that tolerated mine just to sleep next to someone at night, and I don't say that with bitterness because I really don't regret it.

I was nothing but soft and kind to people I know needed it. I just can't help but wonder, seeing all my friends and family in love, if I will ever feel that, or if I was just born to give more love than I will ever see in return.

What if I was made to hang the stars in the sky for someone else to look up, who needs a little bit of light?

No matter what happens, I will always believe in love because of the way l've seen myself love other people so damn much, down to the bone. (Author unknown)

¤●《•°°°¤¤¤《


Nothing wrong with it.  Attachment and relationship are human in nature.  It's also vast and spreads across all the species.  Animals if you fear this or not may not be existential but they do form bonds.  So you're not alone.  Love is unconditional.  If you live like it.  Is rare. - Marco Almeida 2025


Krishnamurti 
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, January 24, 2025

°•○•°°°•• "You made me... " (do it.)

 Think - speak - act -sing ...like you have the sound of prayer stuck in your voice.


Allow the profanity you use to express yourself.  Allow this to get the profanity 'moving'.  So it sounds like language.


°°••°°°°••°°○●○••○○


1 simplify

2 disguise

3 philosophy 


If you are guilty of theft (plagiarize) 


°°°•○○○••°


Bravery < - > testing skill 


°°•○○•°•••••


"leaving it all behind" vs guilt and your behavior (not to be purged of love)


What would be my expression for anxiety.

What is infectious behavior (psychology)

What acts as psychic. 

Expansion of mind...

Vs

Relationship 

Vs

Curiosity.


°••○••○•°°°

The anti- alpha militia 


°°°••○•°°°


An idiosyncratic construct is not to be confused with (context). The contextual relationship between an ideological concept is in relation to a contextual relationship within reality. Identifying societal (Norms)

°°°••○●○○•

Disambiguation (logic) vs. Vagueness (fallacies) propositions 


°°°•●○○○••


Less objective truth -1

Subverting reality -2

Magnetic (energy) -3


https://www.facebook.com/share/r/15raC6pJFE/


https://www.facebook.com/share/r/15XAUX3M5w/

"Time moves backwards" x 'memory' x 'guilt' 





Posted by at No comments:

Human injection

 























Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)