I make no reservation of false impression, that was to say, my impression of others must never relate back to me as false.
There are certain things I base emotional habits on, because I differ to, the emotional intellect of others as an impossibility to presume.
The emotional intellect, is by far the more important (often less pertinent) of all mental faculty.
-----------------------------------------
What is more important I ask this of myself - fame or functionality, but which cannot be both - must be only one or the other.
-----------------------------------------
This is so important in my immediate place in life. That something happened?
I used to think of old age, as some kind of pursuit toward perfection. This is when I began to realize that judgments are not based on my good looks.
In fact, judgment is so often blind, that it can be bought on the spot. On the very spot you have been taken advantage of.
--------------------------------------
This self of mind, came to find itself in the anomaly, of various circumstances which certain people pay little attention to most days. . .
that the legal pursuit of perfection is far less trivial than the human pursuit of wisdom. Which is why I say, "something happened."
What - was it that happened.
The answer can only be unknown, in every possible sequence of events ever made. Just saying "something happened" never seems to satisfy the material need of proposition. Why that is the case, is of intellectual pursuit. Purely made as an intellectual adhominem, where the arguer uses circular reasoning to disguise contempt of it's viewer, that reverse-psychology.
--------------------------------
My complete rejection of Plato's allegory, of Socratic errors in judgement. That is which method I employ anomalies from happening.
I never used to think in terms of an anomaly, I only used to act, as if in terms of non-conditional judgments. Whereas my fear of knowing, never truly existed.
That is until the day, I became self-aware, of my complete rejection of Plato's allegory. My eyes were open, to a whole world of mortally executed possibilities, of which people's very virtue turned to a place of fear from knowing. It was as though self-knowledge, was more important that any unknown thing, which might be valued.
-------------------------
To me, it is amazing how much I use to fail in my better judgment, the whole time - there were people silently engaged. Not really knowing meant very little to them. It still does to this day. It makes judging a hell of a lot easier to produce, on spot.
The perfection of wisdom, that thing most eluding to us as a fear of knowing, became Plato's validation of his allegorical subjects to this very day.
What this means is, that the perfection of wisdom is an attainable weapon, then disguised, as reverse psychology of choice.
---------------------
Speaking as an existentialist, the very endangered notion of sensibility, is to keep my own reverse psychology of choice from happening.
As I used to think that wisdom, came not from a pursuit of perfection, almost as trivially, my belief was a dogma of perfection.
That kind of fluidity requires a certain element of psychological nature.
------------------------------------
A desensitized look into the romance of the will, the very same virtue, comes in the form of a youth lost, an abandonment, from which I learned to realize.
What taken for granted acts on the basis of mere formality or technicalities, which forms our minimalistic tendencies of living in Plato's allegory. We defeated our purpose of living in a time of anomaly, or self-reflection. Not until the day I sooner realized, the changes I have made, expose that very same element of Plato's cave. That those locked into it.
I can without any self-doubt sit here in my own amazement, this very moment, this continuing presence of an outer world lost in its timely pagans.
-----------------------------
The point here is to live without such fear of guilt dispossessed, from that, innocence is kept safe nor near nor far. It is a critical self-examination, of no outside forces.
----------------------------
My current assembly of thoughts is much less bewilderment, than the form of actual empirical or categorical 'evidence'.
An example of this is quite simply a proposition.
This because I feel my topics originate, from a controversial philosophy of choice irregardless of a person's will on that subject, they are judged.
--------------------
My view points might not agree with those, who I detect through no process of critical deduction.
Therefore, when I 'delete' those from my 'friends' list on a social network, it is to challenge them purposely not hypocritically.
That unless they realize I am still open to them as friends, I will add them again as soon as they request to - seems transparent more so than the actual reality taking place. It is nothing more than a feeling. It is nothing more that I decide who I like, as opposed to those I do not care for. Quite immeasurably, the same can be said of Plato's contempt for Socrates wisdom of choice.
--------------------
"As long as you are worried about what others think of you, you are owned by them. Only when you require no approval from outside yourself can you own yourself". Neale Donald Walsch
I have a problem with American philosopher's in
general.
Walsch own credibility on said subject is completely false, due to a misguided misrepresentation, of what it needs to be clearly interpreted as such.
Mainly due to what obscurity lay beyond it.
The common evaluative misconception remains trivial, it's meaning at best, because Walsch determines without being subject of any due cause, or vulnerable consideration. We are not speaking in terms of equal moral consideration on this level.
-------------------------------------
The question then becomes - why should I care if someone or other - as in how they or I are being manipulated, threatened, or otherwise?? How do I know?? My own misconception lay in the unknown, and strictly that which can only be unknown. However, if I am aware of manipulated efforts, manipulation is characterized not on my part, on the second part (of Plato's allegory) I am still willing in participation without ill regard. Therefore, I am fully vulnerable to my interlocutor passing judgement. Fully aware that Walsch is not equally vulnerable (Plato's allegory eliminated my desire for anomaly from happening or something else random.)
---------------------------
Should we not give this credence; if any at all.
In conclusion (if Walsch) is to disprove we can combine the same effort of cause and effect, to wield our concealed weapon of choice at any time.
There is no model of choice for that philosophy, we can simply choose to abandon our morals at any time (we so choose,) at the first sight of any flaw, even if it is done in error.
Walsch appears more evident to respond in fight or flight as a defense mechanism, though not by choice, as if almost implausibly 'automatic'.
-------------------
If anyone ever read something as concise against Plato's philosophy in so many words - please let me know.
No comments:
Post a Comment