Covering (your) assets

 Free will.

What is free will? (Is not the purposeful manner in asking it.)  

The true manner in asking the question: is: what is the question of free will.

To confirm this I have made my own definition of what guides me to understanding free will...

Free will: to serve in pictures.  Be a mental slave. A mental slave to freedom from which you focus on, rather, you being out of character; out of mind.

To serve your mental picuture, as Aristotle pointed out, the mind never thinks without one. (Image)

Free will is an illusion - which can only be implied, not implicated if on psychological terms.  Think about it...  how would your psychiatrist infer a diagnosis of you if he only came to it by virtue of your free will.

•○●•○●•○●

January 23rd 2025

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFKY2p0iyDB/?igsh=MW1zejVjYmhnc2U4dQ==

https://www.instagram.com/p/DFLB71PiQmD/?img_index=7&igsh=b293dzZlZ2dyYTli


Wittgenstein argued that free will is is an epistemological issue not a metaphysical one.  Epistemology requires free will as a background to make the decisions about the causes of anything or decisions in logic and mathematics.  He also made the point that whole debate is based on a misunderstanding of laws of nature.  Husserl makes the point by showing how psychologism, based in natural laws, cannot explain rules of logic and therefore the rules of logic cannot be reduced to cause and effect in nature.  Frege was the first philosopher to point this out in his critique of Husserl’s first book on Arithmetic.  Husserl took that criticism into account in all of his later phenomenology. ( author unknown)

•○●○•○●○○○●
I have to say this.  If there are no rules, as I am simplifying, then what are the laws which either govern or regulate how we think, feel and act.  Would this in question not be reduced to invalid justice insofar that justice is in and of itself.  (Not only invalid but to be the purveyor of injustice.)  That all justice is not in fact, if at all, infallible because it misplaces our own guilt into a fabrication or a lie.  Are we or are we not being purged.  Therefore, there is no free will. We are only as guilty as our thoughts?  An endless means.  There is no ends. No moral value.  No answer to our inevitable end (morality.)  This infers all that categorically true or not.  So the pursuit of truth whether empirical or not is a search for continuity.   Not only intuition but to serve free will.

In conclusion, if we are in fact unaware about the circling around free will.  We are not equally aware of the vacuum we live in.  We are guilty of purging.  Any amount of freewill we have is a fantasy.  And there is nothing worth doing.  Free will no longer is an existential answer to the medium in our own minds.



-Marco Almeida

°•○●•○●•°°

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DBz3RWSvDHL/?igsh=MTNrbXNlcDVjeGxmcg==
 

The freeze

 •●•●•●•●•▪︎

Omniscience means knowing everything there is to know about reality.

In idealism, reality isn’t something fixed or separate from us. It’s shaped by how we perceive it, and every person experiences it in their own unique way.

Since every individual sees reality differently, there are endless perspectives, with each one offering new insight into what reality really is.

To truly be omniscient, one would have to understand reality from every possible perspective.  To know everything would necessitate knowing what it's like to not know everything.

Because perspectives are infinite and constantly changing, fully knowing all of them would be an ongoing, never ending process.

This means that omniscience isn’t just about having all the answers in one moment. Instead, it’s about an eternal process of learning and discovery, as every perspective adds something new to reality's unfolding. To know everything would mean constantly engaging with an infinite, always shifting world of perspectives.  Omniscience is not a static state, but an evolving journey, a never ending pursuit of understanding. (Author: unknown)
•●•●•●•●•●•▪︎

The worst professor I ever had at the University of Winnipeg. Alienated me to the point he called my work unintelligible. Will never forgive/forget him for his petulant bravado. Happy to see he probably fits right in in right wing country with that academic snobbery. Bravo.

Marco Almeida BA 2006
University of Winnipeg

[  ] The worst professor I ever had at the University of Winnipeg. Alienated me to the point he called my work unintelligible. Will never forgive/forget him for his petulant bravado. Happy to see he probably fits right in in right wing country with that academic standard he creates.

He completely destroyed the confidence I had at that time. He can't take away the credit I have in doing philosophy with the paper bag he tried putting over my head. But fuck that for everything he's worth. MA2025

Oh did I get your attention. Now that I have it... fuck your rebuke to hell. All the loop holes that you were so clever to just jump through to get where you inevitably are. I just put one up for you except it's you stuck with that donkey tail between your legs. I've carried around this weight for a long fucking time. Asshole.

The best predictor of human behaviour is past behaviour, which explains why - why you're still an asshole. Makes me vomit. I have had to carry this untruth for a ton of time. I don't expect to get an apology from you either because I've waited long enough to say it. MA2025 

___________________________

Nothing is everything.  And nothing is a singularity from a notwithstanding philosophical end.  Where technology hypothetically and literally takes over. Though in revolutionary theory but not in practice, singulairty resets to reveal what we do not know.  This can only define an awareness into ourselves.  Not just our private inhibitions.  But totally aware.  MA2025

○○••●•○○•

No one impinges on me or purges my sovereignty. Only God. MA2025

○●•●•●•●•●•●••

The courage to be empty (MA2025)

To know the truth also one has to go through the paths of truth and untruth. And when one understands its inevitability and understands this mystery, then thanks also arises in the mind for the untruth that he went through. Because without him the truth could not be reached. The sin through which one reaches virtue, that sin also seems to be compassionate, because
without it virtue could not have been reached. There are thorns on the path of truth - not few, but many - but therein the tests of love and truth are found. Those wishing to find the flowers of truth will have to pass through these thorns. Truth is not cheap. It never was, and it never will be. Pay the price - and don't be afraid. Beyond the crucifix lies the throne.. 🌼🌸 (author: unknown)


I don't require punishment. God requires me in the face of his punishment. I am a sinner. I will always be. Understand that and declare war on  yourself is what the beginning of wisdom creates. I don't feel punishment I fear only if god is for me. MA2025 

○●○●○●•••••

Exploring the interplay between determinism and free will has led me down a fascinating path. At first glance, it appears purely philosophical: we can observe how our unconscious drives and conditioning create predictable, deterministic patterns in our behavior. Yet through self-awareness and conscious choice, we can step outside these patterns – suggesting free will exists alongside determinism rather than in opposition to it.

But what if this dual nature possibly points to something deeper? Perhaps our capacity for free will – this ability to transcend our circumstances and rise above pure cause-and-effect – is evidence of the divine in human nature. While the physical universe operates under strict deterministic laws, and our animal instincts pull us toward predetermined responses, we possess this remarkable gift to choose differently, to overcome our environment and conditioning.

In this light, one could view our base impulses and the deterministic forces of nature as the domain of the demiurge, while our capacity for free will represents a divine spark – a gift from a higher God that allows us to transcend mere materialistic existence. Every time we choose consciousness over autopilot, wisdom over instinct, or love over conditioning, we exercise this sacred ability to "pugna fati" – to wrestle with fate itself.

What do you think? Are our moments of genuine free will evidence of something beyond the material universe? (Author unknown)

○●••●●○○••

What brings out the best of you. Does philosophy bring out the best of you or isn't it just a cynics view of life. Should you be the kind of person that inspires others to make the best out from life or is that simply a philosopher's facticity.  Facticity in the sense you give life meaning. Not to be confused with existentialist thought as in why are we here. But an extension I'm answering why are you here as a philosopher. MA2025

______________________

__________
To debunk an existentialist?


Tell me something from about which I have pondered. I take this positionally myself.

Do you play from recall a position you unmistakenly commit to normalize or regulate as philosophy. You do so. You do so and subscribe to that as your mind dictated and then it fluctuates informing your reasons and changes over time.

Do you think old ways become dogmatic in your thinking.

Therefore, with time and experience the change you see in what you once held no longer holds as true.

This maybe confused as a red herring.

But my point is as valid as daylight. Quite simply: do you change philosophy the way you do it by ways of measure and the process you have formulated over time. Or does that diminish and transform into something new.

Win win. Yes or no.

Can you reject your own beliefs as you recall them or are you living a lie.

For example, someone over time you've met and conducted philosophical interview with them from which they interject with something you stated once before. You may not be able to recall from it (but there is it.) So, do you cower or do you postulate and defend your view whether or not it's relevant to you or not. Keep in mind this happens to you all the time. Just imagine it. Is this a fallacy.

Love you all,

MA2025

○●•○•○•○•○•○

○●○●•●
How you talk.
Reverse psychology domestication of god

Funeral  when we die = the value of the dead is based on three things....

Demoraliziation of gods guilt. That all your sins are forgiven as a reduction under god. When you were powerless you are no longer powerful.  Therefore, your poor moral judgment or bad behavior are absolved from any sins committed.
Liberation from god. That you are free from earthly things in gods name only.
Gods exoneration. That you have been renounced of all things bound to the earth or worldly in value. This includes injustices made against you if your unbridled life from which you've acted or been purged upon by forces against the will which others impose upon us.

Are these ideas that can be tested as a working thesis in theology as philosophically relevant as they apply to as in rules you can be guided with. MA2025

•○○●•○•○○○

Can you deny the existence or what could be the intepretation of philosophy? (What wisdom creates precedes wisdom as in doing philosophy properly. This can be defined by performing exercises inductively, deductively or in scientific methodology)

If in proof as philosophy not done properly. (Is either subjective or illogical)  Where its only property is provided by random order or by chance.

Therefore, if philosophy is properly interpreted and transcends unknown variables. That philosophy qualifies the question of what death might be or not it cannot also verify the probability of god. (Kantian ethics and the categorical imperative)

• Isn't the nature of how we think epistemological in value.
• Isn't the conductivity of metaphysics to find meaning in problem solving.
• My permittivity is the same as in my natural ability, either social scientifically able to deduce or infer what emerges in such a process of cause and effect. (Philosophy)

So my question as stated above is: can you conspire against what wisdom creates. Can this be related to nihilism. MA2025

Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it.

Confucius

All truth is safe and nothing else is safe, but he who keeps back truth, or withholds it from men, from motives of expediency, is either a coward or a criminal.”

— James Russell Lowell

I can't sit back and just not be infuriated with the literal lack of knowledge and misinformation whereas just any political junkie gets into office... Alberta has been born to a conservatives toilet bowl of leaders determined in being just that.

I feel sick to death living in this place I love to call home 🇨🇦 my country. It's about standing firm for what that means. If that fake alpha feminist Danielle Smith and  Pierre Poilievre who couldn't talk there way out of a jello stand. I'm ready for it.

I am taking aim at conservative ideology and I will not lay down to these belligerent assholes get rich or die trying as their hidden message of devaluing me.

Because I possess a monster ego and my values are uncanadian. That's reverse psychology (btw). The cons are bullying us into not buying what they're selling. They think the average Canadian are stupid and will follow.

Not me. No fucking way.

Last night Danielle Smith acceptance speech was the most degrading piece of garbage I've ever heard. She declared war on Canada . I took it personally and it makes me ashamed to be Canadian. Never heard a worse speech from a leader in my life.

It's not us that are insane with rage politics. I'm not against using it as an ends against the real enemies of my country.  The Conservatives are acting like petulant victims and using reverse psychology in feeble attempt to mitigate. This is war.

This is war on a political landscape that's unprecedented in the history of this great country. We live in the greatest nation on earth.  I refuse to just sit back and watch our values go out the window.

My parents are old-school. They're Canadian. I direct my feelings in this manner because like many others they have worked their tails off. I will not just sit on my laurels and watch the Conservatives dismantle how important being a true Canadian means to me. MA2025

Deuteronomy 28:7

God will defeat your enemies who attack you. They’ll come at you on one road and run away on seven(...)


________________________

What if everything you do were considered normal. How would you be perceived. What would that look like.

Now consider not knowing what God is. What is religion if not the domestication of God without knowing what God is.

Now consider you don't have to be a philosopher to know that you are. This follows what if all your defenses are a lie. And everything you use to cope with were strictly observatory. Without guilt. Without fear of being known. Without suicidal thoughts that you will be framed for not knowing.

Now consider once again: what if everything you did were normal and without question. Therefore, did God domesticate you or did we domesticate God.

Conclusion: the biggest misconception of freedom entails if everything you ever thought possible were a lie becomes a process of unlearning. (Why follows) Freedom can be something you never had. What it becomes is a process of unleanring everything you ever thought you knew - without wanting it - all over again. It replaces the value into nothing.  Imagine a democracy where the most evil evil criminals were in power. Now unlearn that from the power invested in your mind. What ideas have fucked you over. What expressions in value are there that you relapsed from being sold something you never thought about in the case of propaganda. This ties into the question of gods domestication from religion and into your own idea of it.   What do politicians tell you to believe. Could you recreate or reinvent all these things. MA2025

Cheap reality vs fictitious reality

 The cheapened sense of a reality gone blind; is NOT a fictitious reality.  It is, in fact, a fantasy.

Getting what you want; is not the same as getting what you deserve.

The act of learning

The mind acts as a Super conductor, its ridicule, to test a person's guilt (if not having a sense of humor) ...but they live in a vacuum. Marco Almeida 2025

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFF_xM2J_iQ/?igsh=cmd0ZW5sbGJ0eHhq

All memory is - is chaos. So always always allow chaos be the choice, you yourself, to having made the choice.  Cheap imitation is not to be intimidated, by using an informed decision (in its form) into a medium you choose to inform those choices. The return is what dictates norms (not IN reality...) but rather IF AS reality. - Marco Almeida 2025

“We are all expressions of something larger, something more mysterious. And the closer we get to that truth, the more peace we can find in our lives. It’s only when we let go of the need to control everything that we begin to experience connection.”

- the late great David Lynch 🖤 conductor, its ridicule, to test a person's gullt if not having a sense of humor but they live in a vacuum.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFF_xM2J_iQ/?igsh=cmd0ZW5sbGJ0eHhq

All memory is is chaos. So  let always chaos be the choice having made it.  Cheap imitation is not to be intimidating using the confirmation of what medium you choose to inform your choices.


“We are all expressions of something larger, something more mysterious. And the closer we get to that truth, the more peace we can find in our lives. It’s only when we let go of the need to control everything that we begin to experience connection.”

- the late great David Lynch 🖤

Sin-cerity

Feedback on the semantics of language, is what motivation an actor creates. The actions leading to a character arch as an actor, is not to inform the choices they make but by assigning meaning to their actions because the words are secondary. 

The psychological attunement (subverting reality)

Subverting reality doesn't come together by accident (language put into meaning = assigning meaning to language.)  Subverting reality should be something uncomfortable not awkward,  not absurd yet obscure, uncharacteristic of action.

You are not (theoretically) subverting your-own-reality. The subversion of reality takes the place of meaning.

Meaning into language.

To reach a truthful place of meaning, you are assigning words - acting as unconnected signifiers to convey your truth of the words. What is it you try doing... is using  unconnected signifiers in order to assign the words meaning

The result is an element of obscurity.  It is because of the words you've assigned meaning to account for persuasion.

In short, you reach words to combine as result of, of an, anomaly. An anomaly once the words are assigned meaning provided, provides meaning as an emotive relapse.  All in relation to it.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFDScQIM-Qd/?igsh=MXExOHdxMDRkOXoxOA==

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/18nMmPcgU8/

A reverence in dissipation

 Titled: Asleep in the 80s

Sunlight.

It hits different...

Into the deep eyesockets 

Of my skull.

Listening to the summer of 69.

Less... even less.

Now lesser. 

The least.

All my worries are located in the heart.

Treat me like the child.

That I will forever remember.

Loving you forever.

- Marco Almeida

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/14fS2CQVqn/

Submergence

 Rational chaos (discords in logic)

In bliss, thinking, inquiry ceases. The way humans are thinking and inquiring means they don't enjoy life, what do you think?

Without living a fantasy life, imaginary relationships will never qualify what truth swirls around in my head only to land on foreign planets.  MA2025 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFDTl3WTG1m/?igsh=MWFuZWIxZjZtNmRkZQ==

'The opening'

 The fallacy of freedom or "not being free"...

Justice comes before guilt.  Justice before guilt is of the highest order. There cannot be a moral code to justice without disorder.  Therefore, we do not judge if you psychologically fail in seeking guilt. And if no one like to feel guilt... It is because it's DNA or in our human nature not to.  It is also psychopathic in behavior.  It is the categorical meaning of being found. That once you feel guilt you eliminate it with discontent.  Your confusion.  The very fabric of humanity rests on such unified principles.

The above all qualify existence without god whether or not you appeal to an authority.  This is a relevant statement.

○●○●○
Now consider the following;

An athiest choose to promote a universe of disorder, only because they also choose not to identify with god.  In a world without god is a form of censorship which dictates this as a norm.  The point this follows: is that if we fail to understand this informal fallacy then god is moot. Therefore, the existential athiest has not inferred formal argument against god.  Which is censorship. (Only if on this level...) that if the censorship of god is in fact true.  (Where do we find order or acknowledge form.) 1- Codes of conduct.  2- Morals in society.  The question being where does censorship come from? 3-  What are factors not directly dealing with a debunking of god.  This is, for example, is an appeal to existentialism.  What are your causes.

Discuss.

○●○●○

○○○○○
January 20th 2025

In the real world, truth is about honesty. What are some good strategies for honesty?

Honesty means that we bascially already have the correct epistemology of the concept of fact, we only need the morale to follow the rules of this correct epistemology.

Everyone already knows, at least on an intuitive basis, how to state a fact, like to say that there is a glass on the table. But there can be all kinds of psychological pressure to deny the truth that there is a glass on the table. Like financial reasons, or loss of status, laziness etc.

At which point a hodge podge of strategies come into play, to remain honest.

Then you should have a basic understanding of honesty, which is a subjective issue. The concept of subjectivity is a creationist concept.

1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact

Basically the logic in a subjective statement is that the spirit chooses, and the spirit is identified with a chosen opinion.

Although in the logic of fact, a fact is forced by evidence, (a fact is a model of a creation) psychological pressure can make it so, that the statement of fact becomes chosen. 

So then it becomes a decision to say whether or not there is a glass on the table, and a moral issue to follow the logic of fact.

So basically you are then choosing a judgment on the spirit in which you make the decision that there is, or there isn't a glass on the table.

Emotions must be primed for honesty beforehand. There must be built up emotional reserves for a passion for the truth.

Also emotional realism is a good strategy imo. Take all the painful truth you can deal with emotionally, and no more. Then just start negotiating with what level of truth you can handle.

There's a popular idea to welcome being found wrong, as some kind of strategy for honesty. I advise against that strategy. This is not a realistic way to deal with the pain of being found wrong in my opinion. Of course you can still welcome criticism of your position, as a challenge.

○○○○○
We all assign meaning to things.  (Whether or not empirically valid or emotively based.)
I identify with myself.  My own image.  I assume none of the risk if I mirror my intention to other people beside myself.  I think that makes sense. MA2025,


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFC1bE0CAfD/?igsh=MWUxNmF5NXdxMTFkaA==

The great reset

Minding reinvention the slow purge: a premonition for (performance) art

In music you are having a sincere relationship with yourself for annaudience that intimately wants it  How can this possibly be any different for an actor.

A person can pretend.  It makes them irrelevant alll they want to. It requires no further Persuasion.  Creativity takes on another role...
Creativity takes on an obsessive quality which dictates form. It restores order informing your memory.  A mentality for chaos and surrender of a process that never ends.
○○○○○
Any idea that exists as an inferiority complex is a bad one. That is a good rule of thumb to live by especially when dealing with class conscious individuals that base their identity and identify with reality unequally.
○○○○○
“One great use of words is to hide our thoughts.”
Voltaire

○○○○○
"Only the great masters of style ever succeed in being obscure."
-- Oscar Wilde
●○●○●

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFDcKautfiu/?igsh=MTA2cXhvc3kzbGprMw==

The psychological 'if'

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

"Whoever wants music instead of noise, joy instead of pleasure, soul instead of gold, creative work instead of business, passion instead of foolery, finds no home in this trivial world of ours."

- Hermann Hesse

1/18/2024, New talk, #1
There is an art in listening.  Listen to find out if what is said is of significance, and after listening, judge, accept, or throw out; but first of all listen.  The difficulty with most of us is that we do not listen.  We come prepared to be antagonistic or friendly, and not to listen neutrally.  If you listen neutrally, surely then only you begin to discover what lies behind the words.  Words are a means of communication.  You have to learn my vocabulary, the meaning behind my words, and then you will find the significance of the subject.  The thing of first importance is to learn to listen rightly.  If you read a poem and are biased, how can you understand it?  To appreciate what the poet wants you to understand, you must come with freedom to do so. K

“Not how the world is, but that it is, is the mystery.”
     Ludwig Wittgenstein

“If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done.” Ludwig Wittgenstein

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DE6OrEMPvSu/?igsh=MWljZXZoeW14bmRpbA==