Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

The Ego and Its Shadow

s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 5:49:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The personality, or individual, is an outcropping of the collective unconsciousness; it is an attempt at characterization. This is why it is the individual with a desire for amplification tries to build strong associations between himself, or herself, and favored identities.

The individual which is too accepting of a multiplicity, or a plurality, of contrasting ideas feels a loss of identity, a blurring of the lines of demarcation, a homogenization, and an attenuation of one's personality. To create the idea of one against the world, as an individual or a group, one has a greater sense of significance; it is a mistrust for the world and its diversity that threatens the individual.

One must have a dual nature, the egoic god who sits on the thrown of consciousness and the subterranean abyss, or underworld, filled with the devils of unfavorable psychic content; it is God, or the ego, and the Devil, or the ego's shadow, which create the individual.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 8:59:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.

Nah, I disagree, lol.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 9:12:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 8:59:45 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.

Nah, I disagree, lol.

Are you playing around or do you really disagree? If you really disagree, then, why?
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 9:30:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 9:12:48 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:59:45 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.

Nah, I disagree, lol.

Are you playing around or do you really disagree? If you really disagree, then, why?

Well, it seems to me you're viewing it as if there's some absolute state to begin with. Which there isn't, but rather that we're a collection of responses. And eh, maybe we're not completely in disagreement, but then there is no darker self to accept, but rather an old self. As regards the "devil around every corner", however, I'm somewhat inclined to agree, but again I'd deny the need to accept a "darker" self. I mean, that works the other way too. Religious people take incredible conviction from the world around them, for example, because their shadows (as you call it) feed their belief. And the subconscious does all sorts of things like that, basically brings the slightest of suggestions to reality (Muphry's Law is an example of the dynamic), and it's all just because the thought is there, not because there's some dark thing underneath pressing upwards. Self-fulfilling prophecy basically--it's a legit HUGE thing with people, though I don't really know why (there seem some blatantly compensatory functions to it,--selective memory, for example--but then it can be torturous too, so...)
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 11:04:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 9:30:32 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 9:12:48 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:59:45 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.

Nah, I disagree, lol.

Are you playing around or do you really disagree? If you really disagree, then, why?

Well, it seems to me you're viewing it as if there's some absolute state to begin with. Which there isn't, but rather that we're a collection of responses.

The absoluteness, I see, is the whole of reality: that which is, and that which isn't. I find it hard to accept our being as, merely, a collection of responses and not a collection of stimuli, also.

And eh, maybe we're not completely in disagreement, but then there is no darker self to accept, but rather an old self.

The reason I prefer to use the term darker self and not merely old is because I don't necessarily believe old comprises all that which we find distasteful about ourselves. In fact, there were aspects about my self, I at times wish were still apart of my life. For me, dark means something hidden or suppressed, something of which we're not proud.

As regards the "devil around every corner", however, I'm somewhat inclined to agree, but again I'd deny the need to accept a "darker" self. I mean, that works the other way too. Religious people take incredible conviction from the world around them, for example, because their shadows (as you call it) feed their belief. And the subconscious does all sorts of things like that, basically brings the slightest of suggestions to reality (Muphry's Law is an example of the dynamic), and it's all just because the thought is there, not because there's some dark thing underneath pressing upwards. Self-fulfilling prophecy basically--it's a legit HUGE thing with people, though I don't really know why (there seem some blatantly compensatory functions to it,--selective memory, for example--but then it can be torturous too, so...)

I see our dark selves as necessary to our identities. As our shadows give us definition and contrast, separating us from the world around us, so, likewise, it is by the suppression of unfavorable psychic content which allows for more favorable psychic content to stand out.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 8:59:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 11:04:20 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 9:30:32 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 9:12:48 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:59:45 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.

Nah, I disagree, lol.

Are you playing around or do you really disagree? If you really disagree, then, why?

Well, it seems to me you're viewing it as if there's some absolute state to begin with. Which there isn't, but rather that we're a collection of responses.

The absoluteness, I see, is the whole of reality: that which is, and that which isn't. I find it hard to accept our being as, merely, a collection of responses and not a collection of stimuli, also.

Yes, I think I get your point of view, and fair enough about stimuli, and I am separating myself from the world, but still...

And eh, maybe we're not completely in disagreement, but then there is no darker self to accept, but rather an old self.

The reason I prefer to use the term darker self and not merely old is because I don't necessarily believe old comprises all that which we find distasteful about ourselves. In fact, there were aspects about my self, I at times wish were still apart of my life. For me, dark means something hidden or suppressed, something of which we're not proud.

As regards the "devil around every corner", however, I'm somewhat inclined to agree, but again I'd deny the need to accept a "darker" self. I mean, that works the other way too. Religious people take incredible conviction from the world around them, for example, because their shadows (as you call it) feed their belief. And the subconscious does all sorts of things like that, basically brings the slightest of suggestions to reality (Muphry's Law is an example of the dynamic), and it's all just because the thought is there, not because there's some dark thing underneath pressing upwards. Self-fulfilling prophecy basically--it's a legit HUGE thing with people, though I don't really know why (there seem some blatantly compensatory functions to it,--selective memory, for example--but then it can be torturous too, so...)

I see our dark selves as necessary to our identities. As our shadows give us definition and contrast, separating us from the world around us, so, likewise, it is by the suppression of unfavorable psychic content which allows for more favorable psychic content to stand out.

I disagree. And I do get your point of view, and it's danced in my mind too, this notion to just accept the world and get on with it, but I don't. And so I say "old" self for that is all it really is. And people do suppress their old selves as if a darkness, but this is just in fear. The trick is to let it go, for by suppressing it you're essentially keeping it alive. And I think there's a certain neatness to internet culture there too, which allows an actual broadcasting and resolving of those darknesses like never before ...Hey, I guess it's just like a religion of sorts of mine or something, but I have some faith and want for better things.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 8:59:40 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 11:04:20 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 9:30:32 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 9:12:48 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:59:45 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.

Nah, I disagree, lol.

Are you playing around or do you really disagree? If you really disagree, then, why?

Well, it seems to me you're viewing it as if there's some absolute state to begin with. Which there isn't, but rather that we're a collection of responses.

The absoluteness, I see, is the whole of reality: that which is, and that which isn't. I find it hard to accept our being as, merely, a collection of responses and not a collection of stimuli, also.

Yes, I think I get your point of view, and fair enough about stimuli, and I am separating myself from the world, but still...

And eh, maybe we're not completely in disagreement, but then there is no darker self to accept, but rather an old self.

The reason I prefer to use the term darker self and not merely old is because I don't necessarily believe old comprises all that which we find distasteful about ourselves. In fact, there were aspects about my self, I at times wish were still apart of my life. For me, dark means something hidden or suppressed, something of which we're not proud.

As regards the "devil around every corner", however, I'm somewhat inclined to agree, but again I'd deny the need to accept a "darker" self. I mean, that works the other way too. Religious people take incredible conviction from the world around them, for example, because their shadows (as you call it) feed their belief. And the subconscious does all sorts of things like that, basically brings the slightest of suggestions to reality (Muphry's Law is an example of the dynamic), and it's all just because the thought is there, not because there's some dark thing underneath pressing upwards. Self-fulfilling prophecy basically--it's a legit HUGE thing with people, though I don't really know why (there seem some blatantly compensatory functions to it,--selective memory, for example--but then it can be torturous too, so...)

I see our dark selves as necessary to our identities. As our shadows give us definition and contrast, separating us from the world around us, so, likewise, it is by the suppression of unfavorable psychic content which allows for more favorable psychic content to stand out.

I disagree. And I do get your point of view, and it's danced in my mind too, this notion to just accept the world and get on with it, but I don't. And so I say "old" self for that is all it really is. And people do suppress their old selves as if a darkness, but this is just in fear. The trick is to let it go, for by suppressing it you're essentially keeping it alive. And I think there's a certain neatness to internet culture there too, which allows an actual broadcasting and resolving of those darknesses like never before ...Hey, I guess it's just like a religion of sorts of mine or something, but I have some faith and want for better things.

I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 10:50:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/11/2014 8:59:40 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 11:04:20 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 9:30:32 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 9:12:48 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:59:45 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/10/2014 8:54:06 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/10/2014 6:25:17 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, this was interesting. Care to expound?

I believe the World is filled with contradictory elements which cancel each other out, a primeval chaos. It is the individual which creates order, or makes sense out of things, by having an affinity to some things, seen as positive, or beneficial, stimuli and a distaste, or revulsion, for others, seen as negative, or malignant. This creates favored psychic content, which is the ego, and negative psychic content, which is suppressed.

The problem arises as the individual becomes too contentious towards his, or her, darker self, as though he, or she, were somehow divided and not whole. Of course, the individual is divided; but, the individual must see himself, or herself, as also whole. A classic example of this is the Jewish concept of God, as the creator of both good and evil, and the Christian concept of God, who is alone good and, hence, the need of a devil. The more broken we see ourselves as being, the more fragmented our world becomes. It is a denial of our darker selves which creates a devil around every corner; as we make peace and reconciliation with ourselves, our worlds become less contentious.

Nah, I disagree, lol.

Are you playing around or do you really disagree? If you really disagree, then, why?

Well, it seems to me you're viewing it as if there's some absolute state to begin with. Which there isn't, but rather that we're a collection of responses.

The absoluteness, I see, is the whole of reality: that which is, and that which isn't. I find it hard to accept our being as, merely, a collection of responses and not a collection of stimuli, also.

Yes, I think I get your point of view, and fair enough about stimuli, and I am separating myself from the world, but still...

And eh, maybe we're not completely in disagreement, but then there is no darker self to accept, but rather an old self.

The reason I prefer to use the term darker self and not merely old is because I don't necessarily believe old comprises all that which we find distasteful about ourselves. In fact, there were aspects about my self, I at times wish were still apart of my life. For me, dark means something hidden or suppressed, something of which we're not proud.

As regards the "devil around every corner", however, I'm somewhat inclined to agree, but again I'd deny the need to accept a "darker" self. I mean, that works the other way too. Religious people take incredible conviction from the world around them, for example, because their shadows (as you call it) feed their belief. And the subconscious does all sorts of things like that, basically brings the slightest of suggestions to reality (Muphry's Law is an example of the dynamic), and it's all just because the thought is there, not because there's some dark thing underneath pressing upwards. Self-fulfilling prophecy basically--it's a legit HUGE thing with people, though I don't really know why (there seem some blatantly compensatory functions to it,--selective memory, for example--but then it can be torturous too, so...)

I see our dark selves as necessary to our identities. As our shadows give us definition and contrast, separating us from the world around us, so, likewise, it is by the suppression of unfavorable psychic content which allows for more favorable psychic content to stand out.

I disagree. And I do get your point of view, and it's danced in my mind too, this notion to just accept the world and get on with it, but I don't. And so I say "old" self for that is all it really is. And people do suppress their old selves as if a darkness, but this is just in fear. The trick is to let it go, for by suppressing it you're essentially keeping it alive. And I think there's a certain neatness to internet culture there too, which allows an actual broadcasting and resolving of those darknesses like never before ...Hey, I guess it's just like a religion of sorts of mine or something, but I have some faith and want for better things.

I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Perfect. Agreed.
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 5:49:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

As I said, I'd have rephrased it. In fact, I'll just paraphrase it later.
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 5:50:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 5:49:05 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

As I said, I'd have rephrased it. In fact, I'll just paraphrase it later.

Hmmm. I'm interested to you how you'd paraphrase that.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 5:50:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 5:50:02 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:49:05 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

As I said, I'd have rephrased it. In fact, I'll just paraphrase it later.

Hmmm. I'm interested to see how you'd paraphrase that.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 6:08:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
"You gotta control your smiles and cries because that's all you have and nobody can take that away from you." -- Training Day

>:D
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 6:11:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Moreno: So tell me something. How long have you been a pig, I mean, a police officer?
Jake Hoyt: I've been a pig for 19 months.
Moreno: 19 months? You like it?
Jake Hoyt: I should have been a fireman.

^definitely the line Training Day was built around. Man that movie owns so hard.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 11:19:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

I'm interested to know what it was you found disagreeable.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2014 12:37:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 11:19:05 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

I'm interested to know what it was you found disagreeable.

1) Advocating the denial of the self
2) The notion that we are the same organisms throughout our lives.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2014 12:59:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/12/2014 12:37:43 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 11:19:05 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

I'm interested to know what it was you found disagreeable.

1) Advocating the denial of the self
2) The notion that we are the same organisms throughout our lives.

Where do I advocate denial of the self?

If you read it a bit closer, you will see I said we are still the same organisms yet we change.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2014 8:19:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/12/2014 12:59:33 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/12/2014 12:37:43 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 11:19:05 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

I'm interested to know what it was you found disagreeable.

1) Advocating the denial of the self
2) The notion that we are the same organisms throughout our lives.

Where do I advocate denial of the self?

"I believe in letting it go., we are not truly letting go of it, but denying it."

If you read it a bit closer, you will see I said we are still the same organisms yet we change.

And we are not still the same organisms.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2014 8:52:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/12/2014 8:19:36 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/12/2014 12:59:33 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/12/2014 12:37:43 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 11:19:05 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:46:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:44:01 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:40:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/11/2014 5:12:45 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:48:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
I believe in letting it go, we are not truly letting go of it but denying it. As we grow, our bodies mature, they morph, yet, they are still the same organisms. Our past makes us who we are, today. It's in embracing our past which allows us to understand who we are, at this moment in time. If you were only to view one frame of an entire movie, you would be hardpressed to make a critical review. It is in consideration of the entire movie which allows you to make a judgement. Without our past, our present does not make sense.

Sig'd

Really?

I'd rephrase it a bit, but I can see where he's going with this post...

What I get mostly from it is that the past and present actions correlate to make us who we are today.
Like he said, judging a movie from one scene, is kind of one sided. You should watch the whole movie before you make a judgement. [Although when cross-applying this to people, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to know someone completely so you shouldn't judge anyone.]

The movie analogy bit and importance of the past was fine. Everything before that wasn't.

I'm interested to know what it was you found disagreeable.

1) Advocating the denial of the self
2) The notion that we are the same organisms throughout our lives.

Where do I advocate denial of the self?

"I believe in letting it go., we are not truly letting go of it, but denying it."

Where in that sentence do I advocate to let go of or deny the self?


If you read it a bit closer, you will see I said we are still the same organisms yet we change.

And we are not still the same organisms.

So, you're saying everything about ourselves has changed; we are no longer human. I agree we are constantly changing, but we are still the same people. If we weren't, how would we recognize each other?