If this is supposed to be my theory about you, it's not. My question came up from 1) your sense that I was evading and what I took as an assumption on your part about what someone does when they are here and if they are not doing it they are evading. I felt like it was a limited sense on your part about what might be a learning interaction - for me, but also for both parties. 2) when you wrote about the minds being changed by the interactions, regardless (my interp), it seemed like, perhaps, you were exploring the idea that, for example, my mind, might be changing even though I am doing something that could be looked at as evading. These together made me wonder what you thought you were doing. It suddenly seemed useful to get a sense of what intentions are because I think they affect how we take other people's actions here.
I was in an extremely playful mood during all those posts last night, pardon. i was having fun. The thing about my gynormous ego actually came from a fairly oddparents episode I saw the other day. It was really funny. Timmy had wished himself and a very popular girl at school to be the only people in the world, so she demanded him to follow her around all day and call her pretty. It was much funnier on the cartoon than writing it here, pardon. I was just making fun of myself in a way that was funny to me. Sorry man, I'll try to explain myself in a post that addresses yoru last full post at some point soon....
Do you 'know' that? Do you just 'feel' it? Is that the same thing? I think it only really changes it if you aren't interested in justifying the game you're playing - which is a perfectly legitimate choice. I think that if we try to justify it, if we choose to analyze it, the words thing seems to come up and the ball game seems set into the circle model. I'm not sure what that implies in terms of the circle thingy, or rather how to contrast it. Could you explain a little more? Well this I certainly understand. Indeed it's highly questionable, but I think it can in several ways. Yes and no. I agree that what you say is always in play to some degree, yet I think the process can still yield growth. I don't think I'd have conceived of english or calculus on my own. Coming to understand either in whatever limited manner I do, definateley changed my mind. In fact as I mentioned briefly in a random thought post, I think every interaction changes us to some degree. Maybe that stuff is just "coursework" and doesn't apply to what you meant, but in every course I took I always attacked the instructor's claims if I had a chance, just to gauge how they fit in my mind as compared to their expectations if nothing else. Moreso though I do that stuff to try to find the limits of the scope of whatever claim is being made. Bah I'm too wordy here sorry. Well you seem to be doing well then, as far as it seem from here. No I didn't think you were evading me. I thought you were indicating that you evade certain thoughts, some of which I offer and you were demonstrating to me how you evade them. I was saying "here's this thought" and you were saying "okay this is how this thought is avoided", like that. Putting it back at you like "he you can avoid them a lot easier by just ignoring me" seemed funny to me at the time, I see it didn't really work. Yes you're very pretty, how may I serve you? (please find the humor there) And yes I'd agree you've been courteous and as helpful as you can be, while earnestly engaging in the matters at hand. I see. Well I seriously don't mean to be rude or dismissive, but I am not concerned with how seductive it is or isn't to anyone. I want to know if it can or should be denied or not, and what that does or doesn't imply about all the shit I frame with it, all that shit. Well I'm trying to do the same I think. hmm... no not really. probably not easy I'd think, but you seem to have the tools, maybe you could do it easy. I dunno. Yeah I really wish there was a better language for this stuff and I was fluent in it.. the missing body language thing is a real big bitch. Hmm... you see, if you and I weren't talking epistemology, etc... fuck yeah get out of my chair you bastard, or oh hey sorry for being in your chair... I'm a bastard. I got no problem with that. It's practical. It's generally pointless to discuss the merits of the actuality of the chair or not. But I come here to discuss weird cases like how we know that shit, etc. In that case, the middle line from above becomes pertinent because of the context. I am... but from my own perspective. I'm saying, if my perspective on this is correct, then here are the aparent universal implications. You seem to find that unfair or in some way ignorant. To me it's just establishing context. Well I've splained it enough, for now I'll just say "okay". Hmm.. yes I understand what you mean I think. In the context of knowing, yeah I think the asterisks become more and more necessary, because we're dissecting the very stuff we're using to undertake the discussion of it. As you wish of course. oh man I totally understand and again, I address this through context. some contexts demand specific attention IMO, others... no. i don't think this conversation is possible though without it. Well maybe some textbook crackpot crap, but I'm talking about real utility man! Oh I don't subscribe to isms usually, I don't think so. maybe fuck i dunno, but i ask you to excuse my philosophical free-styling if you don't mind. otherwise you'll find me more and more annoying, and I'd rather be able to continue a conversation with you without pissing you off. It's intrinsic! Lol. Yeah it's hard to explain man. I think I'm looking at utility as a term in value. I could have said "value" in place of utility there and meant the same thing. Utility being the realization of something valued perhaps, or "the actual impact of the thing on the larger structure of mind". Whereas value I use sometimes the same, and sometimes to connotate potential utility or something. Crap I'm getting tired but felt like I needed to muscle through this, sorry if you feel like you came for caviar and only got mcdonalds... lol. *snore*
I am the alpha and the omega - of me. Ja? Nein? Dualistic god(the dead, philosphical (work(horse)))-puckey?
