Another incorrect assertion.
spendi, It's all rhetorical. Wait, maybe, it's not.
You don't really get much of an argument from these Ozark boy's and ****-kickers do you Spendi? I see they have a machine for spreading it though.
Assertions and ill founded allegations galore but no input of a truly definable nature. If they pledge themselves to earlier allegations they automatically fall foul of the original obligation which they introduced quite nonchalantly in gusto's of anticipated righteousness. Tut tut tut, the mind boggles.
It may well be considered that they need charging to consider and abide by regulating their actions and the squalid reasons they conjure from the depths of depravity and discipline themselves to important moral duties.
I note well your concerns for future inhabitants of the planet. They in turn appear to have lost all reverence and respect for the scriptures which form the foundations of a Christian moral, ethical and lawful undertaking.
Americans unfortunately tend to lean towards misappropriation of day to day occurences, they make films out of whatever it is they have problems in understanding. Tom Hanks proved a good point here in The Streets of Philadelphia and the derision caused by 'aids' assumptions and allegations were well seen to be paramount in their particular applications.
You in turn have a tendency to be prudent and quite well regulated in general, which on their own merits deserve acknowledgement. The use of your mental and corporeal faculties whilst being wasted in general amongst these pages at present may well have futuristic beneficial advantages to mankind in general. They, ridiculing your proposals and suggestions automatically subvert the peace and good order of society in the broad terms of management and control of the inhabitants.
The submissions in general being wasted, especially to the likes of C.I. Ros and Jock. The funny lady who raises her inebriated head once in a blue moon is of course no consideration.
Keep it up Spendi, and, above all never loose sight of the allegiance due to the descendants of the present.
It's quite alright Ros, it may well be above your present contingency for understanding, but time will help.
Keep taking the tablets!
Mathos wrote:It's quite alright Ros, it may well be above your present contingency for understanding, but time will help.
Keep taking the tablets!
No problem Mathius, whether sarcastic or stupid, your post was funny either way.
I see you're talking about 'tablets' now for no apparent reason, unless of course you took my 'medication' comment to Spendi
personally for some reason...
Ross, whatever you do, control the paranoia, it leads to excessive inner withdrawal and resultant therapy from a very expensive psychiatrist!
Don't you know when in doubt shake them out, a pill a day keeps the straight-jacket away? :wink:
Quote:whatever you do, control the paranoia, it leads to excessive inner withdrawal and resultant therapy from a very expensive psychiatrist!
, see that ros, we get all kinds of experienced people on these lines.
both spendi and Mathos must have experience with "psychiatrists." They seem to know something we don't.
Hi Folks-
I've been sidetracked all day and it looks as if it was no bad thing.
I have studied psychology c.i. What do you want to know?
What I want to know, spendi, is why has your study of psychology not helped you live in reality?
Start by defining reality and I might try to answer your question.
You seem to think your reality is the only one.
I suppose habitual asserters would logically arrive at such a point.
It's a version of "Get a life" which makes some sense when addressed to a corpse but to address it to another sentinent being is the very acme of ignorance and self-absorption.
No, spendi. My reality is not the only reality. What is "reality" you ask? If you must ask it, you probably don't understand your own being; what is real; or what is in "fact." It's how we react to our environment. When you type on your keyboard, that's part of your reality.
How do you work out that my study of psychology has not helped me live in reality, as you asserted, unless you have a definition of reality which doesn't include mine and thus opens up the possibility that it doesn't include anybody else's either unless they are like you.
It's based on "our" reality of how we observe your opinions on a2k. Many of your "positions' lack the basis of logic and evidence normally required. Additionally, the majority of posters responding to your posts indicate your lack of knowledge or fundmental understanding of reality. It's possible that the contradictions of your stastements may be the cause of our confusion.
"SApienza University?" gimme a break on a piece of swampland.
Psychologically speaking, from what I am able to discern via the thread it would appear on face value that some of our American friends are blessed with involvement in teaching. I say blessed as my considerations towards modern day teachers especially are viewed as individuals receiving far too much 'Good money for old rope.'
The absurdities of the curriculum they are bound to exercise with total impunity leaves very much to be desired.
On it's own merit It has a tendency for the teacher to resort to pragmatic innovations where necessity of intellect dictates;- in effect one could speak for them with ease by mere pedantic or academic adherence to the well defined and often illustrated text books
One must of course be extremely careful never to equate their stupidity with insanity.
There is grandeur in insanity and insanity in grandeur. By definition the teacher thinks in universal existential or omnipotent terms, broadening the minds capacity accordingly, in fact in immeasurable terms as to what he is capable of conjuring up.
Somewhat akin to an ant attempting to unravel the mysteries of the cosmos, he will fail miserably, but boy, oh boy, will he produce a creation of assertions as possibilities. Then they all jump on the bandwagon and play with his assertions.
Ideally, he must perform the dualistic feat of proving to himself that he is correct about everything, whilst knowing he is not!
Actually he is craving excitement, remember, the teacher created GOD in his own image (exactly) then claimed GOD created him.
Quite fascinating when you think on the proposal .
Yes, the undeniable excites him, it was indeed a brilliant conjecture, but the same man could be just as excited in another life, be he a toilet cleaner at Buckingham Palace and working his way up to obtaining the keys to the 'Royal Loo's'
Is it possible that he permanently inhabits an alternative dimension, where his dreams and assertions combined with reality, create a world of esoteric certitude and applied will?
Because if it is, then it becomes his real world where common reality is separated by an iron curtain. It should come as no surprise that he avidly appreciates what he considers his own personal advantage. Those around him, not being able to see through the iron curtain, make him 'privileged.'
He is smugly amused at observing the teaching of morality by others, knowing they have no idea of his own.
spendius wrote:Start by defining reality and I might try to answer your question.
You seem to think your reality is the only one.
I suppose habitual asserters would logically arrive at such a point.
It's a version of "Get a life" which makes some sense when addressed to a corpse but to address it to another sentinent being is the very acme of ignorance and self-absorption.
Dear Spendi,
The irony of your idiosyncrasies. Now, I know and you know that you understand analogies better than most. You get literal to suit your purposes. Not a bad ploy. Shall I define idiosyncrasy?
Aye Lass- why not?
It might be interesting what with the black sheeries and right knee peepiepeep and all.
Thanks.
