Prostitution and Eternal Values

[Dontaskme]

The 'dead' in hebrew means 'separate'.

The 'separate self' is the one who has beliefs and believes things. When those beliefs and the believing is stopped completely, then that separate self "dies" in the sense that that person stops being separate. Without beliefs a person is able to then become united with the One True Self. When they are one with Thee One they are re-born and as such become alive again. In other words they are born again in the sense of becoming Truly alive when re-united with the One and only True One, commonly known as God. People are never really not united with the One, they are just separate because of their beliefs.

Service to ''others'' is prostitution.

Service to SELF is the eternal value. A gift you give to yourself. The gift that keeps on unconditional giving without expecting anything in return. SELF doesn't need anything to be itself... is is everything unto itself, self-fulfilled, abundant and without lack.

This knowing is innate to us all...it has nothing to do with religion whatsoever...religion is just some human fictional story made up to control the masses..much like what governments do, it's all ego pride and nothing else...let it go, let it all go and come to know the truth of your own self, you are IT already.

Give yourself permission to be free, you are not a separate human, you are freedom, it's all free, you are free always. You are not separate from those who came before you..you came out of them inseparable from you...there was never any dividing line between you and them except as idea...already inclusive of the whole that cannot be divided...ever.

.

[Belinda]

Dontaskme wrote:

What the fuck is a standard model when it's at home? ...did you just make that up out of thin air?

And what about my standard model, shall we just invent our own models to suit our own personal agendas? and poop on other peoples as being false while clinging on for dear life to our own cause we love the smell of our own shit so much.

True, I was struggling to express what I meant to say. I learned the phrase 'standard model' from a physicist. I thought that it would be a good one to describe a standard communications model. I have no particular objections to what I can make of your philosophy but I dislike your circumlocutory use of language. By "the standard model" in communicating I mean 1. explicit 2. concise 3. tolerant 4. respecting your listeners' abilities or lack thereof. 5. sincere.

I don't object to chitchat, or to poetry if it's skilful, however this is supposed to be a forum for philosophy now. If you persist in being discursive you will not communicate very well. My objection is not about what you strive to communicate but how you do it.

Nice about the tomatoes.

[Dontaskme]

Dontaskme wrote:

What the fuck is a standard model when it's at home? ...did you just make that up out of thin air?

And what about my standard model, shall we just invent our own models to suit our own personal agendas? and poop on other peoples as being false while clinging on for dear life to our own cause we love the smell of our own shit so much.

True, I was struggling to express what I meant to say. I learned the phrase 'standard model' from a physicist. I thought that it would be a good one to describe a standard communications model. I have no particular objections to what I can make of your philosophy but I dislike your circumlocutory use of language. By "the standard model" in communicating I mean 1. explicit 2. concise 3. tolerant 4. respecting your listeners' abilities or lack thereof. 5. sincere.

I don't object to chitchat, or to poetry if it's skilful, however this is supposed to be a forum for philosophy now. If you persist in being discursive you will not communicate very well. My objection is not about what you strive to communicate but how you do it.

Nice about the tomatoes.

That's to say stop the pretentious prose. Quote on Quote.

Hey why are you even interacting with a pretentious idiot, if you dislike the circumlocutory use of language...what's your agenda, what's in it for you to interact with these lowlifes?

Hey, I'm only pretending to be an idiot, you already know that...I know it too, because you told me I was...look back at what you wrote...it's in bold.

.

By "the standard model" in communicating I mean 1. explicit 2. concise 3. tolerant 4. respecting your listeners..if I adhere to these rules will that make me look real clever and very important, will it fulfil me, and give me a sense of real purpose in life? will it complete me as a person and make me immune from ridicule by others and be the answer to all my problems? ..or will nothing change?

.

[Dontaskme]

But Dontaskme is not a theist.

How do you know?
Pure projection without any real true substance.

DAM's philosophy includes not only those unbelievers that you label "secular progressives" but also you , your ideas, and all else.

All your own projection without any real true substance.

Your vague expressions amount to bad theism : DAM's verbosity could be edited and become good philosophy.

All projection without any real true substance.

Philosophy, what's that I forgot? ..is that the study of the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.
As opposed to the irrational opposition position of investigating the truths of ''WHO WANTS TO KNOW''..and can that one be known?

Dontaskme, Nick seems friendly to you because both of you are attacked by the same people. The reality is that Nick's theism is very far from your idea . Nick's notion of eternal values is values as revealed by his version of God.

I don't see Nick as being friendly to me, Nick is not my friend, I have never met this person or known this person before in my life...he is only resonating with his own ideas...you other guys on here are only interested in scratching each others back, and being liked for it...Nick and I couldn't give a fuck about being liked or agreed with...so get your rational thoughts straight before opening gob about what you think is actually going on here.

.

[Arising_uk]

What's the alternative? .. More hairless ape hierarchical patriarchal theocracy ?

Where do you live?

[Arising_uk]

You do know that that Man on earth wouldn't have existed if not for animals including cows appearing first?

The cow you talk about is far far removed from the auroch.

You insist on defending the bull of Man as opposed to the sincere fight for life of Hero Cow. Hmmm..could that be hidden sexism?

Specism would be the word you are looking for but personally I don't anthropomorphize such things.

[Dontaskme]

Where do you live?

What you?

[Dontaskme]

I don't anthropomorphize such things.

that's because there is no you to anthropomorphize things.

Are you human?

[Arising_uk]

What you?

Did you have trouble understanding why I asked you where you live? It's because you appeared to imply you live in a hierarchical patriarchal theocracy so I wondered where? As where I live we're fairly far from such a thing.

[Arising_uk]

that's because there is no you to anthropomorphize things.

Who you talking to?

Are you human?

I try to be but by and large I'm a primate with a fair memory and a language.

[Nick_A]

DaM

Simone Weil’s elder brother André Weil the famous mathematician in a 1932 letter to his sister wrote.

“It will now be I think 23 years that you made your entry into the phenomenal world to create the greatest pain in the ass for rectors and school directors”

Simone Weil is a member in good standing of P I T A S S (pains in the ass in the cause of truth.} I know you would not want to be associated with such deplorables. I am already a member so considered hopeless by secularism. However you still can be helped. You can be educated into believing what is acceptable and follow the sophist tradition of proper education


Belinda wrote: ↑

Your vague expressions amount to bad theism : DAM's verbosity could be edited and become good philosophy.

This is what you must do. Beg Belinda to become your editor. All you have to do is send her a check for a mutually agreed upon sum once a month and she will edit all your posts so you will become accepted into sophisticated “good philosophy.” You will then never be associated with the likes of the dreaded P I T A S S. Just think: what could be better than being edited into normality? The skies will clear, the birds will sing, Oprah will cry for you, and you will become content. You will be saved. How wonderful.

[Dontaskme]

Who you talking too?

Yes I'm talking too.

Are you human?

I try to be but by and large I'm a primate with a fair memory and a language.

Do you have to try to be a human?

The last time I tried being a human I discovered that I didn't have to. What a waste of energy trying to be what you already are without effort.

And now you say your also a primate...have you ever been a chameleon as well?

Do you even know what you are really?

[Dontaskme]

What you?

Did you have trouble understanding why I asked you where you live? It's because you appeared to imply you live in a hierarchical patriarchal theocracy so I wondered where? As where I live we're fairly far from such a thing.

''It's because you appeared to imply you live in a hierarchical patriarchal theocracy so I wondered where?''

No, you implied that not me... see evidence in bold.....stop projecting your implied ideas at me as if they were mine, swallow your own lie, because where I live I'm fairly far from such a thing...do you understand? or are you having trouble in that area where you live?

.

Now repeat after me children...''hierarchical patriarchal theocracy''....keep saying these high sounding words, because high sounding words make you look high, they will appear to make you look like you are saying something really really clever...and if anyone asks you what it means you can just tell them I don't know, it's just what someone told me to say.

.

[Dontaskme]

This is what you must do. Beg Belinda to become your editor. All you have to do is send her a check for a mutually agreed upon sum once a month and she will edit all your posts so you will become accepted into sophisticated “good philosophy.” You will then never be associated with the likes of the dreaded P I T A S S. Just think: what could be better than being edited into normality? The skies will clear, the birds will sing, Oprah will cry for you, and you will become content. You will be saved. How wonderful.

I wonder if I'll go to ''the good place'' for being told I have the potential for writing ''good philosophy'' ..won't that be nice, I'll be saved, oh thank you so much Belinda, thanks for reserving me a place in the good place of ''good philosophy''...I can't thank you enough. I would never have thought of that myself, that I could be potentially a good philosopher what ever that is...if it hadn't been for your ever so wise wisdom...I'm saved oh Belinda, I'm saved...all thanks to you.

.

[Yrreg]

Yrreg wrote:

the evidence of God existing are objects made by man like a can or a packet: these objects are made by man, using the things and the laws made by God: without the things and laws made by God, man would not be able to ever have invented a can and a packet.

This is true for deists but not for theists. Arguably, what most people i.e. most theists, mean by 'God' is a being which transcends natural life, time, history, and relativity (such as you describe) , but also can and does intervene in natural life,time,history, and relativity.

The God which matches your description " without the things and laws made by God, man would not be able to ever have invented a can and a packet." does not according to that description alone work miracles or do anything other than set up the basic laws of nature.

According to " without the things and laws made by God, man would not be able to ever have invented a can and a packet." there is no guarantee that God is benevolent and good.

Dear Belinda, you say: "there is no guarantee that God is benevolent and good."

You care for benevolence and goodness in God?

And you don't see it in God, therefore for you God does not exist.

Tell me if you will, what is your concept of God?