What do you think ? 💭

[Age]

“He may well have done that eventually but he was condescended to long before that. Good for Harbal for finally having had enough. He's one of the most patient people I've seen in these forums.”

Aggrandising people is a subtle form of ego worshiping. When most people in life are extremely bog standard, ordinary, and very underwhelming. No one is more something extraordinary and special than any one else, all of what we think and believe about others is a mentally constructed model anyway. And Not anything like what is actually true in reality.

This is Right, absolutely every one is special and unique, and as special, and unique, as absolutely everyone else is.

Every one is just a unique, and special, part of the One, and only One.

If the word patience is what you admire, then give Age some credit too. Notice the patience of Age, it’s exemplary.

And FYI

When people have genuinely had enough of other people, they simply leave.
People who don’t leave are just being very tolerant of other’s idiosyncratic nature.

[Age]

But you already are in the same space with him, you are both sharing the same headspace, he’s in your mind, you are his creator. So show him empathy right now. Don’t imagine he’s in some separate space to you. There’s only one space, not two.

No, I'm not in the same space with him. His words are in my mind, not even as concrete as finding some stranger's hair in my shower drain. I'm sorry, I am embodied. Physical presence, the sound of a voice, they way someone stands, and, well, if I'm close to them and like them, their doft, that all connects me, to people. I am social mammaling my way here through reality, my emotions are connect to the physical. People can manage to hide from me online. They can.

I was born like this. Cut me some slack.

Haha 'born like this'.

[Age]

but others, with their ways of expressing themselves in words, I can almost see them, they are less censored. The human pours through. Then empathy comes. I sense the social mammal. You want to kill off the social mammal in yoursefl, it's hard for me to feel through some letters on the screan. But unlike many, I know the difference between cognitive empathy and direct emotional empathy. I could pretend that the former was the latter and say I feel empthy right now for Age's persona and the Ken typing those words. That'd make me sound like a nicer guy, maybe, but it'd be pretending.

But, that does not make 'you' sound like a 'nicer guy', at all. Well not to me anyway.

[Age]

So his words are in your mind. Lol

And you are judging these words as if they are actually real. Lol

No more than you mine.

Imagine that, boxing with your own mental shadows. When all you have to do is welcome them in, and not resist this imaginary character from taking root in your headspace, or delete the character once and for all.

Woh, woh. Taking root? Nah. But when I read him those words are in my mind.

. This is you choice, and your problem, no one else’s.

Of course. I choose to engage with Age.

just as this

I’m sick of people taking words seriously, I mean there just fucking words, for ducks sake.

and this:

I’m fucking sick of the hypocrisy that is human idolisation.

are your choices and your problems.

Or in both cases, it is more complicated.

Why not take my reactions in the spirit you mean yours when you type them?

If the word patience is what you admire, then give Age some credit too. Notice the patience of Age, it’s exemplary.

I disagree. But it'd be boring to go into.

LOL Here 'we' can see another clear excuse for not just clarifying.

Anyway, I'll move to another field and smell those flowers for a while.

Why not just stay HERE in the One and only, infinite and eternal, 'field'.

Any other,.perceived, 'field' is just an/other illusion.

Also, if one is only going to look at, and from, from a limited, or even a closed, 'field of view', or perspective, only, then why even bother?

[Age]

I wonder if 'this one' could focus on, 'look at', and 'judge me' anymore here. While all the time completely neglecting to 'look at' its own doings and habits, here.

I don't think the first sentence quite says what you intended.

The first sentence appears to be saying, exactly, what I intended.

What do you think my first sentence was intending to say?

At least it seems to be missing a word or something.

What could 'that word' be, and where would you place 'that word' in 'that sentence'?

Also, what could the word 'something' be referring to, exactly?

Oh, goodness, I look at my own doings here and elsewhere with great regularity.

you doing something with 'great regularity' does not mean that you are doing it 'greatly'.

Nor even Accurately and Correctly, at all.

Also, what do you find, see, and discover, when you, supposedly, look at your own doings, with 'great regularity'

And I live with someone who calls me on my shit, which I appreciate.

Why are you so-called 'doing your shit'?

And, how often do they, (have to), 'call you' on 'your shit'?

Is that with 'great regularity', as well?

I haven't transcended the human, nor claim that I have.

Well this is absolutely clearly obvious.

Many humans patterns and foibles going on in here.

If you say so. But this might be, exactly, why someone calls you on 'your shit', right?

So, I'm afraid you assumptions was incorrect, or False and Wrong as you might say. If only you'd asked...but then you did ask before and I answered.

you appear to have completely and utterly Wrongly assumed, here, again.

What were you assuming I was referring to, exactly?

[Age]

No, I argue about the wrongness of nonduality as a concept.

But there’s no such thing as a non existing duality.

Nonduality simply means, one, not two. It means the duality is illusory, not that the duality does not exist, the duality is the one reflecting itself as everything everywhere like a mirror ball.

I mentioned that this concept is wrong given the fact that I didn't write these words yet now I am aware of these written words. So, who did it, a part of me without me being aware of it? Perhaps, but that means that there are at least two agents, and not one!

Here is another prime example of how these people, back when this was being written, would look for, and find just about any set of words, which they would then express, in the hope that those words would somehow back up and support their 'currently' held onto belief.

And, they would express said words even if they completely contradicted and/or even refuted what they were trying to claim was true. As long as they believed that those 'found words' would somehow help prove 'their current belief' true or right, then they would say and express 'those, even absolutely absurd, words'.

[Iwannaplato]

But you already are in the same space with him, you are both sharing the same headspace, he’s in your mind, you are his creator. So show him empathy right now. Don’t imagine he’s in some separate space to you. There’s only one space, not two.

No, I'm not in the same space with him. His words are in my mind, not even as concrete as finding some stranger's hair in my shower drain. I'm sorry, I am embodied. Physical presence, the sound of a voice, they way someone stands, and, well, if I'm close to them and like them, their doft, that all connects me, to people. I am social mammaling my way here through reality, my emotions are connect to the physical. People can manage to hide from me online. They can.

I was born like this. Cut me some slack.

Haha 'born like this'.

Do you understand the reference? Do you know who I was quoting here? Do you notice when you assume things?

[Iwannaplato]

but others, with their ways of expressing themselves in words, I can almost see them, they are less censored. The human pours through. Then empathy comes. I sense the social mammal. You want to kill off the social mammal in yoursefl, it's hard for me to feel through some letters on the screan. But unlike many, I know the difference between cognitive empathy and direct emotional empathy. I could pretend that the former was the latter and say I feel empthy right now for Age's persona and the Ken typing those words. That'd make me sound like a nicer guy, maybe, but it'd be pretending.

But, that does not make 'you' sound like a 'nicer guy', at all. Well not to me anyway.

Nice vague reference: 'that'. Some might say you don't notice when you do things you are critical of others for doing.

[Iwannaplato]

I wonder if 'this one' could focus on, 'look at', and 'judge me' anymore here. While all the time completely neglecting to 'look at' its own doings and habits, here.

I don't think the first sentence quite says what you intended.

The first sentence appears to be saying, exactly, what I intended.

OK, well, after looking at the sentence, now a second time, my guess is that you meant 'any where' - two words - rather than what you wrote (anywhere). These function differently in sentences, and if you meant 'any more' (two words) it would still be a bit unclear: 'any more than he does already here' would be clearer. But perhaps you didn't mean 'any more' but then there is another problem with that sentence.

Oh, goodness, I look at my own doings here and elsewhere with great regularity.

you doing something with 'great regularity' does not mean that you are doing it 'greatly'.

Nor even Accurately and Correctly, at all.

Also, what do you find, see, and discover, when you, supposedly, look at your own doings, with 'great regularity'

You said I was neglecting to look. I pointed out this was false. These other claims are false on your part. Well, if you'd actually managed to make the claims.

And I live with someone who calls me on my shit, which I appreciate.

Why are you so-called 'doing your shit'?

And, how often do they, (have to), 'call you' on 'your shit'?

Always looking for a way to judge or drop wisdom from above, aren't ya. Why on earth would I discuss something like this with you?

If you say so. But this might be, exactly, why someone calls you on 'your shit', right?

and the reason people call you on your shit, Age.

you appear to have completely and utterly Wrongly assumed, here, again.

What were you assuming I was referring to, exactly?

More games. Instead of taking a direct step and saying what you were referring to and how I was wrong, you try to get more text to judge.

The vastly more common human habit of taking such steps actually arrives more quickly at the rub, and further, it allows for more equal responsibility and justification. Something you avoid, though I do understand that you don't notice this. I think you are being 'honest' when you deny such avoidance. And it's OK if you don't understand this, because I am not necessary writing this with you as the intended audience.

[Iwannaplato]

You are very fortunate to be living, being in a relationship / partnership with someone who calls you on your shit, and they are lucky to have you appreciating that. So kudos to you both.

Thank you. And yes, it is lucky.

I would love to be in a relationship with someone who calls me on my shit, I would appreciate that too. But so far I’ve never been that fortunate to meet someone like that.

I'm sorry to hear that.

I am usually ghosted when I’ve been a little shitface. It’s as though some people just can’t deal with other peoples shit, but are quite fine when it comes to their preferences. But I suppose expectation verses reality is such a bitch.

Ghosted is harsh. I've been on both sides of that when I was younger. For me the void is the worst. Maybe you'll know what I mean. To be ghosted by one person is to get a nudge towards the void. To be put on the outside by many or the universe, can throw one into the void. I am not saying alone has to be the void. The void is a very specific and old state. Metaphorically it's a bit like when in science fiction movies someone, without a spacesuit, gets cast into outer space. There's nothing that seems to reflect that you or you experience matters. Like a mirror not with everything in it or with you in it, but just nothing. (not the postive ways nothing is sometimes described in various traditions).

If you've been really close to someone and they are central, being ghosted permanently can at first throw you into the void. Or me, at least.

[Age]

Did you ever thank Atla for accurately pointing out that there was a problem with your communication and working hard to show you why? A decision you made coincidentally and utterly unaffected by his efforts, but which confirmed his sense there was a problem.

Do 'you' feel satisfied with your attempts to garnish support from others for your continual quest against 'me'?

Huh. I was asking you about your behavior.

LOL

So, you were, supposedly, asking me about some.behavior related to some absolutely False and Wrong presumption of yours.

What you were actually doing is obvious.

I hardly need to garnish support or even 'garner support' which is what I think you meant.

you are absolutely Right about what I meant.

But, if you hardly need to ganer support, then that implies you still need, and even want, to.

I'm sure you've seen the reactions to you here, from those that even read more than a little and then ignore.

Does this have absolutely any thing to do with any thing?

If yes,.that what is that, exactly?

By the way you have now proved, irrefutably, just how absolutely completely CLOSED you really are here.

I am pretty closed to you, certainly. Though I've been surprised by people before, so who knows what will happen.

And, you being what you call pretty closed, as I said, proves further what I have been saying, and claiming, here.

So thank you again for helping me out here.

So, you need help?

What even made you begin to assume that I need help, here?

Also, why did you make a claim here, once again, but put a question mark at the end?

What kinds of help do you need?

Again, why did you assume some thing, then jump to the conclusion that your own assumptions is true, and then, worse still, believe, and presume, that your own presumption is true?

[Age]

Have you ever apologized to the people, for example Harbal who was very polite about his objections to your formatting, for the condescending way you dismissed them on the issue?

LOL

Once again 'this one' attempting to garnish support, and back up, from others, for its trails against 'me' does not go unnoticed.

Perhaps you intended these as metaphors 'garnish support' and 'trails against me'.

Perhaps, or, perhaps not.

The first one makes more sense than 'garner support'. I hardly need to do anything to garner Atla's support, which I hope you realize.

you, still, appear to not have yet realized what you are doing here.

I don't know what Harbal's attitude towards you is, but if I wanted to garner support from him, I'd contact him, not question you in a post I'm skeptical he'd read.

Once again, 'this one's has made an assumption, jumped to a conclusion, believed it's own conclusion, and the responds from that.

Which is why 'this one' misses and misunderstands as much as it has been here

But perhaps it's possible for me to garnish support. To decorate it. Use it as decoration. I like that phrase. There's a poet in you. And, really, I like that phrase.

Okay.

'Trails against me. Also, nice, less clear in meaning, but it gives a sense of me coming at your from a variety of directions, at least potentionally. From my perspective it seems you have followed many trails against me, certainly at least also. Of course, not me in particular, as far as I've noticed, you engage with many people who are not, at the time, engaging with you in the thread.

'We' are in a philosophy forum. And, to me, it does not matter what label the words are expressed under I question and/or challenge 'the words', before me, in any way I like.

Given, that is, that you decided, yourself, you could manage to do what you intended to do without that formatting.

But, what you appear to have completed and utterly, absolutely, missed here, as well, is the very reason why I was formatting like I was, although I have already partly explained why.

OK, you hang to whatever story you have here.

LOL

'This one' clearly has absolutely no idea nor clue, at all, why I was formatting how I was, nor as to why I changed it, when I did.

And, at the rate 'this one's is going it will never ever learn, and know, why. it will, instead, just keep believing the absolutely False and Wrong story that it made up, and 'now', 'currently' believe is true.

[Age]

Once again 'this one' attempting to garnish support, and back up, from others, for its trails against 'me' does not go unnoticed.

Let's look at these trails against you. In this thread I responded to Fairy's question.

You responded to me - part of a quest? -

But, who and/or what is this 'One I', exactly, who, supposedly, does not feel that it has to choose?

If, and when, 'you' work out who 'I' am, exactly, then like "fairy" is saying here, 'you' will, literally, feel and see things differently.

You seem to assume you know what I feel and see AND what I will feel and see, if/when I work out who 'I' am or perhaps you are.

This is your view only, here. Which 'we' have already agreed upon and accepted could be absolutely completely False, and Wrong.

In other words: 1) you chose to engage 2) you presented assumptions about what I see and feel and 3) then what I will see if I realize something.

This is your assumption, and belief, alone.

This is, obviously, not what is actually irrefutably True, and Right

So, instead of, for example, asking clarifying questions about what I wrote, and instead of interacting with what I wrote, you started telling me about me, asserting what you think you know about me including my inner life.

But, what I said and claimed here is just irrefutable anyway.

It's not that I saw Age posting in the thread and went on some quest. You opted to interact and went personal, from a superior position.

Is this what you saw, and/or felt?

IOW you know things about me, what I see and feel, what I will see and feel if......

Yes, this is True.

This has been going on for 'ages'.

Okay.

And yet you experience it always, for reasons perhaps not even known to yourself, and certainly not known to me that I have 'trails against you' as if that sums up our interaction.

If you say so.

You see me garnishing support when I ask questions about how you reacted to other people's acts in relation to you, rather than seeing it as the question it is.

If this is how you see it, then so be it.

Instead of asking clarifying questions, you assumed that post was me trying to 'garnish support'.

Are you absolutely sure of this? Or, is this just what you assume, here?

And/or perhaps you saw me trying to 'garnish' support from Fairy, but of course she initiated contact with me with the topic of you, bringing up your autism and more or less saying you can't help being the way you are and that I should cut you some slack.

Perhaps. But, if not, then you are just going on another one of your completely Wrong, off-topic, and off trail tangents, right?

I responded to her post, not to garnish support, but to respond to what she was saying, including implicitly about me or the pattern.

Okay.

Which, of course, is all within the realm of accepted behavior here. But stop playing the victim, and how about starting to be consistent about asking clarifying questions before assuming, given that you are critical of others for not doing that.

If you believe, or assume, that I have assumed absolutely any thing at all here, then I suggest you just write out, absolutely clearly, what you believe, or presume, is the actual assumption, itself. Then, and only then, 'we' will have some thing to, 'literally', 'look at', and 'discuss'.

But, if you do not want to do this, the I understand, perfectly, why you do not want to be completely open and honest here

You don't notice or acknowledge when you don't ask clarifying questions and when you make assumptions nor your quest.

you keep making claims that I have been assuming things here, right?

[Age]

What problem? Do you see a problem? Wouldn't that be yours, then?
Further, part of my point was precisely that it takes two to tango.

Shhhh! Be still. And know thyself.

likewise
and pass it on to Age.

Why did 'you' say to pass it on to 'me' for, exactly?

[Age]

It would be lovely if he could admit this

It would be, supposedly, lovely if I could admit 'what', exactly, here, "iwannaplato"?
Are you, still not yet aware of how often, and how many times, you allude to some 'thing' but never actually just say nor write, directly, about what 'it' is, exactly?

The person I was responding to will be able to understand from the context.

So, once again, what 'we' can clearly see here is another excuse for not just clarifying.

You know, like the quote that sentence was responding to.

- he doesn't need to bring in the autism aspect - rather than judging people who do not do as he wishes.

Once again, 'this one' will not just clarify.

What are you even on about here now, exactly?

And, will you provide some examples of where I have, supposedly, 'judged' you people who, supposedly, do not do as I wish?

Also, will you clarify what 'it' is, exactly, which you claim I, supposedly, wish you people would do?

If no, then why not?

Be still now, shhh! silence is where all the true truth power lies. < Divine paradox. No more of these trails against me.[/quote]

you seem to have become more puzzled and confused here.

What has this got to do with what I have just been asking you to just clarify.

Obviously, it is detracting, and deflects away from you just not clarifying, but, it does not go unnoticed.

Who do not meet his preferences, which he does not notice are preferences. There are autistic people who in this forum and others manage to avoid this.

And, yet "iwannaplato" is one who does not notice its preferences. While there are mentally sick and dysfunctional people who is this forum and others who manage to avoid this.

He may well have done that eventually but he was condescended to long before that. Good for Harbal for finally having had enough. He's one of the most patient people I've seen in these forums.

What is 'acceptable', when it is 'acceptable', and 'by who' can do it, is absolutely relative to 'the observer', to 'their views', beliefs, and perspectives.

Who said anything about acceptable.

In regards to when and where, exactly?

You should have asked a clarifying question before assuming and responding.

What clarifying questions 'should' have I, supposedly, asked here, exactly, before I responded?

And, what are you assuming, or know, that I was assuming here, exactly?

Even better: Be still now, shhh! silence is where all the true truth power lies. < Divine paradox.

Why are 'you' repeating, and saying, things, to 'me', which have been told, to 'you', by someone "else"?