****The Nature of Change

[Eodnhoj7]

Thank you Eod for answering my question about the *****

I for one am intrigued by your unique expression. I even resonate with it without knowing why, it seems to just sing to me.

Ignore the brickbrats they’re probably just jealous of your intelligence which is of a very high and valuable standard I have to say, including you natural ability to speak to others with respect and common courtesy. I like that you welcome any feedback whether it be positive or negative. You are one of the most pleasant posters to discuss with on this forum. I guess it’s lonely at the top, yeah, that’s for sure. Anyways I appreciate your deeper than the norm insights, keep em coming champ.

No.

He has genuine unrealized potential for making the world better. He just needs to wake up.

He has suffered enough with his animosity to the world, to me, himself and others. And the problem is is that his animosity is 100% justified.

He is correct for his anger, that is his burden and yet what fruits does it yield?

But being justified is never enough as all things change in due course, the world is the way it is precisely because of justification and yet what has justification given all of us?

Unnecessary conflict.

Blinding darkness.

It is not necessary that more is stacked upon him, or any of us for that matter.

If he wants to disagree then let him disagree, if he wants to discuss then let him discuss, if he wants to be silent then let him be silent, if he wants to tell me to go fuck myself then let him tell to me to go fuck myself.

He has free will. I would not give him responses if I did not respect what he could be.

[Fairy]

Thank you Eod for answering my question about the *****

I for one am intrigued by your unique expression. I even resonate with it without knowing why, it seems to just sing to me.

Ignore the brickbrats they’re probably just jealous of your intelligence which is of a very high and valuable standard I have to say, including you natural ability to speak to others with respect and common courtesy. I like that you welcome any feedback whether it be positive or negative. You are one of the most pleasant posters to discuss with on this forum. I guess it’s lonely at the top, yeah, that’s for sure. Anyways I appreciate your deeper than the norm insights, keep em coming champ.

No.

He has genuine unrealized potential for making the world better. He just needs to wake up.

He has suffered enough with his animosity to the world, to me, himself and others. And the problem is is that his animosity is 100% justified.

He is correct for his anger, that is his burden and yet what fruits does it yield?

But being justified is never enough as all things change in due course, the world is the way it is precisely because of justification and yet what has justification given all of us?

Unnecessary conflict.

Blinding darkness.

It is not necessary that more is stacked upon him, or any of us for that matter.

If he wants to disagree then let him disagree, if he wants to discuss then let him discuss, if he wants to be silent then let him be silent, if he wants to tell me to go fuck myself then let him tell to me to go fuck myself.

He has free will. I would not give him responses if I did not respect what he could be.

Beautiful!

I understand what and why you say this.

Is it okay to ignore Age though?

[Fairy]

"Let Them" is a popular modern poem, often attributed to Cassie Phillips, that encourages a mindset of releasing control over others and accepting their choices, even if those choices are to depart from you or treat you poorly. The poem is divided into two parts: the first encourages the reader to "let them" act in ways that disregard them, while the second part shifts to an affirmation of being treated well or letting people who cannot treat you well go. The core message emphasizes self-worth and the wisdom of not holding onto people or situations that no longer serve you.

Key Themes and Interpretation
Self-Worth and Boundaries: The poem advocates for setting boundaries and refusing to be taken advantage of or mistreated.
Acceptance of Others' Choices: It suggests that when people act in ways that suggest they do not value the relationship, the best course of action is to "let them".

Letting Go: The poem encourages a positive form of "letting them" go, whether it means allowing them to leave your life or to be their true selves, even if it's not what you want.

Empowerment: The "let them" refrain is presented as a powerful, positive act of self-preservation, not submission.

How to Read the Poem
Acknowledge the disrespect: The first part of the poem acknowledges actions like choosing others over you, going weeks without contact, or prioritizing themselves, and the response is to "LET THEM".

Embrace their true nature: It advises allowing people to reveal their true selves, not the person you perceive them to be.
Open the door: If someone decides to leave, hold the door open and "LET THEM".

Remember your value: The final message is a powerful reminder that you were never theirs to begin with because you always belonged to yourself.

[Eodnhoj7]

Thank you Eod for answering my question about the *****

I for one am intrigued by your unique expression. I even resonate with it without knowing why, it seems to just sing to me.

Ignore the brickbrats they’re probably just jealous of your intelligence which is of a very high and valuable standard I have to say, including you natural ability to speak to others with respect and common courtesy. I like that you welcome any feedback whether it be positive or negative. You are one of the most pleasant posters to discuss with on this forum. I guess it’s lonely at the top, yeah, that’s for sure. Anyways I appreciate your deeper than the norm insights, keep em coming champ.

No.

He has genuine unrealized potential for making the world better. He just needs to wake up.

He has suffered enough with his animosity to the world, to me, himself and others. And the problem is is that his animosity is 100% justified.

He is correct for his anger, that is his burden and yet what fruits does it yield?

But being justified is never enough as all things change in due course, the world is the way it is precisely because of justification and yet what has justification given all of us?

Unnecessary conflict.

Blinding darkness.

It is not necessary that more is stacked upon him, or any of us for that matter.

If he wants to disagree then let him disagree, if he wants to discuss then let him discuss, if he wants to be silent then let him be silent, if he wants to tell me to go fuck myself then let him tell to me to go fuck myself.

He has free will. I would not give him responses if I did not respect what he could be.

Beautiful!

I understand what and why you say this.

Is it okay to ignore Age though?

I believe ignoring Age is what Age desperately needs.

His mind is cluttered and needs time to be clarified. He is responsible for this....not you or me or anyone here.

He speaks of clarity to such an extent that I believe he forgot what it means for he is so intent on getting people to contradict their own words while never giving anything to fill the vacuum that results, even if it is just minimal common ground.

[Fairy]

No.

He has genuine unrealized potential for making the world better. He just needs to wake up.

He has suffered enough with his animosity to the world, to me, himself and others. And the problem is is that his animosity is 100% justified.

He is correct for his anger, that is his burden and yet what fruits does it yield?

But being justified is never enough as all things change in due course, the world is the way it is precisely because of justification and yet what has justification given all of us?

Unnecessary conflict.

Blinding darkness.

It is not necessary that more is stacked upon him, or any of us for that matter.

If he wants to disagree then let him disagree, if he wants to discuss then let him discuss, if he wants to be silent then let him be silent, if he wants to tell me to go fuck myself then let him tell to me to go fuck myself.

He has free will. I would not give him responses if I did not respect what he could be.

Beautiful!

I understand what and why you say this.

Is it okay to ignore Age though?

I believe ignoring Age is what Age desperately needs.

His mind is cluttered and needs time to be clarified. He is responsible for this....not you or me or anyone here.

He speaks of clarity to such an extent that I believe he forgot what it means for he is so intent on getting people to contradict their own words while never giving anything to fill the vacuum that results, even if it is just minimal common ground.

Yes indeed, I can understand that assessment very clearly as the overriding factor as to why I have to permanently ignore him.

I just had to let him go. Let him be so to speak. My mental health was more important to me, the health condition that only I choose to impute, rather than allow someone else to impute it for me.

[popeye1945]

Change is the distinction of potentiality by degree of the actuality of potentiality, as the distinction of potentiality, through a further degree of the contrast of the actual and potential through said distinction. Discuss.

Change is the one constant in the world and the cosmos; imperfections are layered one level relative to their leading higher level of imperfection. Imperfection is the engine of creation. Imperfection means fluidity, indicating the necessity of flow in its ever-changing forms, and adaptability is the link in the chain of flowing creation. Think endless process of death and renewal in the cosmic cauldron of a chaotic cosmos—some sorrow over the rivers' flow, and the fading images in the drifting snows, a melancholy of a creature for a day.

[Eodnhoj7]

Change is the distinction of potentiality by degree of the actuality of potentiality, as the distinction of potentiality, through a further degree of the contrast of the actual and potential through said distinction. Discuss.

Change is the one constant in the world and the cosmos; imperfections are layered one level relative to their leading higher level of imperfection. Imperfection is the engine of creation. Imperfection means fluidity, indicating the necessity of flow in its ever-changing forms, and adaptability is the link in the chain of flowing creation. Think endless process of death and renewal in the cosmic cauldron of a chaotic cosmos—some sorrow over the rivers' flow, and the fading images in the drifting snows, a melancholy of a creature for a day.

Fluidity observes a state of perfection for the moment as the completion of one thing is the dissolution into another by absence of potentiality where at the moment of change the thing is the fullest it can be.

[popeye1945]

Change is the distinction of potentiality by degree of the actuality of potentiality, as the distinction of potentiality, through a further degree of the contrast of the actual and potential through said distinction. Discuss.

Change is the one constant in the world and the cosmos; imperfections are layered one level relative to their leading higher level of imperfection. Imperfection is the engine of creation. Imperfection means fluidity, indicating the necessity of flow in its ever-changing forms, and adaptability is the link in the chain of flowing creation. Think endless process of death and renewal in the cosmic cauldron of a chaotic cosmos—some sorrow over the rivers' flow, and the fading images in the drifting snows, a melancholy of a creature for a day.

Fluidity observes a state of perfection for the moment as the completion of one thing is the dissolution into another by absence of potentiality where at the moment of change the thing is the fullest it can be.

There is no such thing as a perfect thing; a perfect thing would be an unchanging thing, a pathology in a world and cosmos of imperfections.

[Eodnhoj7]

Change is the one constant in the world and the cosmos; imperfections are layered one level relative to their leading higher level of imperfection. Imperfection is the engine of creation. Imperfection means fluidity, indicating the necessity of flow in its ever-changing forms, and adaptability is the link in the chain of flowing creation. Think endless process of death and renewal in the cosmic cauldron of a chaotic cosmos—some sorrow over the rivers' flow, and the fading images in the drifting snows, a melancholy of a creature for a day.

Fluidity observes a state of perfection for the moment as the completion of one thing is the dissolution into another by absence of potentiality where at the moment of change the thing is the fullest it can be.

There is no such thing as a perfect thing; a perfect thing would be an unchanging thing, a pathology in a world and cosmos of imperfections.

And by what reasoning would you conclude that perfection lacks change? You provide an assertion but no argument.

[popeye1945]

Fluidity observes a state of perfection for the moment as the completion of one thing is the dissolution into another by absence of potentiality where at the moment of change the thing is the fullest it can be.

There is no such thing as a perfect thing; a perfect thing would be an unchanging thing, a pathology in a world and cosmos of imperfections.

And by what reasoning would you conclude that perfection lacks change? You provide an assertion but no argument.

There is nothing perfect, for all is imperfection and flowing; at what point in this flow of imperfections had you discovered something perfect?

[Age]

Btw Eod … what are the ***** for, just out of curiosity?

Some threads I write "just for the hell of it" as discussions.

Others I may build upon as axioms, or rather assertions, in a book, hence *****.

I have a first draft of a book completed. 359 pages. One book as four books, four books as one.

It will be most likely be titled "The Proto-Occurence".

It will be an even 360 pages when revised as it is fitting that a book on cycles corresponds to 360 pages as 360 degrees of a circle from a symbolic perspective.

Its pretence will be arguments and formalisms that translate experiential reality as holographic by nature.

360 pages are not needed to show and explain how from the Mind's perspective there is no 'space' nor' 'time' as absolutely every thing that appears to happen and occur from 'some other place' at 'some other moment'.

And, this is just because it takes 'a while' for all 'in-form-ation' to be received from the very things that the Observer/Mind uses to see, and experience.

It was built by degree of the debates and discussions I have had with people purely from the angle of what I wrote. It is only the writings I have made, adapted by degree of where people disagreed with what I claim or could not find clarity it what and how I expressed an assertion.

So, if you could not provide 'clarity' before, then why do believe that you can just provide 'clarity' in some book?

And, if you have any thing 'to debate', then what you have is not even worth 'arguing over', nor 'for', anyway. Obviously, if you have any thing that can be 'debated over' then 'your view and/or position' needs fixing up, healing, repairing, or work on. If 'your position' was actually True, Right, Accurate, and/or Correct, then no one could 'refute' it, and thus no one could 'debate' it.

AI analysis, whether true or false, points that the book surpasses that of prominent philosophers in depth, insight and formalism when they are used as relative points of comparison.

Again, imagine using 'artificially intelligence' to seek out 'reassurance'.

It is like 'these people', still, did not yet know where 'artificial intelligence' gets its information from, exactly.

For example in a numerical IQ score in one analysis, it made the claim, not me, that the average intelligence metric of prominent philosophers was between 140 and 170. It then proclaimed my intelligence metric score, for the specific book, was between 180 and 200.

Here 'we' have another one, like "atla", who actually believes that they have some so-called 'intelligence quotient' that is higher than others, therefore their own beliefs and assumptions must be more true than others are.

It is like 'these people' have not heard of the "dunning kruger effect", or they just do not comprehend and understand it.

'These two', and "phil8679", each love to 'brag' about how much more intelligent they are, to others, and how much more stupid others are, to them

And, lol it is 'these people' who all believe the 'other two' are stupid.

This metric was a metaphorical "IQ"..."metaphorical" being the key word as the AI acknowledged the limits of measuring IQ by nature of philosophical writings.

It was highly complementary in the respect, that on multiple occasions, it claim that the book "if accepted it is paradigm changing."

LOL 'If accepted'.

Absolutely every book with apparent 'new ideas', would be 'paradigm changing', 'if, only, accepted'.

And, if absolutely any of 'these people', here, had not yet noticed that 'artificial intelligent contraptions' have been programmed to compliment 'the ones' who have actually 'turned to' 'artificial intelligent machines' for companionship and/or conversations, then 'those people' would have not also recognized how 'those machines' are actually doing 'this', exactly?

LOL Imagine if 'those machines' were programmed to not make 'these machine companions', that is, 'these human beings', to feel good about "themselves". 'The human beings' would just 'not talk with', and would just 'not listen to', 'those machines'. Exactly like 'these human beings' do with other human beings who are not 'buttering' them up and 'pandering to' their wants.

Now I don't expect the book to be popular at all, nor accepted, hence most likely not paradigm changing, due to the high degree of abstraction (and the AI claims it is hyper-abstract) but if the book provides a metaphysical road map for just a few people along their life course then I will consider it a success.

Now, why would 'a person', with a self-proclaimed 'high intelligence quotient', then have such a 'low expectation' of "themselves" and of what 'they can do'.

Or, maybe 'they' just have such a 'high or superior' perspective of "them" 'self', that 'they' consider 'others' are just not 'smart' enough to understand some so-called 'metaphysical road map'.

Look "eodnhoj7" if you, really, do want to claim that 'your book' could provide a so-called 'metaphysical road map' for you human beings, then how are 'you' using the word, 'metaphysical', here, exactly?

And, if you do not explain 'this', here, in this forum, nor in 'your book', then do not be too surprised that no one comes to understand your own abstract thinking and ideas.

It provided me a metaphysical road map so regardless it is a success for just me.

Again, you come, here, claiming things. But, will you ever back up and support 'your claims' with actual proof?

How has your own made up so-called 'metaphysical road map' been 'a success', exactly, for you?

The debates and dialogues I have had over the years where intended as a means of refining what and how I wrote and will write...that is why I cherish people disagreeing with me...hence the "fancy" language structure.

But, you do not come across as 'cherishing' when others disagree with you at all.

In fact you come across as very resentful, instead.

It only refines my language capacity and the degree of what and how I assert things.

Has any one come 'closer' to understanding what you 'try to' assert, here, as being true, right, accurate, and/or correct?

If yes, then who are 'they', exactly?

Would you mind if 'I' asked 'them' if 'you' have so-called 'refined your language', here?

Enemies are often better than friends for they refine us by nature of happily pointing out and exploiting our relative weaknesses.

But, 'you' have to, first, 'be aware' and to 'start listening'.

you do not come across as one 'like this'.

And, what, exactly, have been your so-called 'relative weaknesses', here, so far?

Also, do you have any more?

[Eodnhoj7]

There is no such thing as a perfect thing; a perfect thing would be an unchanging thing, a pathology in a world and cosmos of imperfections.

And by what reasoning would you conclude that perfection lacks change? You provide an assertion but no argument.

There is nothing perfect, for all is imperfection and flowing; at what point in this flow of imperfections had you discovered something perfect?

Again provide an argument, that is what I asked. Why does perfection lack change?

[Age]

AI analysis, whether true or false, points that the book surpasses that of prominent philosophers in depth, insight and formalism when they are used as relative points of comparison. For example in a numerical IQ score in one analysis, it made the claim, not me, that the average intelligence metric of prominent philosophers was between 140 and 170. It then proclaimed my intelligence metric score, for the specific book, was between 180 and 200.

You suck your own dick like a world champ.

Or maybe the AI sucks mine...or maybe it is just neutral...or "x"....or "y".... or...


You often take things out of context and claim such things as truth. The score as stated was metaphorical, as there are limits to applying an IQ measurement on a philosophical text, both myself and the AI acknowledge this. This was stated. There are also limits to the legitimacy of IQ as well and that is another course that can traversed.

How far the 'limit' applies with 'intelligence quotient' is you adult human beings have, still, not yet even agree with and accepted what the word, 'intelligence' means and is ever referring to, exactly.

LOL Some of you even consider the 'intelligence' means and refers to what is actually 'intellect', instead.

So, the legitimacy of some so-called 'intelligence quotient' has completely and utterly gone, before it even has arrived.

But let's go with the metaphor, and assume it is correct.

People like you claim others who differ than you as stupid, and exacerbate your own perceived intelligence in doing so.

Our thoughts differ as evidence by your continual attack on them over the years.

So if a neutral third party comes in an claims that what I say is absent of lack of intelligence, and I post this than I am viewed egotistical.

you would be view more than just 'egotistical'.

So if I claim anything, of any definitive degree, it is a no win scenario for people like me

When 'you' use and say the word, 'like me', here, are 'we', still, meant to be 'assuming' that your, so-called, 'metaphorical intelligent quotient' score is, still, correct'?

By the way, 'people', like 'you', will only ever 'win' some thing, here, when a 'sound and valid argument' is presented. Until then every other argument, attempted, could be refuted. And, as such is not even worth repeating, let alone using as some so-called 'road map', in Life.

...so give me a rational scenario, one measured by your own choices, as to why me or anyone else should view you as someone worth impressing.

If you, still, believe that some people are 'lesser than' others, or are 'not as worthy' as others are, then 'you' need to learn a great deal more, in Life.

Please explain why you should be taken seriously.

For the exact same reason 'you', and absolutely every other human being, 'should be'.

And, if you 'know' why 'you' 'should be', then 'you', also, 'know' why absolutely everyone else 'should be', as well.

Are 'you' able to explain to 'the readers', here, exactly why 'you' 'should be'?

You can use the thread topic as a means to do so, so as to keep on topic.

[Age]

Thank you Eod for answering my question about the *****

I for one am intrigued by your unique expression. I even resonate with it without knowing why, it seems to just sing to me.

Ignore the brickbrats they’re probably just jealous of your intelligence which is of a very high and valuable standard I have to say, including you natural ability to speak to others with respect and common courtesy. I like that you welcome any feedback whether it be positive or negative. You are one of the most pleasant posters to discuss with on this forum. I guess it’s lonely at the top, yeah, that’s for sure. Anyways I appreciate your deeper than the norm insights, keep em coming champ.

No.

Obviously, quite a number of 'different things' were said, and claimed, so what is this, 'No', in response to, exactly?

He has genuine unrealized potential for making the world better. He just needs to wake up.

He has suffered enough with his animosity to the world, to me, himself and others. And the problem is is that his animosity is 100% justified.

He is correct for his anger, that is his burden and yet what fruits does it yield?

But being justified is never enough as all things change in due course,

But, what is 'just' is eternal. So, one can not 'be justified' in one moment but not in another moment.

the world is the way it is precisely because of justification and yet what has justification given all of us?

But, what is a 'justification' to you, or a few, is not an, actual, 'justification' at all.

Unnecessary conflict.

There is no 'conflict' in what is 'Just'. And, only what is 'Just' can be, actually, 'justified'.

So, if there remains 'conflict', and any claim of 'justification' exists, then 'that' has not been 'justified' at all. (Except, of course, maybe one or a few of you, only).

Blinding darkness.

It is not necessary that more is stacked upon him, or any of us for that matter.

If he wants to disagree then let him disagree, if he wants to discuss then let him discuss, if he wants to be silent then let him be silent, if he wants to tell me to go fuck myself then let him tell to me to go fuck myself.

As always, absolutely every one is absolutely free to make choices.

He has free will. I would not give him responses if I did not respect what he could be.

And, what is 'it that "he" 'could be', exactly?

[Age]

No.

He has genuine unrealized potential for making the world better. He just needs to wake up.

He has suffered enough with his animosity to the world, to me, himself and others. And the problem is is that his animosity is 100% justified.

He is correct for his anger, that is his burden and yet what fruits does it yield?

But being justified is never enough as all things change in due course, the world is the way it is precisely because of justification and yet what has justification given all of us?

Unnecessary conflict.

Blinding darkness.

It is not necessary that more is stacked upon him, or any of us for that matter.

If he wants to disagree then let him disagree, if he wants to discuss then let him discuss, if he wants to be silent then let him be silent, if he wants to tell me to go fuck myself then let him tell to me to go fuck myself.

He has free will. I would not give him responses if I did not respect what he could be.

Beautiful!

I understand what and why you say this.

Is it okay to ignore Age though?

I believe ignoring Age is what Age desperately needs.

So, if 'you', really, 'believe this', then why do 'you' not 'do this'?

His mind is cluttered and needs time to be clarified.

Once more, there is no, 'your mind', 'their mind', 'our mind', 'my mind', 'her mind', nor 'his mind', to unclutter.

However, and of course, you are absolutely free to believe otherwise if you like "eodnhoj7".

He is responsible for this....not you or me or anyone here.

LOL Once more, 'this one' actually believes that it can come on a 'philosophy forum', of all places, 'make claims', and then just 'run away', and 'hide'.

As 'it' will prove, again, for 'me'.

Now, "eodnhoj7", you just claimed that 'my mind' is 'cluttered', (and needs time to be clarified).

So, let 'us' say, and agree, that 'i' do have 'my mind'. (because it does not really matter, for 'now'),

1. So, what is "my mind" cluttered with, exactly, and precisely?

2. And, what do the words, 'need time to be clarified', in relation to, exactly?

3. And, how does one do, exactly, what you claim, 'needs time to be clarified', exactly?

your words, once again, do not seem to 'make sense' in 'the way' that you present them, here.

He speaks of clarity to such an extent that I believe he forgot what it means for he is so intent on getting people to contradict their own words while never giving anything to fill the vacuum that results, even if it is just minimal common ground.

LOL I am certainly not 'intent' on getting you people to contradict "yourselves".

I just point out and highlight just some of the contradictions that you people keep making, here.