Education, a Biological Imperative

[Phil8659]

PDF and Video
https://archive.org/details/education-a ... imperative
Video
https://youtu.be/Uh5NboUnX58


Education, a Biological Imperative

What are we supposed to do with our life? Or again, what is our purpose? Or again, where do we fit in? Or again, what is our goal in life?

We are a mind, and as the life support system called mind or soul, we are responsible for the behavior of the body within which we reside such that our behavior maintains and promotes that very life. We start with egocentricity, and grow to organize those particulars into a world view which is organized and functional. In order to accomplish that, we learn to be very aware of the difference between the self and what is not the self, between us and that, even between body and mind. Putting the that into a single word, between ourself and God; or between us and the expanse, or us and the Universe. Whatever we call that, is what we are tasked to manage and we manage that proportional to our
intelligence or simply said, doing what we can.

[promethean75]

That's a pretty bold thesis, Phil8659. You can always aks Aristotle what's the purpose for the four causes in toto. I don't mean the dog or the band but substance itself, the fundamental thing or property all things possess if they exist. What about THAT thing and its purpose? That's a metaphysical question... "Why anything at all"... and our only answer is because 'nothing' is inconceivable, and this is an unfair question. Unfair because we are aksed to go beyond the limits of science and philosophy to answer it. Alls we know is that there is stuff, and it moves around and forms patterns sometimes. Why any of this is happening and happening like it is is a good question, pal. But Aristotlean Final causes is where we draw the line. I'm afraid there is no grand teleology in the scheme of things. And i can explain why. Design and purpose suppose a prior state of deficit or lacking, and the process of development makes means out of things and creates a hierarchy of values. So you have a process where lesser things are put into existence (because something is lacking) and used to create greater valued things (at their own expense?). This is what is logically implied by the conventional 'designer' theories. This designer god would be like a metaphysical Mussolini, a cosmic Constantine, a galactic Genghis Khan... and he'd be anxiety ridden, unsatisfied, and prone to bouts of magnificent violence, whether that be collpasing stars into black holes to little microscopic amoeba monsters devouring each other like creatures in a Lovecraft story.

No, you shouldn't want to attribute design to this universe even if you could. You should want to fire the designer, if anything. If you don't, you must be suffering from some mental phillness.

And thank god there is no god lording over creation like the indian slum landlord that he is... which is what he'd have to be if you look at his rental properties.

So, HOW DARE YOU, Phil8659. How dare you try to claim all is well if we would just understand the Platono-grammatomical codex matrix.

[promethean75]

Do this, and it will change you forever. Find some people with no skin and go to Applebee's with em. You're sitting at the table with three people that look like bro on the Iron Maiden covers. Eddie's 'is name, I think. There they are, creepy af drinking sweet tea and just talking up a storm about the latest hockey game or gas prices like nobody notices they look like actors in Hellraiser. You sit there staring in horror. You realize at once that it's all skin deep... that we're all grotesque monsters under this superficial skin.

[Phil8659]

Do this, and it will change you forever. Find some people with no skin and go to Applebee's with em. You're sitting at the table with three people that look like bro on the Iron Maiden covers. Eddie's 'is name, I think. There they are, creepy af drinking sweet tea and just talking up a storm about the latest hockey game or gas prices like nobody notices they look like actors in Hellraiser. You sit there staring in horror. You realize at once that it's all skin deep... that we're all grotesque monsters under this superficial skin.

So, I take it that today is not a drug free day.

A Couplet Called Reciprocity

The reflection of what you see
Is the product of your own stupidity.

by Ancient Artifact

One can call that the Simple Song of Sapience.

[promethean75]

The only substance i consume is a legally modified hemp flower that only becomes illegal when it is burned.

But i can get around this logically. My argument, much like Zeno's, states that when the legal flower is burnt, it produces a smoke product that is illegal... but because i only possess the flower and not the smoke, I can not be said to be in possession of an illegal substance. I can only ever be a) in possession of legal flower or b) in possession of legal flower that is burnt. But burnt flower is not an illegal substance. THCa is an illegal substance, and i neither bought nor do i and possess this THCa as i would the flower, burnt or otherwise, lest i blow the smoke into a ziplock bag at such point the smoke would become tangible property. That is to say, the smoke would be contained and held for a duration and in a definite space. These terms are necessary, constituting the definition of 'property' and thus the circumstances in which one can be said to be in 'possession' of anything at all.

[Phil8659]

Quote of the haze.

Yup, I got one neuron that firing, so I can justify giving it a break.