Philosophy Now Forum

promethean75 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2024 2:54 pmdon't try to figure it out

Already did. You're not deep. You're not complicated. You're not the hero.

Be better.

I'm doin' you a favor, guy: mebbe just be quiet for a while and sit with it.

The gravity of the situation I'm in is so deep, so tragic, so philosophical, Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, and Kafka wouldn't even wanna touch it. They'd be like 'nah I'm good.'

Oh lol wait hold up. What's this:

"Be better"

What does that mean? Keep my unit in my pants? Done that. Done that for fifteen years. Now what?

'Be better' he says. What the fuck are u, a fortune cookie or a bumper sticker?

Here's sumthin deep for u, john boy.

There is no 'god'. U do not have a soul. U do not have freewill. Trump is a useless parasite. The world is full of shit. Oh and Karl Marx was dead on.

There's six deep truths for u to ponder while sitting on your front porch swing.

https://kaotic.com/video/834e7249_20240915183020_t

An idea for a new kind of non lethal weapon that cops can carry. The bean bags and tazers don't always work and the firearms are too much. What they need is a compact pneumatic gun that fires a net at the guy. Think spiderman. The net will have little weights attached to it so when it hits em, the momentum of the weights will cause the net to wrap around em and disorient him enough so he can be seized and restrained.

See that little hole? That's from when i hit homegirl like two months ago. I still haven't filled out the claim report and they're blowin my phone up.

Muwahahahahaaa!

Take a hunerd out of the thousands I've paid u over the years for no reason, put some bondo in the hole and get the fuck off my leg already. Or don't. I can do this all day.

Tell me if i got this right. A marijuana can be sold in states where marijuana is illegal (recreationally) if it's a special kind of marijuana that doesn't produce the chemical that is the substance making the other kind of marijuana illegal, until it is heated?

Dude just told me he bought some buds in the city next over and that it doesn't become illgal until it's burned. Not delta 9 or whatever. Something else. I smoke real pot and don't keep up with this new stuff going on. He gave me a bud, and the high is almost indistinguishable from the real thing.

If this is true, that's a fantastic little loophole. The product is not illegal unless it is burned... when a chemical change occurs and produces a scheduled substance. So it wouldn't be illegal to sell it or have it... only to smoke it. Lololol.

This can't be right. I haven't googled anything thing so i know nothing about this. Was this dude tellin me the truth or just makin something up with the burning thing?

Just becuz i have mastered this thread and it might as well be called prom's saloom or something, it doesn't mean u guys can't post in it.

U can even post in it when i ask u to... oop... see that? I spelled it 'ask' and didn't even think about it. Maia's got me self-conscious about improper spelling now. I feel like I'm being watched by Hal or something becuz she's got that reader thing.

I think i may have to revert back to the king's english and desist in the purposeful wanton misspelling of words and use of slang that has so recently characterized my posting habits.

So it's true! THCa it's called. And yes, it isn't illegal unless it is heated.


Why am i totally seeing a Tim Dorsey scene in my head right now. Lol something like this....

The new THCa craze has a handful of top officials and directors of the DEA, FBI and ATF in an uproar. These guys are all straight edged christian conservatives. They receive word of a very large unlicensed shipment of THCa flowers coming from vermont and decide to stake it out unofficially and somehow find a way to make a legitimate arrest. The problem is that the flowers aren't illegal unless they are burnt (turning the THCa into THC). Incidentally, one of the higher ranking DEA officials who's a little too vigilante-minded devises a plan to have an agent placed above the warehouse where the shipment is going, armed with a bazooka that's loaded with a nonexploding incendiary rocket. When the truck arrives, the agent shoots the truck, setting the flowers on fire and making them illegal. Five teams of guys in blue jackets and shotguns swarm the truck and start arresting everyone... but the smoke from the burning flowers is so thick that the agents get high and start goofing off with the people they're supposed to be arresting. Think Cheech and Chong Up In Smoke van scene. At the end of the day, the grower is only fined for the unlicensed shipment, and the agents write off the fire incident in their report.... after the DEA director receives a USB disk with footage of his agent with the bazooka, hidden in the bushes waiting for the truck, and smoking a joint. His agents had missed that camera when they were surveilling the area prior to the stake out and put the bazooka guy right in view of that camera. To avoid the bad publicity and possible criminal charges that could come to the director if this ever got out, he agrees to forget the whole thing ever happened.

Something like that. Dorsey would murder that shit. It's the perfect subject matter for his expertise.

Apparently, this new tech has only been around for a year. I knew nothing about it becuz I'm old af and always smoke real herb. And i always thought anything smokable would be that delta 9 stuff or whatever it's called. The clerk was a short, mild mannered chubby girl who spoke slowly and said 'man' too much. U could tell she had been stoned for the better half of her life by listening to her talk. She told me that just last week, the feds were in there wanting samples to test. She said she was paranoid now, and then she issued into what might be called a rant against the government for not legalizing pot. After the standard anti-government chat that all stoners are universally obligated to have when in the company of other stoners, i asked her for a quarter of her strongest stuff. She disappeared into the back, and i examined the digital menu hanging on the wall. Upside down runts. Toxic Marley. Gorilla glue. Oh, 36 percent. That's like ten percent higher than all the others, but it's the same price. Clearly, I'll go with the Gorilla Glue.

Is there religious significance to drug induced hallucinations? Discuss.

Pretending the abrahamic triad religions are right, and these two things are also true:

There are such things and angels and demons.

Due to the circumstances of freewill and the necessity of 'faith', a supernatural being like that couldn't interfer with your faith by ever showing itself. If it did, u would know this supernatural world exists and therefore would no longer need, use, or have faith. You'd simply be religious through a feeling of obligation, not by radical faith.

(It's one of those C.S. Lewis and Kierkegaard type situations sorta, but mine's cooler)

Then: angels and demons would be legally able to fuck with u if u are really high because in such a state, u couldn't rule out the possibility that u were hallucinating, and therefore wouldn't have solid evidence for the existence of the supernatural.

Like i have been soooo high that in order to rule out the possibility of what i experienced, rationally, saying to myself, 'No, that couldn't have just happened. You're just hallucinating.' I'd have to reject evidence that seemed so fuckin real u couldn't ever imagine your senses and brain being so fucked up as to produce such a complex hallucination, so u think it had to be real.

The point here now: when the angels and demons make this contact during intoxicated states (so as to seem dubious and remain hidden), the nature of the interaction is conspiratorial in essence. Which makes it bad, despite its purpose. Maybe an angel or demon wants to give u a little push and frightens u. Doesn't matter. That still doesn't justify giving a push in that way, in a way that is so dubious, abnormal or even spooky, but with such severity and importance.

what's the relationship between metaphysical beings and humans if they interact. Meaning some, not all, paranormal events are indeed paranormal... and we're granting that the abrahamic triad is true and all those beings talked about in scriptures are real.

What would they be able to do and not do, and when, when interacting with a human? That casual thought led me to that thesis: freewill and its force of importance can't ever be challenged by finding absolute proof of the supernatural. When one has proof, one no longer has faith.

And from this i claim that angels and the like, the good guys, know the conspiratorial nature of this kind of interaction - fucking with the guy when he's high af - and would not do it. Ergo, only ill mannered and malevolent forces would interact with somebody who's high af. Ergo, ergo, anything gained through the encounter with the supernatural when high af can be summarily dismissed as nefarious squabnobble with the caveat that u are evil and like to be fucked with by demons. But who does that.

A self-degenerating circle of mediocrity and standard-lowering happens when, because many consumers aren't attractive or healthy and/or are overweight, and these are the target groups of commercial advertising, and commercial advertisements use similar people in their ads, people subconsciously come to accept more and more being ugly and overweight.

A woman's bra commercial today. It used to be that only really good-looking women were modeling the bras in the commercials. Today, because those godless wokies have taken over the world and made everyone think that being fat and ugly is okay, is just a life decision, is not something others judge, etc., ugly people are all over the TV.

I turn on the TV, and some obese black woman in lingerie is spraying her stubbled and discolored armpit with a deodorant and the camera's like four inches from her arm pit. It's like I'm right there in the action.

She glances at herself in the mirror and satisfied, spins around in an about-face, and heads for the walk-in closet to select a dress for a full-figured girl. 'Thick', as it were. Not fat. Nobody is fat anymore.

So your people are seeing the worst examples of themselves in their commercials, and they're becoming normalized to it and losing a standard of excellence we should all have as 21rst century Spartans.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2024 1:08 am A self-degenerating circle of mediocrity and standard-lowering happens when, because many consumers aren't attractive or healthy and/or are overweight, and these are the target groups of commercial advertising, and commercial advertisements use similar people in their ads, people subconsciously come to accept more and more being ugly and overweight.

A woman's bra commercial today. It used to be that only really good-looking women were modeling the bras in the commercials. Today, because those godless wokies have taken over the world and made everyone think that being fat and ugly is okay, is just a life decision, is not something others judge, etc., ugly people are all over the TV.

I turn on the TV, and some obese black woman in lingerie is spraying her stubbled and discolored armpit with a deodorant and the camera's like four inches from her arm pit. It's like I'm right there in the action.

She glances at herself in the mirror and satisfied, spins around in an about-face, and heads for the walk-in closet to select a dress for a full-figured girl. 'Thick', as it were. Not fat. Nobody is fat anymore.

So your people are seeing the worst examples of themselves in their commercials, and they're becoming normalized to it and losing a standard of excellence we should all have as 21rst century Spartans.

You are way behind the play. They use men to model women's underwear and swimsuits now.

Plus you have to remember that 99.85 percent of Americans are mobidly obese, so underwear companies don't even bother making underwear any more that is smaller than xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx0S.

Androgynous folks is the way of the future because once women stop giving natural birth to the childrens and instead are having designer babies grown in a lab, there'll be nothing left of sex but for the purpose of pleasure. Now what you'll have then is a slow gradual loss of the precedence of and distinction between the classic two genders. Being a female won't be augmented by the importance of the ability to give birth... and the demasculinization of men via the ease of modern living and female equality in the work force will cause the concept of 'man' to change, to be a relic of a time when human's still mated in monogamous pairs and the man protected his family with a big club, then a big bank account, while his wife was pregnant and stayed in a cave, then a castle, then a condo raising your childrens.