Most People HATE Serious Discussion

So many assumptions taken-for-granted just in that one sentence:

“We” like to “imagine?”

Who’s “we”?

What do you mean “imagine”? Doesn’t that mean thinking in images? What is this thing called imagination? And while you’re at it, does “thinking” make the “thinging” or does “thinging” make the “thinking”? Or could that be just many of the false dichotomies or invented paradoxes born out of hoaxed realities we see around us? If our realities were not as hoaxed and fake as they are, would they be less paradoxical? You see, there is nothing as simple as can be de-fined in one sentence and framed “for good.” There are ten books to be written there, based on just those questions, already.

Why do “we,” assuming that “we” have even remotely the same unit of measure as humans, use so much imagery and then somehow assume that the so-called basic “objectivity” sold to us, this so-called basic “logic” based on the silly assembled symbols of letters and then words to identify images (and sounds and smells and other sense perceptions; all of these form metaphors, compact-meme-maps, to identify ever more complex conceptions and link them to the lower conceptions they branch their meaning from) is somehow enough to get us (oz? where does this stupid word come from anyway? Does it “stew” in the “pit” or what?) to this i-mage-ical space called “truth” where our actions in the so-called “real world” are able to be repeated with a consistency that can be called success? (suck-seed and sucks-ass? What the fuck? Who made all these words up to sound so “t-root-ful” to what we see around us as “successful” people or pupils?)

What is “real” in Is-rael? Jews or the elephant in the room? After all, doesn’t the medium of the media determine the message and ALL of our taken-for-granted assumptions that not even guys like JLB question before they make entire posts about them? If the medium is the message and the medium is owned by ONE co-racial and co-religious group, working for their own interests at the expense of yours, then doesn’t that make all or most of “us” in “oz,” whoever “we” are said to be BY THEM, no better than pet dogs or goys as they call the denizens of “oz”?

What is “enjoyment”? Why do we have “joy”? If being a black-&-white Aristotelian logician is enough and gives us so much “joy,” then why do “we,” at least those of us that are able to determine what is “good” or “bad” for us in a semi-coherent way, need music and poetry? Why did Nietzsche, one of the top so-called philosophers, always write in so-called “non-exact” or poetic sentences when it would be the easiest thing in the world for him to write in as bland and comformistly “exact” a style as any one of many hundreds of “trained logicians” in the universities of Europe in the 19th jew-sus-myth derived century, most of whom are now minor footnotes in “our” hoaxed and obscured history?

None of these terms can be taken for granted or defined or framed in any ONE way, if “philosophical investigation” is the real goal rather than run-of-the-mill trutherism posing as “deep thinking.” I call this “cutting edge” dis-ease. Some people have to always be on the cutting edge to feel good. It’s not that complicated to just sit at the very cutting-edge of each issue and see how far you can push the limits before falling off. In order to regain their own internal “ease” these types of personalities (and I might be one of them at times myself, I’m not pulling myself out of this category) tend to dis-ease or put-at-an-edge others, without really intending to.

This is what I call: cutting yourself on your own edginess and the result tends to be not that different than confusion, which is the goal of organized disinformation campaigns. So there are many ways to shill a disinformation campaign through useful actions that have not been pondered over too deeply without being paid directly by some kind of official “handler.” The reality of dis-informed people exists because the lies at the top confuse even the smartest people to take certain things for granted. What is taken-for-granted then builds the linguistic prisons of the future societies the elites want.

http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/8l4rrkpp6k/above_all_use_its_symbols_john_cowper_powys_zappa_waka_jawaka_annette_peacock.jpg

http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/1t2zunor02/knot_of_paradox_and_contradiction_john_cowper_powys.jpg

http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/voo528k863/attitude_that_combines_extreme_reverence_with_limitless_skepticism_powys.jpg

One thought on “Most People HATE Serious Discussion”

Negentropic

20-April-2018 at 2:47 am

So many assumptions taken-for-granted just in that one sentence:

“We” like to “imagine?”

Who’s “we”?

What do you mean “imagine”? Doesn’t that mean thinking in images? What is this thing called imagination? And while you’re at it, does “thinking” make the “thinging” or does “thinging” make the “thinking”? Or could that be just many of the false dichotomies or invented paradoxes born out of hoaxed realities we see around us? If our realities were not as hoaxed and fake as they are, would they be less paradoxical? You see, there is nothing as simple as can be de-fined in one sentence and framed “for good.” There are ten books to be written there, based on just those questions, already.

Why do “we,” assuming that “we” have even remotely the same unit of measure as humans, use so much imagery and then somehow assume that the so-called basic “objectivity” sold to us, this so-called basic “logic” based on the silly assembled symbols of letters and then words to identify images (and sounds and smells and other sense perceptions; all of these form metaphors, compact-meme-maps, to identify ever more complex conceptions and link them to the lower conceptions they branch their meaning from) is somehow enough to get us (oz? where does this stupid word come from anyway? Does it “stew” in the “pit” or what?) to this i-mage-ical space called “truth” where our actions in the so-called “real world” are able to be repeated with a consistency that can be called success? (suck-seed and sucks-ass? What the fuck? Who made all these words up to sound so “t-root-ful” to what we see around us as “successful” people or pupils?)

What is “real” in Is-rael? Jews or the elephant in the room? After all, doesn’t the medium of the media determine the message and ALL of our taken-for-granted assumptions that not even guys like JLB question before they make entire posts about them? If the medium is the message and the medium is owned by ONE co-racial and co-religious group, working for their own interests at the expense of yours, then doesn’t that make all or most of “us” in “oz,” whoever “we” are said to be BY THEM, no better than pet dogs or goys as they call the denizens of “oz”?

What is “enjoyment”? Why do we have “joy”? If being a black-&-white Aristotelian logician is enough and gives us so much “joy,” then why do “we,” at least those of us that are able to determine what is “good” or “bad” for us in a semi-coherent way, need music and poetry? Why did Nietzsche, one of the top so-called philosophers, always write in so-called “non-exact” or poetic sentences when it would be the easiest thing in the world for him to write in as bland and comformistly “exact” a style as any one of many hundreds of “trained logicians” in the universities of Europe in the 19th jew-sus-myth derived century, most of whom are now minor footnotes in “our” hoaxed and obscured history?

None of these terms can be taken for granted or defined or framed in any ONE way, if “philosophical investigation” is the real goal rather than run-of-the-mill trutherism posing as “deep thinking.” I call this “cutting edge” dis-ease. Some people have to always be on the cutting edge to feel good. It’s not that complicated to just sit at the very cutting-edge of each issue and see how far you can push the limits before falling off. In order to regain their own internal “ease” these types of personalities (and I might be one of them at times myself, I’m not pulling myself out of this category) tend to dis-ease or put-at-an-edge others, without really intending to.

This is what I call: cutting yourself on your own edginess and the result tends to be not that different than confusion, which is the goal of organized disinformation campaigns. So there are many ways to shill a disinformation campaign through useful actions that have not been pondered over too deeply without being paid directly by some kind of official “handler.” The reality of dis-informed people exists because the lies at the top confuse even the smartest people to take certain things for granted. What is taken-for-granted then builds the linguistic prisons of the future societies the elites want.

http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/8l4rrkpp6k/above_all_use_its_symbols_john_cowper_powys_zappa_waka_jawaka_annette_peacock.jpg

http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/1t2zunor02/knot_of_paradox_and_contradiction_john_cowper_powys.jpg

http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/voo528k863/attitude_that_combines_extreme_reverence_with_limitless_skepticism_powys.jpg
Log in to Reply

One thought on “Most People HATE Serious Discussion”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply