Stosh

As an anarchist , shouldn't you be of a mind that no one should be allowed to make laws?

While I like the gardens , I am not big on eastern paintings , they look more like illustrations to me. I like old school American painters.

I saw a thing where a guy was talking about the paintings of Homer , I didn't feel entirely on board with his reading of messages within each work , but it didn't matter I still enjoy the paintings themselves , and as you know one of these weekends I am going to take up Oil painting and produce some museum quality stuff. Sagebrush's post has me thinking in that vein. (And I would ask him why the fox is turned away from the viewer in Fox hunt,,, if It went that far.)

Scrunched eyebrows , rolling eyes , clenched teeth ,,, these are equivalent to words , not thoughts, they are generalized external indicators of subtler thoughts that prompt them. They are seen and interpreted. They aren't thoughts being read. If I said , the great artists presented abstract messages in the paint, would you know what that meant , having read them ?

Same , dropped most fiction first. But One day , I picked up an anthology of Melville , whos stuff I boiled through, many years ago , and this time I found I was pausing on every sentence or paragraph to consider and enjoy it. I didn't get through it this time, but it became clear , that some works , really have more content than a cursory glance supplies, and books still provide a convenient and rich pastime.

possessed ?

Wing it.

Pee?

No probs wiggly -bear.

Because that's still erring , sweetie-dumpling.

Who is it that can divert the weightless twirling clouds , budge the sloshing sea , or improve innate virtue? One might as well attempt to blot the stars to see the night more gently smooth untrammeled snow ,to obscure ones path and harness sparrows to flit about

Great ze problim she is sol ved ! As Clouseau likes to say . ✌✌

Lately this proof requirement has been tossed aside in the pursuit of finding people to condemn. Its burning up the political process. Theres a desire for justice, and thats fine, but there must be a requirement to prove ,to have the right to confront an accuser. Its like somewhere along the way, the public forgot that these issues were ironed out hundreds of years ago. And this includes very smart people who have seemingly forgotten the findings of the enlightenment. Why that is,, I dont know. Maybe its the collapse of the integrity of the press in the face of its democritization, and the citizenry needs to relearn on their own behalf without the crutch of the press , about rights justice privacy, free speech , etc.

Agreed. Now for the claim that the truth is always true ... well its true the cat is in the box. And if you want to disprove my claim you need to show how its true at the same time that the cat is not in the box. Right?

Fine ,prove me wrong, pick one, in or out.

That will be helpful if it comes about, but in the mean time we have to deal with the backwards guessing game , take it with a mature grain of salt ,and make diapproving faces of bombastic claims.

Fine, but you still need to choose the situation being discussed. Youre still trying to leave the thing indeterminate , like math Or our knowlege may be. But the cat is not indeterminatedly quasi material.

I like the idea, but its too late now, others already pointed out the flaws in the argument.. bunked it. Actually the fundemental problem with q mech , is that the investigators have no idea what is really going on , they just make the math work and postulate fantastic connections that make no sense. I saw one guy solve how the universe came into being ,looking at his shampoo bottle ,, , before this one was here , there were two others and where they bumped into one another they had a baby ,, brilliant !

Scientific investigation is done for the simple reason that it is the best means by which to learn that which is actually objectively true. Its not some sort of club. Even the most religious person attempts to persuade with proofs, because it proves things. People of faith also are promoting something that they think has value , however the thing being valued is generally a subjective state. Lack of proof , is a great reason to dismiss all sorts of arguments , like the one about the Judge confirmation. All that has been presented are accusations , and rightfully they should be dismissed as readily as the brand of " She is a witch !" , an idea that floated around for many centuries. ( I am told they tried to muster proof , by throwing the suspect in a river to see if they floated. )

Well , answer me this first, Is the cat in the box or are these hypothetical possibilities? If the cat is indeed in a box for some reason, then regardless of the statements made about it , let the thing out of there ! All that you are demonstrating is that an assertion may be wrong , that it is wrong when it doesn't mirror the true state of the circumstance. To do what you are seeming to attempt to demonstrate something akin to the Schrodingers cat box thing , which is a false argument for the same reason. Schrodinger is thinking he can assert things that are mutually contradicting and somehow this would prove the universe is not in accord with itself. I might as well say , B=A but A>B therefore I am a brilliant guy ( my old math teacher would probably have something to say on that note Schrodinger was once overheard talking to his wife, He said, If I dont ever look in the cats litter box , I will never have to clean it ! To which she responded , That just means he shit somewhere else , Go change the damn litter ! )

Maybe ...for you ... but I ain't going there. I do not think I could muster enough power over my own perceptions to reverse the negative experience into a positive one for something so extreme as getting chili in my eyes. Are you saying you personally can morph a migraine headache into a restful repose? ( and I mean , not to make it go away, I mean that you can actually like the thud of the blood in your skull ..)

I think most would call that being warped or crazy, ( the self burning thing) , while some get an endorphin rush from mild pains , which exceeds the negative value of the pains, the thing they are liking is the endorphins, same as anyone else might. For instance, I like to eat hot chili peppers, (which is not really all that odd) , but I do not want to get them in my eye, nor do I enjoy a pounding headache.

Huh? While you're entitled to an opinion , on everything open to opinion , every truth being true- is true , logically speaking , -even if there is nothing else true.

I thought so but that's fine.

A Pleasant thought, but we need to specify the parameters a bit , Will you help me spank Integrated in the other thread for putting me and others on ignore ?