http://theseagypsyphilosopher.blogspot.ca/2016/10/looking-astern.html
"Sending good-paying
factoring jobs overseas" but that is not what is happening. We the people are choosing to buy the most low cost products, not local product. As a result we cannot compete with the foreign producers that have lower cost of production. The local jobs just dry up and blow away, unless a country produces tariffs or the like to equalize the price.
The third world has few well paying jobs, certainly not in factories. Perhaps a few factory owners. They may be among the 1% of their country.
Now I am Canadian and in Canada. We went through this a few years ago with the US lumber, where the US violated the free trade agreement. US lumber production is more expensive, mainly due to the price of standing trees. In the US, most are private. We still have some crown trees in bits of Canada, and our government is not as greedy as the US land owners when it comes to trees.
The US government thinks this is unfair, so they imposed a significant tax on our lumber when it crosses the border, and that acts as a subsidy to the US producers, keeping them in business. Canada should have placed a export to the US duty, and kept the money in Canada, but our government has no political will for such things.
A country must do something to help develop jobs inside her borders. Note that I am using the feminine pronouns, for reason is not a political strong suit. Oh well.
In the end the customer vote with their wallets or feet. In this globalization, many lose, while the no value added transport industry and fuel industry benefits. Oh well, the rich one percent always get richer, and the rest of us struggle.
Monday, October 31, 2016
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Be Aware of the Thought Police
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/10/26/racism-alberta_n_12661142.html
We have government goons with guns running around creating bad situations in traffic and writing tickets for anyone who does not handle the situation within the letter of the law. Baiting and trapping. Revenue generation. Not for the public good, just another form of taxation.
Now the government is trying telling us what to think. They can regulate against behavior, but not against thought. We can think they are idiots, we cannot call them idiots. The government has just got silly, and must be treated as silly, for the lack of a better word.
Behavior is cultural. Those who live in the ghetto do not like those outside the ghetto. Those outside are not permitted to express their dislike for those within the ghetto, but those in the ghetto can do or say anything. There is no way to enforce the law. Prison is a better living condition than they have now in some cases. Only there freedom to choose body location is removed from them. Many were too nervous to leave there ghetto before, so what does prison take away? Nothing they value much anyway.
If government thinks it can change our thinking, it is just silly. Religion has always been just silly anyway. Our thinking is the only thing we have control over. The government can abuse people, but they cannot enforce logic on themselves, and not force ideas onto people. It just cannot be done, even if the idea is good. They may be able to sell the idea, but they will need to state the benefits and drawbacks. Mixed culture have never worked in the past. So who thinks this one can work?
We cannot go around making posters that say the government, colors, or religions are ignorant of the nine point scale of truth, or that they are just silly. We cannot say they are just wrong, but we can certainly think it and teach it to our children, privately. We can certainly teach our children to be psychopaths and sociopaths, anti-social money wasters, religious freaks, criminal, and like depraved sorts. The government does not even speak out against such activities, but say something against a group of people who are causing local unrest in the population, and you are a public enemy. There needs to be a bit of uniformity in the logic. No group can be considered better, more important to protect that the herd. But that is what we have.
If we hung up fliers saying stomp out criminals, would anyone care? So if the government wishes to change the public culture, it better know what it is doing, but it is obvious it does not.
We have government goons with guns running around creating bad situations in traffic and writing tickets for anyone who does not handle the situation within the letter of the law. Baiting and trapping. Revenue generation. Not for the public good, just another form of taxation.
Now the government is trying telling us what to think. They can regulate against behavior, but not against thought. We can think they are idiots, we cannot call them idiots. The government has just got silly, and must be treated as silly, for the lack of a better word.
Behavior is cultural. Those who live in the ghetto do not like those outside the ghetto. Those outside are not permitted to express their dislike for those within the ghetto, but those in the ghetto can do or say anything. There is no way to enforce the law. Prison is a better living condition than they have now in some cases. Only there freedom to choose body location is removed from them. Many were too nervous to leave there ghetto before, so what does prison take away? Nothing they value much anyway.
If government thinks it can change our thinking, it is just silly. Religion has always been just silly anyway. Our thinking is the only thing we have control over. The government can abuse people, but they cannot enforce logic on themselves, and not force ideas onto people. It just cannot be done, even if the idea is good. They may be able to sell the idea, but they will need to state the benefits and drawbacks. Mixed culture have never worked in the past. So who thinks this one can work?
We cannot go around making posters that say the government, colors, or religions are ignorant of the nine point scale of truth, or that they are just silly. We cannot say they are just wrong, but we can certainly think it and teach it to our children, privately. We can certainly teach our children to be psychopaths and sociopaths, anti-social money wasters, religious freaks, criminal, and like depraved sorts. The government does not even speak out against such activities, but say something against a group of people who are causing local unrest in the population, and you are a public enemy. There needs to be a bit of uniformity in the logic. No group can be considered better, more important to protect that the herd. But that is what we have.
If we hung up fliers saying stomp out criminals, would anyone care? So if the government wishes to change the public culture, it better know what it is doing, but it is obvious it does not.
Saturday, October 15, 2016
Painting on a Purpose of/in Life
There is no genetic purpose of life beyond reproduction, and it is not important to reproduce anymore; humans are too effective at that now. We need to paint on a personal purpose, one to give meaning to our own lives. This search for meaning, value becomes the prime motivation in our lives. Frankl saw this in his life and wrote "Man's Search for Meaning." What we chose should be clear of money, power, prestige, perhaps happiness, and be open ended, for these are more a function of luck than our effort. We should apply meaning to something within our control, and that way we are more likely to to be able to acheive success.
We are free to change our search several times each day. First we can serve our clients, our employer, and provide a service that has value to us to the end client or customer. Work that provides something that we do not value will be just for the revenue, which is not good motivator long term for some. If it is just money, that unethical gains become the easy way, and become the default, which is not good for society. We need some money, but we also need to enjoy our work and life. We must become willing to live on the funds that an occupation can generate. Greed is not a good characteristic, but it is heavily promoted as good in modern life. Evil mass media.
There is no doubt that my search for meaning drove my life in the past. It was first to get enough together, money, to leave my ancestral home and assumed occupation. There was a change from away from something to toward something. Then to get enough together to get an education, than to get that education, expand that into a career, step wise. Along the way I lost interest in much of the industry, so much bullshit for so few good projects. Oh well, I retired.
Now the search for meaning takes a different direction, money is not the primary concern, but a secondary issue. That is much better but has much less urgency and less future.
I agree with what Frankl saw as the meaning that provides the primary motivation for action. It is essential for life, but along the way are the rules of conduct that keep us from doing wrong, our virtues that we select, for life. Stoic and Buddhist concepts outline life much better in this area, but Frankl provides the understanding for motivation better than anyone. Maslow and Adler fix up the broken, Positive Psychology Friedman and Seligman outline the requirements, many religions provide a complete system if we have " buy in" into there hypothesis presented as facts, but untruth is easy to spot. There are no god's. There is nothing beyond this life, make it or not. There is nothing wrong with an ordinary life. That is what we should aspire to, as it is the most likely outcome. Being extraordinary is more luck and chance of birth, genes, and opportunity that under our control.
Now what is under our control? Our attitude, our ability to choose our attitude, our ability to choose our beliefs, our values, our ability to ascent or decent to concepts, ideas, proposals, our likes, dislikes, and to make thing neutral, not caring about, to some extent, and now our meaning which is the seed of motivation, from which effort comes. The Stoics had similar ideas of what was within our control and what was not. Oh well, itewajda (in the end we all just die anyway.)
Until then, however, we live in an overpopulated world that is losing the environmental race. We are headed for a rough patch, declining fish stocks, air quality problems, increasing carbon dioxide, declining oxygen, declining sea ice, and once that sea ice goes, methane release from the melting methane hydrate. That will be the near end of humans, the great die off. Those who survive will be able to live and reproduce in a hot dry climate, until the next dust producing event. Oh well, itewajda.
We are free to change our search several times each day. First we can serve our clients, our employer, and provide a service that has value to us to the end client or customer. Work that provides something that we do not value will be just for the revenue, which is not good motivator long term for some. If it is just money, that unethical gains become the easy way, and become the default, which is not good for society. We need some money, but we also need to enjoy our work and life. We must become willing to live on the funds that an occupation can generate. Greed is not a good characteristic, but it is heavily promoted as good in modern life. Evil mass media.
There is no doubt that my search for meaning drove my life in the past. It was first to get enough together, money, to leave my ancestral home and assumed occupation. There was a change from away from something to toward something. Then to get enough together to get an education, than to get that education, expand that into a career, step wise. Along the way I lost interest in much of the industry, so much bullshit for so few good projects. Oh well, I retired.
Now the search for meaning takes a different direction, money is not the primary concern, but a secondary issue. That is much better but has much less urgency and less future.
I agree with what Frankl saw as the meaning that provides the primary motivation for action. It is essential for life, but along the way are the rules of conduct that keep us from doing wrong, our virtues that we select, for life. Stoic and Buddhist concepts outline life much better in this area, but Frankl provides the understanding for motivation better than anyone. Maslow and Adler fix up the broken, Positive Psychology Friedman and Seligman outline the requirements, many religions provide a complete system if we have " buy in" into there hypothesis presented as facts, but untruth is easy to spot. There are no god's. There is nothing beyond this life, make it or not. There is nothing wrong with an ordinary life. That is what we should aspire to, as it is the most likely outcome. Being extraordinary is more luck and chance of birth, genes, and opportunity that under our control.
Now what is under our control? Our attitude, our ability to choose our attitude, our ability to choose our beliefs, our values, our ability to ascent or decent to concepts, ideas, proposals, our likes, dislikes, and to make thing neutral, not caring about, to some extent, and now our meaning which is the seed of motivation, from which effort comes. The Stoics had similar ideas of what was within our control and what was not. Oh well, itewajda (in the end we all just die anyway.)
Until then, however, we live in an overpopulated world that is losing the environmental race. We are headed for a rough patch, declining fish stocks, air quality problems, increasing carbon dioxide, declining oxygen, declining sea ice, and once that sea ice goes, methane release from the melting methane hydrate. That will be the near end of humans, the great die off. Those who survive will be able to live and reproduce in a hot dry climate, until the next dust producing event. Oh well, itewajda.
Tuesday, October 11, 2016
meaning of life
There is none. Pleasure, good life of doing right (Stoic), a life of purpose, a life of meaning, be it aimed at ego, understanding, wealth generation, farming, trade, profession, what ever in meaningful to the individual. It is a choice, what are we content with. Most of us do not start out with a clear plan or direction in our life, rather we start, and make decisions as opportunities present themselves. Some create opportunities at school age, other struggle for survival, even in Canada.
I grew up without, living without much was economical, so education fairly economical to start. By the time my formal education ended, it was far from economical. I had undergone hedonistic adaption.
We humans are an opportunistic animals. When we see an opportunity... we take it. Oh well, itewajda.
We start with a hypothesis... and we are off to test that hypothesis... I want to be in the construction industry I think... and then it is too damn cold to be outside in the winter... I need an education... what are my choices? Pick one, and do it. What are my choices for employment? Pick one and do it? Advancement, security, benefits, poor. More education, and the situation is not any better.
There is an underlying hypothesis that education increases the chances of prosperity. This is false. Luck, choice of fields (largely luck, genetics, skills, interests are largely luck), and the time and changes in the economy of the time make such a impact on employment possibilities. Effort, concentration, work are important but more is just luck. A poor memory and work will not equal a gifted memory. Oh well, itewajda.
We start with a concept, an hypothesis, and if it is right, we do well, if it fails to be true, oh well, itewajda. The hypothesis is an unknown, assumed to be true, until shown not to be, or remains unknown.
Many hypothesis are just our best guess at the time, and with more information, are still resistant to change. We adopt hypothesis as true when we are raised with those hypothesis being assumed to be true. Religions, are examples of hypothesis systems that have built up out of lesser hypothesis. Many are built up to promote a selected group of virtues, obedience to a story and institution being one of the necessary virtues. Once we become obedient to facts, truth, analysis, the whole religion thing falls apart. We see it for what it is, a hypothesis system.
I grew up without, living without much was economical, so education fairly economical to start. By the time my formal education ended, it was far from economical. I had undergone hedonistic adaption.
We humans are an opportunistic animals. When we see an opportunity... we take it. Oh well, itewajda.
We start with a hypothesis... and we are off to test that hypothesis... I want to be in the construction industry I think... and then it is too damn cold to be outside in the winter... I need an education... what are my choices? Pick one, and do it. What are my choices for employment? Pick one and do it? Advancement, security, benefits, poor. More education, and the situation is not any better.
There is an underlying hypothesis that education increases the chances of prosperity. This is false. Luck, choice of fields (largely luck, genetics, skills, interests are largely luck), and the time and changes in the economy of the time make such a impact on employment possibilities. Effort, concentration, work are important but more is just luck. A poor memory and work will not equal a gifted memory. Oh well, itewajda.
We start with a concept, an hypothesis, and if it is right, we do well, if it fails to be true, oh well, itewajda. The hypothesis is an unknown, assumed to be true, until shown not to be, or remains unknown.
Many hypothesis are just our best guess at the time, and with more information, are still resistant to change. We adopt hypothesis as true when we are raised with those hypothesis being assumed to be true. Religions, are examples of hypothesis systems that have built up out of lesser hypothesis. Many are built up to promote a selected group of virtues, obedience to a story and institution being one of the necessary virtues. Once we become obedient to facts, truth, analysis, the whole religion thing falls apart. We see it for what it is, a hypothesis system.
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
hypothesis
Hypothesis, Hypothesis, all is hypothesis, until we can prove it.
Definition: a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation. So all is hypothesis, until we can prove it. God, gods and the various concepts, no god atheism is also; however, when there are two opposing hypothesis, only one or neither can be correct. Evidence toward one is away from the other, we grow toward the more correct in science. Religions are dying for lack of evidence; yet they hold on. Starting hypothesis, formed without any knowledge are usually wildly wrong. This can almost always assumed. When there are many different, they are likely all wrong, except for the universal opposed, like there is no god.
Once we start to look at religion as hypothesis, and each story as a separate hypothesis, it becomes apparent that each was an attempt at explanation, and we know more today, so the new hypothesis is more correct, yet are lacking. When we/I look at these as hypothesis, it becomes easier to let go of the lesser hypothesis.
Considering the triune brain, physical, emotional, and rational behaviors, thoughts, and looking at US presidential election, the emotions are in the way of rational decisions. Religion is in the way of rational progress in society, and in the criminal element. Make drugs legal, but regulated and tax it. That is the only way to get control of the drugs, otherwise the US is just playing whak-a-mole.
Mixed race culture has never worked in the past, except when one was subservient. What makes the government think it can work today? Canada has a problem with natives, Us with blacks, and everybody has a problem with Islams. Carbon dixoide is on the rise worldwide. The real problem is overpopulation, so what is the obvious solution? Pakistan - India tried it, and did it work? Not well. So we need a new hypothesis, and I suggest the problem is overpopulation, and the antibiotic resistance bacteria are the world's solution.
Definition: a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation. So all is hypothesis, until we can prove it. God, gods and the various concepts, no god atheism is also; however, when there are two opposing hypothesis, only one or neither can be correct. Evidence toward one is away from the other, we grow toward the more correct in science. Religions are dying for lack of evidence; yet they hold on. Starting hypothesis, formed without any knowledge are usually wildly wrong. This can almost always assumed. When there are many different, they are likely all wrong, except for the universal opposed, like there is no god.
Once we start to look at religion as hypothesis, and each story as a separate hypothesis, it becomes apparent that each was an attempt at explanation, and we know more today, so the new hypothesis is more correct, yet are lacking. When we/I look at these as hypothesis, it becomes easier to let go of the lesser hypothesis.
Considering the triune brain, physical, emotional, and rational behaviors, thoughts, and looking at US presidential election, the emotions are in the way of rational decisions. Religion is in the way of rational progress in society, and in the criminal element. Make drugs legal, but regulated and tax it. That is the only way to get control of the drugs, otherwise the US is just playing whak-a-mole.
Mixed race culture has never worked in the past, except when one was subservient. What makes the government think it can work today? Canada has a problem with natives, Us with blacks, and everybody has a problem with Islams. Carbon dixoide is on the rise worldwide. The real problem is overpopulation, so what is the obvious solution? Pakistan - India tried it, and did it work? Not well. So we need a new hypothesis, and I suggest the problem is overpopulation, and the antibiotic resistance bacteria are the world's solution.
Sunday, October 2, 2016
The Logos goes to My Logos to The Logos
First what does it mean?
Here's Wiki: It is a Greek word meaning "ground", "plea", "opinion", "expectation", "word", "speech", "account", "reason", "discourse",[1][2] but it became a technical term in philosophy beginning with Heraclitus (c. 535–475 BCE), who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.[3]
Others: "reasoned discourse", "premise", "word","logic",
and finally: the rational principle that governs and develops the universe or the rational principle that governs the universe, humans and directions for a good life.
So there is a bit of uncertainty in the translation. Just depends on who is speaking... so it becomes a personal journey. It could go from the logos to my logos, for others may have a different opinions. Yet the logos should trend toward right thinking, therefore in the limit should approach truth, hence the logos may be more appropriate.
So the logos here are the rational principles that govern the development of a rational future life. It is not about making a living, but how we live, and think, and in the end behave and do. It is about overcoming emotions, which are our automatic first responses, genetic, epigenetic and trained into the organism. We are never done learning and adapting, so as we go, our personal logos grows and changes. Much is gathered from philosophy and other studies.
The logos is about principals, concepts lifted from other and reproduced, it is about bits of culture separated from there source, it is about truth and story's. Story is used here to describe a tale which is knowingly untrue, created as an explanation for the unknown, for we humans seem to be more at peace with a falsehood than an unknown. Story should be replaced with facts, truths, even when the truth is unpleasant. What is truth? It is a continuum from absolutely true to absolutely false with unknown in the middle. Seven and nine point scales are often used to represent this concept.
The logos is not traditional behavior, although it may be. These are two separate processes, one with the input of the ancestors and community, while the other is a rational process without regard to where it is from or how it fits with the attitudes of others. In the Oriental philosophies, tradition rates higher than reason some of the time, but logos places reason and logic above tradition. This sorting of priories is in conflict with tradition; we do it this was because we always have. We are approaching or at the turning point in human society, earth population and resources, carbon dioxide levels, energy, systemic economic overpopulation, inter-religion intolerance, race intolerance, intercultural intolerance, rebellion against government policies, political/military/police control freaks; which one will be the first in your area to blow up.
We need to settle for ourselves which to support, which are worth supporting, and which are worth dying over.
Here's Wiki: It is a Greek word meaning "ground", "plea", "opinion", "expectation", "word", "speech", "account", "reason", "discourse",[1][2] but it became a technical term in philosophy beginning with Heraclitus (c. 535–475 BCE), who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.[3]
Others: "reasoned discourse", "premise", "word","logic",
and finally: the rational principle that governs and develops the universe or the rational principle that governs the universe, humans and directions for a good life.
So there is a bit of uncertainty in the translation. Just depends on who is speaking... so it becomes a personal journey. It could go from the logos to my logos, for others may have a different opinions. Yet the logos should trend toward right thinking, therefore in the limit should approach truth, hence the logos may be more appropriate.
So the logos here are the rational principles that govern the development of a rational future life. It is not about making a living, but how we live, and think, and in the end behave and do. It is about overcoming emotions, which are our automatic first responses, genetic, epigenetic and trained into the organism. We are never done learning and adapting, so as we go, our personal logos grows and changes. Much is gathered from philosophy and other studies.
The logos is about principals, concepts lifted from other and reproduced, it is about bits of culture separated from there source, it is about truth and story's. Story is used here to describe a tale which is knowingly untrue, created as an explanation for the unknown, for we humans seem to be more at peace with a falsehood than an unknown. Story should be replaced with facts, truths, even when the truth is unpleasant. What is truth? It is a continuum from absolutely true to absolutely false with unknown in the middle. Seven and nine point scales are often used to represent this concept.
The logos is not traditional behavior, although it may be. These are two separate processes, one with the input of the ancestors and community, while the other is a rational process without regard to where it is from or how it fits with the attitudes of others. In the Oriental philosophies, tradition rates higher than reason some of the time, but logos places reason and logic above tradition. This sorting of priories is in conflict with tradition; we do it this was because we always have. We are approaching or at the turning point in human society, earth population and resources, carbon dioxide levels, energy, systemic economic overpopulation, inter-religion intolerance, race intolerance, intercultural intolerance, rebellion against government policies, political/military/police control freaks; which one will be the first in your area to blow up.
We need to settle for ourselves which to support, which are worth supporting, and which are worth dying over.
Saturday, October 1, 2016
Purpose in Life
Finding a purpose for our life is one of Positive Psychology (PP) suggestions for a successful life, what ever that is. When we look at religions, most tell us how to live a good life, but the definition of good varies so much as to be mutually exclusive, aka cannot coexist. So WTF? When I look at any of the belief systems, there is some garbage in them all, as well as in PP, yet in all there are truths. Some of the truths are common throughout; yet each group has exceptions. Buddhism is peace based, and ignores the military forces necessary to maintain a country. Stoicism deals with much but Epictetus acknowledged a god, beyond nature. He did outline five possibilities and leaves it up to the student of philosophy to make a decision or not.
There is the Pleasant life, the Good life, the Meaningful life, the life with Purpose, where the meaning and/or purpose can be picked from a long list. We can switch along the way; we can run two or more and switch for parts of the day or week. We can do only part of the total meaning or purpose, leaving the hard part or just selected parts out. Consider the environmental movement; a good cause, and a major portion of the final solution will be birth control and immigration control, to control population. The Alberta Government will attach the production of industrial carbon, but is unwilling to much on the demand side, which is going to be the only way in the final solution, which will take hundreds of years to develop. Some things are just rationally compatible. Oh well, itewajda.
So what would the universal belief system look like? Well, it would be correct in a scientific way, truth would be one of the cornerstones. Yet truth is an abstract reality; better understood after looking at "the best current knowledge", and truth being the ultimate limit value of the function. We do not know what the final truth is but we ratchet closer to it all the time in science. There is no god is what we are trending toward, so in all probability, there is no god. Some of us have accept this and moved forward; there is no supernatural; no life after death in any form, no reason to pray beyond verbalization of thoughts and perhaps a better self understanding from that verbalization. So what is our purpose now?
Many religions say and think that the only purpose is to serve god, or some such nonsense. Life is the universal purpose, and to make that life comfortable is a secondary purpose, possible to make it comfortable for all or many is also in the running. Warm, fed, clothed- after that all is luxury. And if your priories do not match up with mine, you are on your own. If you want drugs, tobacco, alcohol, etc, it is beyond what we are willing to provide, you are on your own.
So what happens when we stop wanting, stop wanting to do things? Just stop caring? About others, and about doing anything beyond sitting and watching the human circus? Online one can just watch, the pointless movement, and idiots flailing about without clear purpose.
It is apparent to me that purpose of life is life, and we can paint on any purpose in life, and if we believe it, all is good. Greed is the purpose of many, the search for money, while other take on mundane thing like defining what and how to build a suitable foundation for structures, roads, lines, and other such things. After a while we get old and cannot or do not want to do it any more.
Ultimately, a great purpose would be to write the Logos, v 0.1 outline.
There is the Pleasant life, the Good life, the Meaningful life, the life with Purpose, where the meaning and/or purpose can be picked from a long list. We can switch along the way; we can run two or more and switch for parts of the day or week. We can do only part of the total meaning or purpose, leaving the hard part or just selected parts out. Consider the environmental movement; a good cause, and a major portion of the final solution will be birth control and immigration control, to control population. The Alberta Government will attach the production of industrial carbon, but is unwilling to much on the demand side, which is going to be the only way in the final solution, which will take hundreds of years to develop. Some things are just rationally compatible. Oh well, itewajda.
So what would the universal belief system look like? Well, it would be correct in a scientific way, truth would be one of the cornerstones. Yet truth is an abstract reality; better understood after looking at "the best current knowledge", and truth being the ultimate limit value of the function. We do not know what the final truth is but we ratchet closer to it all the time in science. There is no god is what we are trending toward, so in all probability, there is no god. Some of us have accept this and moved forward; there is no supernatural; no life after death in any form, no reason to pray beyond verbalization of thoughts and perhaps a better self understanding from that verbalization. So what is our purpose now?
Many religions say and think that the only purpose is to serve god, or some such nonsense. Life is the universal purpose, and to make that life comfortable is a secondary purpose, possible to make it comfortable for all or many is also in the running. Warm, fed, clothed- after that all is luxury. And if your priories do not match up with mine, you are on your own. If you want drugs, tobacco, alcohol, etc, it is beyond what we are willing to provide, you are on your own.
So what happens when we stop wanting, stop wanting to do things? Just stop caring? About others, and about doing anything beyond sitting and watching the human circus? Online one can just watch, the pointless movement, and idiots flailing about without clear purpose.
It is apparent to me that purpose of life is life, and we can paint on any purpose in life, and if we believe it, all is good. Greed is the purpose of many, the search for money, while other take on mundane thing like defining what and how to build a suitable foundation for structures, roads, lines, and other such things. After a while we get old and cannot or do not want to do it any more.
Ultimately, a great purpose would be to write the Logos, v 0.1 outline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)