Should be is a lie, it just is.

posted on June 30th, 2009, 1:32 am

Not to be rude, but It isn't a break through.  I have always believed this, but I'm glad you agree with me.  ( And that my analogy wasn't lost in rambling.) 

posted on June 30th, 2009, 1:36 am

Well I am glad to hear that!

Well there no way one should say it so if rambling works rambling works. 

posted on June 30th, 2009, 1:37 am

I think Tommy Jefferson said it best:

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there is one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."

posted on June 30th, 2009, 1:45 am

Totally!

When people get this stuff the the only thing in there way o having what they wont in the world is them selves circumstances are merrily a challenge to over come nothing more nothing less.

any one could be the next Jefferson, Linken, JFK, Marten loather king. And there no what one should look you can create what ever you wont.

[tom]

posted on July 1st, 2009, 10:28 pm

Last edited by tom on July 1st, 2009, 10:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

i have something for u ewm. worth watching it has polish subs but it's in english... mostly
http://video.google.pl/videoplay?docid=3725805429355396303
tell me what u think.

posted on July 1st, 2009, 10:36 pm

I think Tommy Jefferson said it best:

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there is one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."

Perhaps, but too often we see glorious words to veil vain desires. After all when one is applying reason, one's reason is only as good as the facts in his possession. Which leaves us with a fine line distinguishing rationale from sophist polemic with the aim of procrastination instead of any allegiance to reality or truth.

Take for example the premise of this thread. One says that should be is a lie and what is, reality.
however, if we introduce into the equation that what is is based on man's efforts to reach the "should be" (some achieved some not each in varying degrees to the other), one is pressed by a question as to then whether reality is indeed reality or merely one's contentment with one's situation.

simplistically speaking - if a thief should be honest, is honesty then for him a lie upon which he should base his permanent stagnation in thievery?

posted on July 1st, 2009, 10:40 pm

simplistically speaking - if a thief should be honest, is honesty then for him a lie upon which he should base his permanent stagnation in thievery?

lol, that is good.  Is he stealing your right to know the truth by not telling?  Of course is that your right?  I guess by your logic, he isn't a thief if he tells the truth.  Quiet a Conundrum.

[ewm90]

posted on July 2nd, 2009, 2:08 pm

Last edited by ewm90 on July 2nd, 2009, 2:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Good quection

Yes,

He is how he creats him self as. Soulds a interpritation, by taking the interpritation out you see it as he is. To go a bit father thare is no sutch thing as thief theres people how stell but to classify one in ones head as thief, robber, killer, or what not, cut off posabilatys for them to be other things for ones self.


This video tuches on how ones words empact the world around them in ways one may or may not see. The next leave is they empact you too. ITs a bit harsh but efective in getting th post across

simplistically speaking - if a thief should be honest, is honesty then for him a lie upon which he should base his permanent stagnation in thievery?