Making your posts more coherent has nothing to do with others needing to be more sentient, but I will leave the matter there.
I’ve worked 24 years to make my last update.
It’s no longer an issue of my fault, or if it is, it’s exceedingly minimal
Ecmandu, I put you on ignore (foed you) because from what I’d read of you, it didn’t seem worth it to argue with you. But apparently you interpret it as proof of my not being a “sentient enough being” to understand you. Okay, well then…
Where’s your logically and realistically “unassailable” essay?
Ahh… This is the pinnacle of all my brainpower and life experience.
The rest is just footnotes…
That’s why I think this will be my last thread, I’ve said that about 5 times…
But this really is the best I am.
To answer your question no your posts make absolutely no sense at all as they are incoherent rambling streams
of nonsense. And so maybe that is why Satyr nominated you as the craziest one here on a forum full of psychos
Satyr is still mad because I said I can refute his entire thread about what he believes…
And I actually can.
As an objectivist!!
Ecmandu,
If you see no purpose or value within your past, how will you find purpose in the present moment or your future?
If you take away the bricks from your foundation, what happens? The structure will collapse/fall.
Feng Shui it.
It’s garbage as a whole…
There are worthwhile ingredients though
Your poll doesn’t even make sense.
fail on several levels
Ahh… But it makes perfect sense; there’s only one correct answer.
It’s to show that not only am I rational, I’m smarter than you, and I also have a good humor.
Next time you try to talk like Trump, don’t say the clear day sky isn’t blue!
Be less transparent about it…
You’re off to a good start though!
Eccy (can I call you Eccy?),
The only thing that’s never really made any sense out of your posts is your idea to create a whole new universe in which no one gets hurt and everyone’s happy, but you invariably fail to explain how that’s done.
I also disagree with your link between the male suicide rate and nice guys not getting pussy. I think when it comes to suicide, by definition it is chosen by free will, and not a causal effect from some other factor.
^ But that’s a disagreement, not a failure to make sense out of what you’re saying.
I suppose the first item is too–creating a whole other universe–but in that case I’d call it an incomplete explanation.
^ So I take back my vote: everything you say makes sense–I just disagree with it or need further information before I can agree or disagree.
It’s a couple of things.
The only perpetual motion device we know of, is existence itself.
Because of things I’ve actually seen, I am very certain that we have spirit energy that can access it.
Those two things gave me encouragement that we can actually build our own universes.
Also the idea that you can use very simple reductive algorithms to extend infinitely. It wouldn’t require an infinite amount of work to do this.
In terms of women, I think the stratification towards what we’d call extraneous drama or conspicuous consumption, contradicting yourself, and needing to approach escalate is a huge insult to people who are sensitive, and it gnaws at their brains, it’s crazy making and absurd.
I discovered something called the conveyor belt effect, where the older men go to hell eventually forever, but new men are always being born, so women don’t care, and think men deserve it. They can’t be sent to hell because then the man would be the jerk!
You can’t actually viscerally show this to women through types of memory overlap, because the level of abuse that women perpetrate is so severe, that you’d end up contradicting yourself as the jerk who got laid. So… In the absence of that, women will never understand it.
Eventually men will try to be good people, and the moment they do that boom hell forever.
Men are not allowed to let women viscerally learn this lesson at all, otherwise they go to hell for hypocrisy.
Based on my own understanding of metaphysics and consciousness, it should be possible in principle to build a universe out of the material of your own mind. It’s what we’re doing all the time anyway without knowing it.
Well, here we have an example of one of the things you say that don’t make sense. There seems to be a lot of conceptual material jam packed in the phrase “simple reductive algorithms to extend infinitely”. It’s not clear you’re even using those words properly (but I could be wrong). I don’t think anybody understands what that means.
I get the overall gist though: it’s doable.
This gives me the impression that part of your problem is that when you explain things, you run through a whole heap of material that the listener/reader is unfamiliar with and don’t take the time to go into detail explaining what you’re saying.
Lucky for you, I’m a sucker for inquiry into the obscurities of some people’s thoughts. Let’s start with your favorite phrase: sexual stratification of conspicuous consumption. What on Earth does that mean? I’m an analytical thinker, so I like to break things down. What does “sexual stratification” mean? And separately from that, what does “conspicuous consumption” mean? And then what do they mean together? ← Let’s start with this.
Some of the things you say above hint at why you have the views you do. You say that women are sending men to hell by the legions. Most of us don’t know this (including women themselves?) so it’s hard to empathize with such misogyny, even if we are frustrated that women won’t sleep with the nice guy. But if you’ve been there and you’ve seen it from that side–and if you could only convey what you’ve seen to others–maybe we’d all be enraged by women. ← I think that might be a missing piece as well.
Trixie’s spreading a rumor that you’ve been to hell for 400 billion years–longer than the age of the universe. Is this true? Is “Ecmandu” just your current incarnation? What were you before? What universe did you live in?
You say constructing universes from the minds material … Yes and no, there are glitches with some of this outside of PZ worlds … A simple one is that everyone would be you. That causes lots of problems.
The plus one algorithm is the simple infinite reductive algorithm for the counting numbers.
1,2,3,4,5 etc…
Sexual stratification is the reality of most earth species giving most of the sexual variety to a small percentage of the population … It doesn’t mean that only a small percentage get sex, just sexual variety.
An example of conspicuous consumption is buying a 200 million dollar yaught and using it only one week every 5 years, with a 25 million a year upkeep.
Dumping toxins in rivers is another example.
Contradicting yourself is another.
Towards: Guys who dump toxins or play sports, get more pussy than those who don’t
It’s waste, to make one seem powerful, in the entire animal “kingdom”.
The conveyor belt problem is caused by the torment of doing the right thing and always losing with neglect. Those who do the wrong thing , are punished as well. All men get punished forever, women eventually stop getting punished.
Well… I was alive long enough to watch all the stars in the sky slowly go out. I’m still a bit confused about it… But it happened after I posted my video of all of us needing to go to hell for 400 billion years.
Like this?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pYUHwIl0O8[/youtube]
What makes it reductive?
And the stratification comes in by the way the alpha male gets the bulk of the females, then second in lines gets fewer females, then third… Is that right?
It’s conspicuous how? You mean, because it stands out? A man with a 200 million dollar yaught is noticeable?
Huh? What do these have in common?
Ok, it’s waste. So the 200 million being spent on a yaught only to be used once every five years is a waste. Toxic waste is, well, a waste. Playing sports is a waste (because it doesn’t actually serve any purpose–like finding a cure for cancer or feeding the hungry).
And women like this?
Still don’t get contradicting yourself though.
And this you know from your experiences in the afterlife?
Do you have a link?
Gib…
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=191950&p=2644055&hilit=Marriage#p2644055
I’m not putting those videos up again Gib.
What’s extremely important to understand is that while the basic problem of sexual variety stratification is huge, just like wealth stratification.
EVERY single problem that exists comes to solving the problem of overlapping desires and mutually exclusive desires!
An overlapping desire is say a million people all wanting the same lover or to be president in 2017.
Mutually exclusive desires are things like an animal not wanting to be eaten, and you wanting to eat it.
Or for a man to want consensual sex with a lesbian.
The question when you see the issue clearly about these desires is… Why would anyone accept anything less??
All posts make sense. It is just the degree of sense in which they are graded by.
Primarily, a post should invoke a solid logics, and quality sensory stimulation, which is why I like to add color to my posts.
Well, I suppose if you created a universe in which everything everyone wanted was actually possible to achieve (no mutual exclusion) and that everyone could achieve it simultaneously (no overlap) then you’d have a perfect world.
You underestimate your humor. You >are< hilarious, in a tragic sort of comedic way.
There you go mowk! You’ve already improved !!