The purpose of all life

Cool, then I can slip in a last word on the matter.

Purpose of all life?.. Living.

Money, hos and clothes.

Clearly for all you doofuses ecmandu is a social engineer who uses tactics to get sexually insecure men to think about becoming rapists. He uses a moral position as a mask over an apparent information he is extending, namely that to get laid you need to violate consent. He knows no one gives a shit about his purported purpose, that people only get agitated (stimulated) by what he is saying about the opportunities in the here and now.

And yachts with jetskis dude. And fresh fish prepared by said hos without clothes, but with shoes. Heels or sneakers no matter.

I’m not really much of a social engineer, more like a cosmic engineer. Letting you know how this world works is what I do when I’m bored. People should never get defensive about logic, but alas.

I do not endorse or condone rape.

I’m in it for hyperdimensional mirror realities for all existents.

I already know that humans can’t handle the truth with their conscious minds. I say these things because I am lonely and bored. Not because I expect, action, understanding or results.

Boredom is the devils pillow.

If you think I’m of the devil, then I must assuredly tell you, the devil is quite a wonderful person.

and gracefully humble. And perhaps humility is over rated.

Humility is the by-product of wisdom.

I know in a zero sum world that if I win, I lose.

The arrogance of the unwise thinking they are winners.

Let me clarify this:

In a zero sum world, if I win, I lose, and if I lose, I lose, except for spreading the non zero sum words or less zero sum than others.

All life purpose solves as non zero sum and non consent violating, the more someone does this, the more purpose they have, when it is 100%, they have absolute, pure and infinite purpose.

Many people on these boards are terrified of my teachings, because they want that kill, metaphorically speaking, that victory in a zero sum world.

Ultimately, all people come to me. The chasm of the meaninglessness of their lives searches for the only thing that can help them; the hope at the bottom of Pandora’s box: consent.

For my own cognition could you explain anything you have won or lost, and what was really won or lost? Big pictures.

The non zero sum desirability and the lack of consent violation are the only measures of life and goodness.

You can judge me in those criteria.

How?

You speak of winning and losing. And I have asked what you have won and lost. I am simply attempting to sum things up.

Common. Game theory, not physics.

It means that if someone wins another her loses.

+1 + -1 = 0

Hence the term “zero sum”

How do you determine the + or -? Perhaps notions of winning and loosing aren’t Boolean values. Certainly at face value… but what about beneath that? Can you factor in all the variables?

If someone wins over mutually exclusive desires, it’s considered zero sum. If someone wins of the same mutual desire, it is also considered zero sum.

In game theory, there are only 3 possible outcomes …

Win/win
Win/lose
Lose/lose

Win/win is the entire book of all struggles of ethics and morality; it’s billions of times more powerful than the golden rule.

In game theory? How does that apply? Is >this< a game?

I asked how a win or a loss is determined? In >this< Big Picture.

So you present a very simplified diorama of the win/lose picture.

I would counter Entity A and Entity B argue over Resource R. Whether A or B wins, doesn’t require resource R to by applied positively or negatively. How do you factor in what a plus on one side and a minus on the other side constitutes? You have simplified an equation that involves so many cultural factors, resources, human capacity into a boolean system of on’s and offs, and only three possible combinations.

I can imagine how it might be done but were Pen and Teller fouled?

Which of the three versions would you wish to attach me to?

I try not to judge you, But your ideas are fair game.

The key to non zero sum work is the translation of desirable states of being.

If you live in a house that’s highly coveted, with a family, translating desirable states would allow billions if not an infinite number of people to live in the same house; it is to resolve the issue of desirable scarcity, whether it be family born into, friends, lovers etc …

It is this translating of desirable states that is the only thing the drives the purpose engine, for people to take or leave as they will.

When consent is violated against consent, there’s simply glancing into an infinite future of consent violation, which for every being, is a loss/loss scenario. This is the enemy of all life.

Simple. When both sides lose, you don’t think it’s good for anyone.

But you still haven’t defined how a plus or minus is determined to factor the equation. Are we just going to wait around to let evolution figure it out?

You’ve got an idea. It’s your life… run with it. But there is a corner over there that you seem to ignore that has my curiosity.

Plus or minus (sorry I thought it was clear) is whether ones personal consent is violated against their consent. That’s different for each individual to judge for themselves.

There are mutually exclusive consents.

The broadest one is that some people’s consent is violated if anyone’s consent is violated, with others, their consent is violated unless they can violate the consent of others.

The latter group is what we call “evil”

In order to solve this equation, the latter group needs to be sent to a reality where they actually believe that they’re violating consent, but actually aren’t, they are kept ignorant.

The former group will desire to know that they’re in a reality that cannot violate theirs or anyone else’s consent, they will desire to not be ignorant.

Think of consent also as each individuals desire fulfillment, most of ours are vastly different from each other.

Non zero sum work is to solve all of this.