-->
@secularmerlin
I know i'm being a grammar nazi in a way... but psychopaths fit into this more. Sociopaths do care about some people.sociopaths
I know i'm being a grammar nazi in a way... but psychopaths fit into this more. Sociopaths do care about some people.sociopaths
I know i'm being a grammar nazi in a way... but psychopaths fit into this more. Sociopaths do care about some people.
Not everyone has the same cues.
How does that correlate to one changing their mind concerning what is moral and what is not? Morality is after all just an opinion.
in my view, the words morality and immorality refers to an imaginary 'stuff' that suffuses things. When we judge something as moral or immoral we can think we are detecting the presence of morality-stuff or immorality-stuff within it.
I believeTHERE ARE NO RULES.PlusI am 38 years and 5 months old.Thus My so called "morals" are a ( result* ) of ME living 38 years and 5 months with NO RULES.* may not be the best word to use.
See LINK to several dictioanary definitions of synergy.So my only question at this point is "how do you define synergetic?"
I guess the honest way to put it is I believe we start off with an objective moral in our bodies and translate it based off our opinion.
My quintessential example is a person who believes murder to be moral will still get a negative response if they witness a murder regardless about their opinion.
I know what synergy is.
Please explain what you mean when YOU say it.
I can't intuitively see how synergy applies to math
so I need you to tell me your semantic methodology and put aside your EGO that keeps making you insult MY EGO
Ive given you the details via my 2nd hand intepretation --that includes more than Fullers-- and you have ignored them. Sad :--(explain the difference between adding two triangles and adding them in a synergetic way. I need to know what the specifics are of adding things by synergy. If you can't give me details about that, then it is impossible for me or anyone else to comprehend, correct?
Oh, I get it now.
Your math is made up nonsense. Cool.
That's all I needed to know. I was actually interested in what you had to say for a second there but all of your rudeness and ironic critiques of ego kind of turned me off of the whole thing.
I will not make the mistake of actually trying to be civil with you again because I now know I was wrong to think you actually had a good thought to share with me. My mistake.
I wasn't playing dumb.
I was actually trying to understand your position because I thought it might have been cool.
You're so fricken obtuse that you can't even see when someone is genuinely interested in something you have to say.
Sur you get it but your ego blocks you ability to acknowledge truth when it is presented to you in clearly and concisely. Sad :--(
No, your ego based mental blockages to truth is not cool. It is immoral.
If you cant handle the truth then you need to get out of the kitchen of truth.
More ego based false accusations by you is immoral chewing gum that you repeated regurgitate, to chew and repeat over and over. Sad :--(Please share when you actually have any significantly rational, logical common sense that, addresses the specifics of my comments as stated. You ego does not allow you to to do this and that is further evidence the lack your being mature adult when engaging with me. Sad :--(
You gave me no choice but to assume it's nonsense because when I asked you to explain how synergy applies to math, you shut me down.
How am I suppose to understand a foreign concept that you bring to this forum when you won't even explain it to me. You keep telling me to sift through some link or something. Just explain it to me.
You mean the truth you refuse to share with me? That's rich.
So when that changes, you can explain mathematical synergy to me.