Hi angel Sapientia,

You're interesting, no question. Hope you enjoy my new thread piece, "Sapientia's letter re "3" quality (a risk). It was fun to do.

Take it easy, wild one, I'm out, Daorley

Dear angels, I realized that my self-introduction was incomplete, so there's a lengthy part 2 of it coming up; might be a while (?).

Angel Pattern-chaser [[ and to the attention of all angels AND last but not least the angel Moderator ]]: I am going to love the hell out of responding to you. I'm thinking of trying two different responses; the first, a concise one (fat chance with me!) with an impersonal, detached tone, like an ancient blind Chinese philosopher mumbling behind a screen; the second, I'm thinking should be addressed to all, and therefore should be as impersonal, objective and inoffensive (not possible!) as possible, as I sense that you have taken some offense at my words (which is inevitable for many including those who will remain silent) and may be on a "power trip" involving intolerance, politics and the attempted swaying of minds to believe I have no place here. I didn't say I was "fully informed" (which is relative to knowledge that virtually 'never ends'); I said I had "ALL THE ANSWERS" (i.e., the eternal and reliable answers to Life's greatest problems). The title "Introducing myself, a Christ Conscious "wise" fool" is just the truth, but many will have a problem with it; I can't help that. I'm in this world to be a shit disturber with the Truth. It's like my job, or natural calling; that is, I tell the Truth, mouths fall open in disbelief, etc. It's a good starting point for attracting those who will quickly reveal they have chosen to be my enemy. (I have no enemies, only angels who help me learn many things.) (With this, my preferred possibly inevitable banning is hastened, and any serious intolerance of me by any angels (including, crucially, the angel Moderator) becomes evident, effectively showing whatever degree of openmindedness or closedmindedness The Philosophy Forum has). Pattern-chaser, I sense from your bold questions and presumptuous assertions, that your earlier "with all due respect and courtesy" may not be sincere. I love such a challenge like this to dispassion and logic, and giving you all the chance to see a real philosopher at work (no offense to any who think they are real philsophers. If you feel insecure, it's natural.) I'm not concerned whether I'm accepted here or not; I have no desperation whatsoever. I'll just do my best until I'm banned; however, my possible banning might be revelatory for some of you, and that's all good. NONE OF YOU ANGELS should assume that my words here are an attempt at self-defense. On the contrary, self-defense is a waste of time and just a poor ego trip; it's what one's critic wants one to fall into, and only furthers greater imagined or real discreditation. As the Tao Te Ching relates, "No fight: no blame". OK, I realized I just gave the second answer, so here's the first:

"The sage does nothing, yet nothing is left undone". (Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching). I will not interpret this unless a truly respectful angel asks me to. Time will tell whether I am "not open to discussion or new ideas". New ideas? "There's nothing new under the sun", and my concept includes all the ideas of any real value in the only potential but presently impossible healing and spiritual evolution of the "human race", which is, for the most part, the "inhuman race". Yes, I have no real diplomacy; speaking the Truth, regardless of its many horrific implications, is priority number one for me. The Beatles' line "All we need is love" is a well-meaning fallacy. However, I do need to be careful not to go overboard with Truth telling, as it is a possible and occasional cruel perversity of mine; further, most of us are not looking for Truth, but just want something comforting we can figuratively "dream on with and remain asleep". That concludes my "two responses".

All sight: Our thoughts are all we really have to go by. For those who wish to evolve, they are our current place from which to do so. To ignore them is to try and make one's mind blank, which can't be done anyway, and it's being unkind to one's Self to try. If we do judge our thoughts to be inferior, we can also judge others unfairly. I told Chris Evans (actor playing Captain America) on YouTube that his "shushing himself" or "saying shh" to what he called his "brain noise" is illogical and proof of his mental illness (which he bravely talked about in a video). His lack of self-confidence, attempted "self-suppression", anxiety, control issues and fear of losing control are caused by his unbalanced Numbers from his names.

0 thru 9: Glad I passed your test. You're welcome.

Sapientha: "poor grammar" -- not likely. "Crackpot" in others' views -- inevitable. Thank you.

Love and Truth, I'm out, Daorley

Thank you so much, angels. I LOVE a challenge, and your comments made me laugh heartily. I'm not really laughing at you or your comments (to do so is disrespectful, as we should always, at least initially, be taken seriously and listened to kindly). My laughter is really just because I am happy as -- for the first time in a long while -- I have the opportunity to possibly dialogue with or at least respond to others somehow ("No response is also a response"), as I have been suffering from isolation. Of course I may get tired of being with you -- ha ha ha -- just as quickly - ha ha ha ..... Of course I'm a joker, but also the deepest philsopher-prick you may ever "read". There's no need to take ourselves seriously; we are all serious enough without that egoistic bullshit.

Pattern-chaser: I like your challenging question and think it deserves an answer separate from this one.

fdrake and Jake: You're right, sorry, it's been a while for me. No more of that. Readability is IMPORTANT.

Blue Lux: no comment.

Sir2u: Yes, the lower case middle part is my joke, elaborating upon how I know some feel about me. The serious part is in CAPS, and that's COMPLETELY HONEST, as I always am. Good Humor is a virtue which, if we do not have at least a bit of, we are virtually "dead though alive" in my view, and might actually be better off physically dead too. As you seem to resent humor, this is said not for you, but for others' possible greater clarity on and appreciation of the value of Humor, the approximate opposite of the sin of DEADLY SERIOUSNESS or DOURNESS.

0 thru 9: I like your response -- ha ha ha -- implying I'm possibly a zombie talking out of my hat. My image may appear to be "lofty", but I myself am not either particularly self-aggrandizing, egoistic, proud or deluded, like many philosopher-frauds are. I am a fierce defender of morality amongst other things, and I could not have the understanding/forgiveness and Love of the "good" or "bad" angels if I was a self-absorbed virtual lunatic pretending to be a philosopher. In other words, I am humble, but not falsely so; such folks are looking to fool others for their own ends. I repeat that "I don't care what people think of me" because "people don't generally think deeply about anything"; but the main reason I say this is because as a "wise" fool I am perfectly secure in my concept of Life and the fact that I am growing, and, as long as I'm trying to "get out there" I'm doing my best and should have no remorse at my final breath. I appreciate your humble openness to the possibility that I might actually be what I say I am. All the best to you, dear angel. Daorley out.