Read further.

I mean witch ever 1,000 years you originally mentioned; I can't adequately answer your question, because I too don't know which 1,000 years you were referring to...

You probably assume, via the avatars of BC and myself, that we're two old men bickering about chess pieces. I'll dispose you of that false notion right now by letting you know that one of us is a phony, in that regard.

You, for instance, will be among the last to be bored, since you have a well stuffed mind, or at least it looks like that at a distance. — Bitter Crank

Again with these edits, as I re-read. Are you just placating me here? Or is this some fodder to make your case look better? I really don't know.

Which 1000 years? I have a sense of humor, but it doesn't manifest itself when confronted with bullshit.

Maybe you misunderstood. Read "shove" as "shovel"; shovel in as much as you can. The separate etymologies of shove and shovel is one of those things you can think about after death. — Bitter Crank

Thanks for the edit here; I did read "shove" as "shovel", hence my use of "shove" in my initial comment....

Well sure, my response, "bullshit", is just as probable as your entire OP, since no one knows what happens after death. Is that your point?

Bullshit.

What's pessimistic about "eat, drink, be merry, and learn as much as you can while you have the opportunity, lest your life after death be the worst possible drag"? — Bitter Crank

There's nothing pessimistic about "eat, drink, and be merry"; but "shove it all in while you can!" is basically nihilism personified.

What happened to "Against All Nihilism", or whatever?

The most important answers being: poetry, humor, and courage. — Jonathan AB

Sounds good.

(Y) Measured, as always.

Memoirs Found In A Bathtub - Stanislaw Lem

This is some almost-black-comedy/surrealist/horror 1984 shit. Really different; barely even sci-fi.

I'm kind of embarrassed that I posted that back then, but I'll give it a shot.

I wonder if you would be willing to attribute this to the "intelligence" of the subconscious (as the subconscious often behaves in very rational ways and solves problems for us without our directed attention). — prothero

I'm fine with that interpretation, as long as it's not considered a dogmatic, metaphysically exclusive and exhaustive explanation. What exactly is the intelligence of the subconscious? Those waters are way too murky to automatically assume a materialistic position in which the theory that suggests the subconscious as the "answer" to the phenomenon lays all metaphysical doubts to rest. A psychological explanation could serve as an expression of the singular reality of what's happening. A mystical explanation, for instance, could also serve as an expression of that singular reality. I see no reason to assume one being primary or "more real" over the other, aside from pure assumption and personal metaphysical bias.

I've been reading about the Christian mystics, and the Kabbalah as well recently. The experiences they had sound like the creative process to me. Pretty simple, really.

I've probably talked about beauty more than any other topic on the forum.

Is this beautiful?



Is this beautiful?



Is this beautiful?



I challenge anyone to listen, fully, without distraction or interruption, to the full 20 or so minutes of music I just posted, before responding.

Jeez, just make more job for him, will ya — Akanthinos

For who?

The discussion is about beautiful things. Please carry on. — Baden

Oh really? >:O

I don't consider myself a good person, no, but I also believe I'm gooder than I know or realize.

I'm no expert, but the ones I posted are my favorites, and they're 60's/70's. The covers to the Lord of the Rings edition that I posted in that photo are probably my favorite book covers of all time. Those covers fueled my imagination as a kid long before my parents actually read the books to me for the first time. They come in a box set, and the box is equally amazing. I recently purchased my own copy on abebooks, but The Fellowship is already falling apart. I need to cough up the big bucks on a set that's in great condition.

I asked a similar question here, albeit from a much different angle; it wasn’t very well received. Probably not philosophical enough, too imaginative. Ironically, we’re better equipped than ever, now, to ask this sort of question. A lot of people seem not only uninterested, but against the question itself. Indicative of the zeitgeist we live in?

Damn, looks like those rules haven't been voided, then.

ha ha

By the way, Star Wars was pretty ok.

He who talks a lot, — Sir2u

How is that measured? And would quantity of rules automatically be a good thing?

Rule 4.2 seems meaningless.

You always knew I would never become a despot. You said I would be fair. And yet now you demand tyranny. You've "washed your hands" before, and yet you always come back, thirsting for rule after rule. If you could only see yourself for who you are, you would be freed from this need. I await the creation of rules like a baby awaiting an unknown future she could never conceive of; I wear rules on my person like Tom Bombadil wore The One Ring.

Anyways, I'm off to see the new Star Wars movie, wish me luck. Hope it doesn't suck.

I await enlightenment, then.

I like that rule.

But I don't consider it one of my duties to deny or accept every rule. I only did so this time because it was requested of me.

True leaders
are hardly known to their followers.

When the work's done right,
with no fuss or boasting,
ordinary people say,
Oh, we did it.

-Tao Te Ching p. 24

I don't want to limit the game, so I reject rule #4.

whether or not those rules are accepted by Da Man. — T Clark

Woah, you can do that?

Provide us with rule #4 to redeem yourself.

What do you expect me to do, descend to Earth in human form and dish out a bunch of rules that have nothing to do with each other, like we find here in the game?

"Thought is like a mirror. One looking at it sees his image inside and thinks that there are two images, but the two are really one." - Perush ha-Aggadot, Azriel of Gerona

I haven't dropped the ball; no one seems to want to add a new rule.

God is changeless. — bahman

There are a lot of conceptions of God out there. Some of them make room for a God that is both changeless and changing; Ein Sof in the Kabbalah, Paul Tillich's "God Above God", etc. And the idea of us having "a relationship" with God is a pretty modern, Evangelical notion. I'm not aware of it existing in other religions in the way it does in Evangelical Christianity, but I could be unaware.

But this forum is full of so many "incredible thoughts"...

For some reason the title of this thread always makes me think of Michael Bolton's chorus on this song...sorry...

I don't understand.

Do you feel you haven't been listened to here?

Not at all; anyone, including yourself, can add a rule, and you've added several. That gives you power, and you can use that power in many ways, including oppression.