Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What is your duality argument?

I tried to write a list of them, having the category and sub-category.

Duality, (I know I speak the obvious), is the argument of two opposites, opposing sides, seems to always be two.

I think we all have an inherent desire for duality, as we were born out of one (man and woman), it's in our DNA, which is, you guessed it..a double helix (two opposing sides of protein strand).

Here we go, and again, add on but try to include a category.


1. Economics
Communist vs Capitalist
Citizen vs slave
rich vs poor
wealthy vs rich
poor vs impoverished

(poor doesn't mean the lack of "means", many religious people are poor by choice, b/c of how they view the rich, the poor may not carry debt or extra income, impoverished may have means but it never stays...the wealthy can create riches, the rich just have abundance, the rich only know one way to earn abundance, the wealthy can point the value in the unforeseen)


2. Gender
Male vs Female (even if someone is gay, they usually chose one side)


3. Politics
right vs left



4. Class
(even though most countries have two classes, some do think our middle class is a transition state to either becoming wealthy/rich or poor/impoverished).



5. Religion
Protestant vs Catholic
Muslim vs the non-Muslims (infidels according to them)


6. Sports
Usually two opposing teams


7. Propaganda vs realism (not sure which category that would go in)


8. DNA strand
double helix: the helix on the left vs the helix on the right

9. civil war
north vs south


I think it's natural for us to have this because it's part of our DNA, so although a person can have more then one category of arguments, some end up focusing on one, and yes, that includes race, as this is why some people who are racist feel it's natural, it's not the race opposition that is natural as much as it the need to be in opposition to something opposite. Let's take the Southern Bell vs South Afrikan farmers (or the Amish). Both maintain their racial heritage, but each still has a duality argument...guess what it is? Well, the southern bell sees the skin color as their god, and the Amish see work as a sacrifice to their god, so people can be in the same "race" and will naturally have a duality argument, this argument may never play out in words, it may play out in action. This doesn't justify all racism, but it does allow us to understand why some are very hard core, and maybe they find that their children sway one way or the other, probably maintaining their own duality argument that is totally unrelated to their parents, it happens, and I suspect it's in our core DNA that causes us to seek out this (1-9) duality. I've visited the Amish and watched them at work, they are very hard workers and industrious, this is because work is an offering to their God, so you can see how one group can have two sides (secular vs religious) or (ruling others vs self rule). I am not putting down southern bells or exalting the Amish, it's just an example to state a duality argument, nothing more, so please don't complicate it....(and please do not attack the Amish out of jealousy PLEASE).

Really looking forward to seeing what you think are new duality arguments that I couldn't think of...you can include your own if you want to disclose which one as your duality argument that has always been an issue or a passion in your life.

The human perspective
Good VS Evil
Indifference VS indecession

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
The human perspective
Good VS Evil
Indifference VS indecession


HOW COULD I MISS GOOD VS EVIL, that's classic in most dramas!!


Religion
heaven vs hell (only two options)

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
HOW COULD I MISS GOOD VS EVIL, that's classic in most dramas!!


Religion
heaven vs hell (only two options)

I was actually trying to catagorize good vs evil under the human perspective, but i guess it works just as well as a stand alone idea.


also i think you think to much, do people ever tell you that

Reality VS imgination

I dont know if thats an example of duality rather than a contrast of opposites

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
I was actually trying to catagorize good vs evil under the human perspective, but i guess it works just as well as a stand alone idea.


also i think you think to much, do people ever tell you that

Yeah, I knew you wanted it under Human Perspective, I would have added it on to the major list but the timer to edit ran out.

Oh, I wish I thought too much!

Human beings cannot survive on extremes, we need a balanced middle ground that incorporates idea's from both forces of the universe (Positive & Negative). Finding that balance is one of the purposes of life in my opinion.

My favorite is the Super Ego Vs The Id.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Human beings cannot survive on extremes, we need a balanced middle ground that incorporates idea's from both forces of the universe (Positive & Negative). Finding that balance is one of the purposes of life in my opinion.

Balance is like earth with respect to heaven and hell. We all know how to be practical, but when it comes to our "inner" core issues, we are decidedly one or the other, isn't that what we make ourselves chose in this world? Either male or female...city or country....right or left (politics)...we can all play politically correct, but that's ignoring the elephant in the room. We force people to chose one or the other, we force it on each other.

Ego vs Id (that's a good one)

ego = your defense to the outside world imposing on you
id = identity, your own personal identity


"A popular interpretation of the id is not that it is "convincing" the mind to ignore social norms, but rather in itself just does not take social norms into account when 'thinking' or 'acting'."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego

Waffles vs. Pancakes.

I can never decide what to have for breakfast.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Balance is like earth with respect to heaven and hell. We all know how to be practicle, but when it comes to our "inner" core issues, we are decidely one or the other, isn't that what we make ourselves choice in this world? Either male or female...city or country....right or left (politics)...we can all play politically correct, but that's igoring the elephant in the room.

That's really flawed reasoning, one extreme is not better then the other. The earth it's self is at a middle ground in the universe, Not too close the Sun and Not to far away the Sun. Life cannot thrive on extreme's, we need middle ground.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
That's really flawed reasoning, one extreme is not better then the other. The earth it's self is at a middle ground in the universe, Not too close the Sun and Not to far away the Sun. Life cannot thrive on extreme's, we need middle ground.


but you act as if ignoring the DNA aspect of our duality is somehow going to make everything to away, "everything in moderation" yes, even religious zealots say that, and yes, they are on one side of the argument when it comes to secular vs religious...there is nothing wrong with being honest with ourselves about this, really, it doesn't change things by hiding what we think about things. Democrats vs Republican (I doubt we will have a third party system anytime soon).

Politics
Democrats vs Republican

Witchcraft
the circle (female) vs the dot (male)

.
.
.
.
.
be creative.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Reality VS imgination

I dont know if thats an example of duality rather than a contrast of opposites

William Blake absolutely loved that one, As did a lot of Romantics.

Originally posted by Ymir
Waffles vs. Pancakes.

I can never decide what to have for breakfast.




Food
Vegetarian vs Vegan
Meat eaters vs non-mean eaters


(again, I am not dividing people, please don't see it this way, what this helps us to see is that it's natural for us to have at least one duality argument in our core purpose in life (religious vs nonreligious, for example)...btw, that was funny, waffles are the ubber class of pancakes, lol.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
but you act as if ignoring the DNA aspect of our duality is somehow going to make everything to away, "everything in moderation" yes, even religious zealots say that, and yes, they are on one side of the argument when it comes to secular vs religious...there is nothing wrong with being honest with ourselves about this, really, it doesn't change things by hiding what we think about things. Democrats vs Republican (I doubt we will have a third party system anytime soon).

Politics
Democrats vs Republican

Witchcraft
the circle (female) vs the dot (male)

.
.
.
.
.
be creative.

If you only accept one aspect of duality, your only accepting a half of the universe and not all. If you argue soley in absolutes, then you can never make exceptions.

Theres a strong need for many of the above. Its alright that there are two sides to things and it is good and part of who we are. That goes as long as one side is not clearly committing wrong acts that everyone agrees is wrong.

Reality vs. Fantasy...yes that is the one I like the most. I am not a big fan or reality sometimes.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
That goes as long as one side is not clearly committing wrong acts that everyone agrees is wrong.



The Majority isn't always right in it's view though. Whenever a Populuem argument is brought up to resolve an issue, that means the issue is not fully understood.

The Majority Vs the Individual

Here are it's Substratums:

Democracy Vs Despotism
Masses Vs Individual
Society Vs The Individual

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
I was actually trying to catagorize good vs evil under the human perspective, but i guess it works just as well as a stand alone idea.


also i think you think to much, do people ever tell you that I old her she thinks too little oftentimes.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
The Majority isn't always right. Whenever a populuem argument is brought up to resolve an issue, that means the issue is not fully understood.

The Majority Vs the Individual

yup, a lot of people have Me against the World complex...even in some heroic movies, it's the lone ranger against the world (of crime).

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
yup, a lot of people have Me against the World complex...even in some heroic movies, it's the lone ranger against the world (of crime).
I added more BTW. . .

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Theres a strong need for many of the above. Its alright that there are two sides to things and it is good and part of who we are. That goes as long as one side is not clearly committing wrong acts that everyone agrees is wrong.

Reality vs. Fantasy...yes that is the one I like the most. I am not a big fan or reality sometimes.

Yeah, I think most of us are on this board b/c we love sci-fi or comics (x-man was/is my favorite) either when we were little kids or even still ...

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I added more BTW. . .

Yeah, although, I hardly run into the sub-topics...but I'm sure they are out there!

Here's a Martial Arts one: Gentle Hand Vs Iron-Fist

duality vs sensability.

Originally posted by Alliance
duality vs sensability.


it was only a matter of time, i was expecting that response a lot sooner. although the act of calling duality insensible ignores most of the structure in the world around us..

Functionalism Vs. Marxism.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Functionalism Vs. Vitalism.

Fixed it for you

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
it was only a matter of time, i was expecting that response a lot sooner. although the act of calling duality insensible ignores most of the structure in the world around us..

No. Calling dualities insensable does not ignore the structure of the world, but rather ignores a false way in which we percieve structure in the world.

Originally posted by Alliance
No. Calling dualities insensable does not ignore the structure of the world, but rather ignores a false way in which we percieve structure in the world.

Because Reductionalism is the only way. . .Tell me, how do thoughts or information fit into Reductionalism?

Originally posted by Alliance
No. Calling dualities insensable does not ignore the structure of the world, but rather ignores a false way in which we percieve structure in the world.


hahaha, i am not arguing with you about a DNA issue of duality argument that is natural for us to chose in life/work/politics/games/spouse/debates, etc.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Because Reductionalism is the only way. . .Tell me, how do thoughts or information fit into Reductionalism?

I'm sure your referring to reductionism.

Reductionism is effective, but it depends on how it is used. If over used, it creates false categories, grouping things together that are logically distinct. 100% black and white gives you a 0% RESOLUTION.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Fixed it for you

I was talking about sociological theories, each with their own paradigm. So, no, you didn't fix it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I told (edit) her she thinks too little oftentimes.


hug it's ok bradock...

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I was talking about sociological theories, each with their own paradigm.

My bad, I didn't know functionalism was a social logical theory.

Originally posted by Alliance
I'm sure your referring to reductionism.

Reductionism is effective, but it depends on how it is used. If over used, it creates false categories, grouping things together that are logically distinct. 100% black and white gives you a 0% RESOLUTION.

It can lead to Materialism.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
It can lead to Materialism.

Well, materialism would be impossible without material posessions...yet I doubt you are taking that path.


are you saying reductionism can leat to materialism?

What about orgasmism?

droolio

With humans it's always one extreme or another. Never an interval between he two. Unless someone's already mentioned it:

Race
Black x White

Originally posted by FeceMan
What about orgasmism?

droolio

As soon as that becomes a topic of issue I'll comment... until then
droolio

God exists vs God doesn't exist
Reductionism vs Holism

Holism.......youpi

dancingcheese

So, you're talking about dichotomy?

Its a socially constructed process, especially of dichotomies such as male and female - and especially since those two are not actually in reality dichotomies (some males, may feel and count themselves as females and vice versa, people who have changed their sex or intersexuality).

Worded the last bit wrong. Dualities exist, but are NOT a dichotomy.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Dualities in reality, do not really exlusivelly exist. There is always a middle.

That doesn't remove dualities.

There can be a middle and still be two polar opposites. And sometimes you don't even have that.

For magnetic north and south the middle ground is basicly nothing at all.

At Ralph Wilson Stadium in Orchard Park, NY, there exists no duality, for if you're not a Buffalo Bills fan, you get beaten and shoved into a porto-potty in front of your girl. True story from last year.

Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
With humans it's always one extreme or another. Never an interval between he two. Unless someone's already mentioned it:

Race
Black x White


YES, peer pressure, people will get others to make that person chose either way, and from what i know if the blacks want to "put that person in their place", they will try to get whites to do it for them, like pawns or something, I can use myself as an example, I am mixed Indian and Hispanic, not one of those groups try to dominate me, they look at me and can tell I am part of them, but they will not get whites to try peer-pressure a person into being in the group, that' s b/c they don't need to, when blacks do this, when i see it in my life or the life of others, it shows that the group really isn't a good group to be associated with, b/c when you have something good, you don't need to bully people into it for fear that they may never have anything to do with that group, plenty of indians and hispanics only associate with whites, and i never witnessed other indians or hispanics bullying them into "staying in their place", but i have seen this tactic done PLENTY OF TIMES by blacks or haitians. remember FOTN, he claims dominican, but again, i never heard dominicans attack whites that way, ONLY HAITIANS, very racist people, who pretend as if they are not, but uses people like FOTN to rally the "team". I've NEVER met a Dominican that talks the way he does, he talks like a pro-black Isalmist/Muslim like the farakahn group. if the group was a good group, they would never have to harass people or get whites to "put them in their place"...the only reason a group will do that is if there is something wrong. If you have a nice house, do you have to beg people to visit it? Do you have to harass the neighbhors where you live that you should move out and live among the nicer homes? Of course not! But you could see someone who PRETENDS to have something nice, and then harasses you and people who they think you get along with to "pin you in the place they want to see you", which is right beside them, why? that's slavery right there, but just using whites to do it on the other end. pro-blacks have more to gain out of this then regular blacks who probably can careless what another human being is thinking or doing, and part of those pro-blacks are Haitians, as FOTN keeps saying he is Dominican, but I HAVE NEVER MEET SOMEONE WHO IS SO (mixed black) FORCEFUL AND MEAN SPIRITED TOWARD WHITES (or any other group) UNLESS THEY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH HAITIANS OR PRO-BLACKS. They are the ones who want one drop rule so they will have more people to control.

internal conflict i think. {sorta freudian} other than the fact that we dont have unidimensional thinking {which creates purely thought based conflict} and the fact that our initial biological programming{instinct} is in conflict with both our inability as phyical beings to do whatever we want and also with the society's norms etc. this nurtures from birth, a thinking pattern based on conflict{id even go so far as to state that contemplation as wee see it, wudnt be POSSIBLE without internal conflict} which often times feals a partial sort of internal PEACE when conflict is in the atmosphere. that sorta translates into our communication, way of life, knowledge, how we retain memory and ofcourse, language, the usage of which, further reinforced the conlicting views.

Originally posted by Mindship
God exists vs God doesn't exist
Reductionism vs Holism

you mean something like:

atheism vs God

gnostic vs atheism


Regarding Reductionism vs Holism:

I know that when a student is studying, it's good for them to figure out if they think holistically or if they like to work from the bottom up. Teachers have their own style, some start from the bottom up and others work from the big picture and work down...

Originally posted by leonheartmm
internal conflict i think. {sorta freudian} other than the fact that we dont have unidimensional thinking {which creates purely thought based conflict} and the fact that our initial biological programming{instinct} is in conflict with both our inability as phyical beings to do whatever we want and also with the society's norms etc. this nurtures from birth, a thinking pattern based on conflict{id even go so far as to state that contemplation as wee see it, wudnt be POSSIBLE without internal conflict} which often times feals a partial sort of internal PEACE when conflict is in the atmosphere. that sorta translates into our communication, way of life, knowledge, how we retain memory and ofcourse, language, the usage of which, further reinforced the conlicting views.

do you feel that this is because of our dna in itself, the fact that it's a duality of helixes, one on the right and the other on the left...where do you feel this intrinsic duality exists in our physical body? (DNA, the brain wiring, etc.)?


http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/images/dna_bases.gif

which kinda looks like (caduceus):

http://www.crystalinks.com/caduceus.png

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
you mean something like:
atheism vs God
gnostic vs atheism
I was thinking of writing "Theism vs Atheism," but I wanted less emphasis on the belief systems, as opposed to the central concepts in each belief system (I'm splitting hairs, I know). I was even thinking of writing it as "Reality as Big Machine vs Reality as Consciousness," this way minimizing any preconceived/Biblical notions of "God."


Regarding Reductionism vs Holism:

I know that when a student is studying, it's good for them to figure out if they think holistically or if they like to work from the bottom up. Teachers have their own style, some start from the bottom up and others work from the big picture and work down...
I was thinking in terms of, will a more complete picture of reality come from a reductionistic approach or a holistic one?

A third duality, related (at least in part) to the above dualities:
A teleological universe vs a nonteleological universe.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
hug it's ok bradock...

Aww, you nice, black lady hug

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
do you feel that this is because of our dna in itself, the fact that it's a duality of helixes, one on the right and the other on the left...where do you feel this intrinsic duality exists in our physical body? (DNA, the brain wiring, etc.)?


http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/images/dna_bases.gif

which kinda looks like (caduceus):

http://www.crystalinks.com/caduceus.png

i dont think its cause of our complementary{or conflicting as u see it} base pairing of dna at all. even though from a mathematical perspective its conflicting, the same relatoin/operator/function doesnt hold true in what we see as real life and has no consequence on BEHAVIOURAL or MENTAL conflict. also, the dna bases UNZIP before trancripton to mRNA and tRNA finally creating the protien in question. i think its cause of the reason i mentioned earlier.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Aww, you nice, black lady hug

Awe, you nice (white) conduit person who likes to be used by blacks to "put them in their place" even though I said I am not a black person by idenity or culture, who thinks you have the right to tell someone who they are b/c the pro-blacks want you to and work against a person's FREE WILL idenity unless the issue is of gayness, ops, I meant homosexuality, and you know darn well if pro-blacks weren't using peer pressure for you to do this, you wouldn't concern yourself one way or another with what I identified with, but for you to dismiss your own white cultural value of respecting a person's free will that is well known with white culture, just to be the "black pusher" to impose "who does she think she is" and "too high on the stratus" or whatever these pro-blacks tell you to get you to be their pawn. Now that was a run on sentence!

It's ok, I already know their game, you'll figure it out soon enough.


hug

Originally posted by lil bitchiness

Dualities in reality, do not really exlusivelly exist. There is always a middle.

So...I take it you changed your opinion on opposites as well then?

Couldn't you have done so before I got banned?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
The opposite of me is you, actually.

Opposite of me as an object would be male.

''Here's a list of things I'd like to know the opposite of then:''

Flying - falling
Drowning - swimming, or being on the land, not drowning
Chocolate - no chocolate
TV - no TV
Book - No book
Bardock42 - no bardock42
George W. Bush - No George W. Bush
The Sun - No sun
The USA - Any other country, or no USA
Music - silence or no music
Earth - air, or no earth
Five - minus 5, or no 5, or 0
Zero - something - any other number that isn't 'zero' is its opposite.
The letter "B" - no letter B
The Batman Sign - No batman sign

Opposite of something that IS, is something that ISN'T that. How complicated is that.

Something is something, because its not the other.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Awe, you nice (white) conduit person who likes to be used by blacks to "put them in their place" even though I said I am not a black person by idenity or culture, who thinks you have the right to tell someone who they are b/c the pro-blacks want you to and work against a person's FREE WILL idenity unless the issue is of gayness, ops, I meant homosexuality, and you know darn well if pro-blacks weren't using peer pressure for you to do this, you wouldnt' care one way or another what I identified with, but to leave the respect of a person's free will that is well known with white culture, just to be the "black pusher" to impose who thinks they are thinking they are too high on the stratus or whatever these pro-blacks tell you to get you to be their pawn. It's ok, I already know their game, you'll figure it out soon enough.


hug

That makes no sense.

I don't even care for Negros. I don't even know any Negro outside of KMC.

I hate FOTN as much as you if not more.

But you are a freaking racist weirdo, you are no better than him in my book.




hug

Originally posted by Mindship
I was thinking of writing "Theism vs Atheism," but I wanted less emphasis on the belief systems, as opposed to the central concepts in each belief system (I'm splitting hairs, I know). I was even thinking of writing it as "Reality as Big Machine vs Reality as Consciousness," this way minimizing any preconceived/Biblical notions of "God."



I was thinking in terms of, will a more complete picture of reality come from a reductionistic approach or a holistic one?

A third duality, related (at least in part) to the above dualities:
A teleological universe vs a nonteleological universe.


Are you thinking "big machine" as the collective consciousness of a group of people? Someone coined the phrase "borhian mind" but that never took off. As Neils Borh was rumored to believe that the mind is a collective network but he was often mocked and not really treated with a lot of respect among his peer group. Followers of science doesn't like to be agreeable with anything "too spiritual" or religious, aka psuedo-science. They can very snobbish toward "believers".

Originally posted by Bardock42
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Awe, you nice (white) conduit person who likes to be used by blacks to "put them in their place" even though I said I am not a black person by idenity or culture, who thinks you have the right to tell someone who they are b/c the pro-blacks want you to and work against a person's FREE WILL idenity unless the issue is of gayness, ops, I meant homosexuality, and you know darn well if pro-blacks weren't using peer pressure for you to do this, you wouldnt' care one way or another what I identified with, but to leave the respect of a person's free will that is well known with white culture, just to be the "black pusher" to impose who thinks they are thinking they are too high on the stratus or whatever these pro-blacks tell you to get you to be their pawn. It's ok, I already know their game, you'll figure it out soon enough.


hug

That makes no sense.

I don't even care for Negros. I don't even know any Negro outside of KMC.

I hate FOTN as much as you if not more.

But you are a freaking racist weirdo, you are no better than him in my book.




hug


How can I be a racist weirdo BY YOU if you don't care for Negros! Now, that doesn't make any sense. I can careless how you feel about negroes, but you sure are working for them! You can't be good at chess, I would be surprised if you are good at chess, b/c you should be able to see the games that YOU are playing into, you are a pawn, it doesn't matter if you dislike the ones using peer pressure to get you to behave and think the way you are thinking, you are still DOING it, so you are still a pawn.

And btw, who cares if you find me weird or not, unlike yourself, I actually respect a person's free will opinion, you could tell me that you hate all humans and love only cats and birds, I am not going to harass you or bother you or try to "put you in your place". If that's what you identify with, then be my guest, I'm not your god, and I won't get other posters to bother you b/c of your beliefs or experiences in life, it's just not my kind of culture to harass someone and heckel them just b/c they do not like to be dominated, I won't dominate or heckel someone for expressing their opinion, I won't dominate or heckel someone just b/c they don't want to be around a group that has bothered them in the past and the present. I just don't play dominate/heckel peer pressure games, something that you lords don't seem to understand, I don't break from peer pressure, lol. I don't mind being called weirdo. I am what I am, and I am confortable knowing what happened to me and who I identify with ON THE INSIDE, if that makes you uncomfortable, my apologies, but, I do not play peer pressure click games (shakes head), I am not that kind of person to break and the fact that they want me to break is one of the myraid reasons why I distain them, unlike you, I actually have reasons for disliking negroes and they are real and tangable reasons. If you find that weird, go ahead and feel that way, think positive or negative, I am not your god or lord or master, so think what you wish!


hug

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina



How can I be a racist weirdo BY YOU if you don't care for Negros! Now, that doesn't make any sense. I can careless how you feel about negroes, but you sure are working for them! You can't be good at chess, I would be surprised if you are good at chess, b/c you should be able to see the games that YOU are playing into, you are a pawn, it doesn't matter if you dislike the ones using peer pressure to get you to behave and think the way you are thinking, you are still DOING it, so you are still a pawn.

And btw, who cares if you find me weird or not, unlike yourself, I actually respect a person's free will opinion, you could tell me that you hate all humans and love only cats and birds, I am not going to harass you or bother you or try to "put you in your place". If that's what you identify with, then be my guest, I'm not your god, and I won't get other posters to bother you b/c of your beliefs or experiences in life, it's just not my kind of culture to harass someone and heckel them just b/c they do not like to be dominated.


hug

I am working for Blacks?

How?

And where can I get paid?

And if you are not going to harass me if I say "I think all humans should be killed" and am serious about it then there is just something wrong with you. Not all opinions are equal, contrary to what you would like to believe.

I'm half Japanese and half Black

What's with the constant racism? What happened to the whole "God made everyone equal" argument. Just because someone has arguably darker skin pigments than someone else, they're dirty or insignificant?

Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
I'm half Japanese and half Black

What's with the constant racism? What happened to the whole "God made everyone equal" argument. Just because someone has arguably darker skin pigments than someone else, they're dirty or insignificant?

Exactly. God is omnibenevolent and can't be swayed by trivialities but he hates you cause you're black.

Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
I'm half Japanese and half Black

What's with the constant racism? What happened to the whole "God made everyone equal" argument. Just because someone has arguably darker skin pigments than someone else, they're dirty or insignificant?

I don't believe in God.

And yes.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I am working for Blacks?

How?

And where can I get paid?

And if you are not going to harass me if I say "I think all humans should be killed" and am serious about it then there is just something wrong with you. Not all opinions are equal, contrary to what you would like to believe.

Alot of people are annihilistic and think warlike, I've debated with plenty who think we ought to bomb Iraq with children, I don't heckle them or harass them (we actually believe in freedom of speech and expression here). I just will simply state my argument as to why I disagree and sometimes, we have had to agree to disagree. I can still talk with them on other issues without harassing them b/c they think differently about Iraq.

You work for them by working with their ideology to dominate a person. If a person doesn't want to identify with a group, it's not my place to be a pusher in that person's life and try to force my "hand" to make them "stay in their place" or whatever place I think they should be in or whatever place the Pro-x group who actually hates whites and jealous of them...it would make no sense for me to work on their behalf. I am nobody's lord or master, so I allow others to tell me what and who they are, I don't impose it on them, as I don't want it imposed on me. So, I don't heckle gays, even if, no body would know how I view gays based on how I treat them, as I do not beleive in bothering or harassing people who think differently and what I mean by differently is not DEGRADING me or my culture or way of life BY HARASSING. I may not always agree with every gay issue, but I don't harass or heckle.

It's just like the issue in Alabama, blacks use to tell me that it was whites who wanted the one drop rule for any person who even looks whites but has one drop of black blood is black...well, that doesn't exactly work on the advantage of whites at all, and if any white person goes for it, they are blindly playing into pro-black hands, as plenty of whites are mixed with Moors in Europe, so really, that would advance the confidence of pro-blacks to go after the whites who have any black mixture at all. If you think in terms of advantages, that works in the advantage of pro-blacks and against whites.

So, yeah, I do feel you are working for them by the way you are feeding into their hand of advantage, they have a particular reason for wanting you to do this and you can't see it right now, but one day you will. They are jealous hearted people who have a huge ego structure, and just like it plays out in the DNA issue of dominance, they are people who love to dominate...that's one of many reasons why they do not get along with other blacks...they easily get jealous and ego issues, and start to play dominant and the other person tries to defend themselves, and it goes around and around, they DO NOT RESPECT FREE WILL, that is not what they are about. Whites have more diversity within their culture then blacks, blacks can't take too much, any sense of strength or that could be scene as "superior" is something that has to be taken down (hence the notorious "n" word...it first starts out in dominating in DNA, and works outward...as a group...i have had very bad experiences with the group and don't want the identity of that group, that's my belief, and should be respected in a free society). If you heckle me to peer pressure me into the group I am distant from(and explained most of the very damaging experiences that was in the past AND CURRENTLY experiencing, then you are inadvertently working on the behalf of that group, as they do not like those who exercise their HATE FREE WILL.


hug

Originally posted by Bardock42
Originally posted by lil bitchiness

Dualities in reality, do not really exlusivelly exist. There is always a middle.

So...I take it you changed your opinion on opposites as well then?

Couldn't you have done so before I got banned?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
The opposite of me is you, actually.

Opposite of me as an object would be male.

''Here's a list of things I'd like to know the opposite of then:''

Flying - falling
Drowning - swimming, or being on the land, not drowning
Chocolate - no chocolate
TV - no TV
Book - No book
Bardock42 - no bardock42
George W. Bush - No George W. Bush
The Sun - No sun
The USA - Any other country, or no USA
Music - silence or no music
Earth - air, or no earth
Five - minus 5, or no 5, or 0
Zero - something - any other number that isn't 'zero' is its opposite.
The letter "B" - no letter B
The Batman Sign - No batman sign

Opposite of something that IS, is something that ISN'T that. How complicated is that.

Something is something, because its not the other.

I worded that wrong. Dualities in the matters of dichotomy.

Everything DOES have an opposite. Male is opposite of female. It is just NOT a dichotomy.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That doesn't remove dualities.

There can be a middle and still be two polar opposites. And sometimes you don't even have that.

For magnetic north and south the middle ground is basicly nothing at all.
Worded the thing complitely wrong.

Edited.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
do you feel that this is because of our dna in itself, the fact that it's a duality of helixes, one on the right and the other on the left...where do you feel this intrinsic duality exists in our physical body? (DNA, the brain wiring, etc.)?


http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/images/dna_bases.gif

which kinda looks like (caduceus):

http://www.crystalinks.com/caduceus.png

level 1:non existance-birth of conciounce/existance

level 2:conciounce-thoughts

level 3:thoughts{having initially no boundries or hurdles} - inability to realise your thoughts in action or even by the inability of your physical brain's ability to process more than a certain type of data/thought

this conflict of thoughts/inability to have them, creates desire as desire as an emotion, only comes in, when youve known how it feals to not be able to realise sumthing that your thoughts cud think of.


level 4:thoughts{with the limits put on it by the brain} - conflicting thoughts, born from the anomaly that was created by the hurdle which was able to stop your initial mode of thinking

level 5: thoughts{conflict with other thoughts and inability of the brain to process an infinite type pf thought} - supression of the desires and fealings and modes of thinking developed by the thoughts i just mentioned, by society, secodary heridetiary charactereistics{sex, biochemical strong emotions} etc.

this goes on and on to create the conflict in all things, well in the rather idealistic part of my current{and severly, chronologically varying, sentimental mind, lol}. ofcourse in reality, its nowhere near as linear as that, specially if you see your intial conciounce as nothing at first and developing due t the expiriences u have.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Are you thinking "big machine" as the collective consciousness of a group of people? Someone coined the phrase "borhian mind" but that never took off. As Neils Borh was rumored to believe that the mind is a collective network but he was often mocked and not really treated with a lot of respect among his peer group. Followers of science doesn't like to be agreeable with anything "too spiritual" or religious, aka psuedo-science. They can very snobbish toward "believers".
Big Machine as in, void of (Universal/Cosmic) Consciousness. Another way to put this: Reality as understood by Empirical Science vs Reality as understood by Meditation/Mysticism.
Put another way: Is Reality as a Whole conscious or not?
Or even: Materialism vs Consciousness (as in, what is the ultimate foundation of reality?)

Originally posted by leonheartmm
level 1:non existance-birth of conciounce/existance

level 2:conciounce-thoughts

level 3:thoughts{having initially no boundries or hurdles} - inability to realise your thoughts in action or even by the inability of your physical brain's ability to process more than a certain type of data/thought

this conflict of thoughts/inability to have them, creates desire as desire as an emotion, only comes in, when youve known how it feals to not be able to realise sumthing that your thoughts cud think of.


level 4:thoughts{with the limits put on it by the brain} - conflicting thoughts, born from the anomaly that was created by the hurdle which was able to stop your initial mode of thinking

level 5: thoughts{conflict with other thoughts and inability of the brain to process an infinite type pf thought} - supression of the desires and fealings and modes of thinking developed by the thoughts i just mentioned, by society, secodary heridetiary charactereistics{sex, biochemical strong emotions} etc.

this goes on and on to create the conflict in all things, well in the rather idealistic part of my current{and severly, chronologically varying, sentimental mind, lol}. ofcourse in reality, its nowhere near as linear as that, specially if you see your intial conciounce as nothing at first and developing due t the expiriences u have.


This is all abstractions, you haven't showed any PHYSICAL evidence, where does this idea of duality exist in the body? You've only talked about the mind, which is still a debatable issue of existance b/c it's not a physcial thing. See? Can you show a physical area that this abstraction takes place? (please don't say it's the universe :/ you can mention the universe, but please help me understand how that is a physical place...lol...in other words, were does this happen in the universe..and no, i won't poke fun of you if you tell me...i'm broad minded that way ).

You're all a bunch of ****in rascists!

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
This is all abstractions, you haven't showed any PHYSICAL evidence, where does this idea of duality exist in the body? You've only talked about the mind, which is still a debatable issue of existance b/c it's not a physcial thing. See? Can you show a physical area that this abstraction takes place? (please don't say it's the universe :/ you can mention the universe, but please help me understand how that is a physical place...lol...in other words, were does this happen in the universe..and no, i won't poke fun of you if you tell me...i'm broad minded that way ).

actually i dont have the mathematical qualification right now or the ability to PROVE sumthing like that. ill give you an example though, of a system in which such interactions/phenomenon can possibly happen{although that might be even vaguer}. are you familiar with the unus mundud{although im talking about only the non inherent part of it}. the idea that a collective conciousness can rise from a number of parts working independantly, having no conciounce of their own. but in a certain persepective, also have some connection which is not willing{be it, proximity in space and time}, CAN actually give rise to a coeherent collective conciounce which is at the same time, a direct effect of, and dependant on its parts, but also is completely free of them and independant of them{a virtual constructs}. i think our minds are something like that, they have a form of collectiv conciounce based on our brain cell. think for instance, my thoughts are made up ob brain cells, electrical signals, and synapses. and yet none of these things ARE thoughts, they only constitute thoughts. thoughts are a purely virtual construct which has accumulated so much CONTEXT{from the physical CONTENT, provided by the parts which have no thoughts/conciounce} that it is able to partially close in on itself and exist/develop as a seperate entity from its physical constituents. ofcourse, paradoxically, they are directly affected by the physical parts. {im terrible at explaining this stuff, srry}. the main reason i say this is because, if we were nothing more than the sum of our parts, we would only ACT LIKE we had a conciounce, or it would only be a BEHAVIOURAL conciounce so to speak, nothing would change PHYSICALLY and our physical bodies would act like robots programmed to act like they had conciousnesses. yet we do FEAL self aware{independant from acting like it}, a TRUE self awareness does exist which seems to be dynamic, chronologically, and i cant find an explanation in the purely physical state of the world, logically{well there are partial ones, but not sumthing that can logically satisfy itself as a complete definition, to me}. ofcourse, people {me included} find it hard to accept how a purely virtual construct can EXIST at all. its the same argument for computers, are they just systems of entropy spatially set up in such a way as to SEEM to us to be thinking/calculating, or create the illusion of actual processing{when arguably, their molecules are not ruled by motives/purpose, but by randomness} or is it ACTUALLY, at some level, THINKING/processing/solving? it depends on perspective, but the problem with conciounce is, that we cant simply say that perspective alone can create or destroy it as it undeniably exists in us{or atleast, for me, verifyibly, in me}. thas why i cant really give you physical piece of evidence, just what my cognition has come to see, in partiality.

Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
You're all a bunch of ****in rascists!

No...I'm not.

****ing gook.

Originally posted by Alliance
Well, materialism would be impossible without material posessions...yet I doubt you are taking that path.


are you saying reductionism can leat to materialism?
I'm talking about a different type of materialism.

Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
You're all a bunch of ****in rascists!


Well, maybe according to the duality argument, some may genetically desire to be that way, and although you may not have that same argument, you probably have another (but just happens to be socially appropriate), but racism was socially normal at one time too, so what's socially acceptable argument doesn't always match your inner world argument of duality, sucks but true. You either have to find friends who agree or keep it hidden inside, but it's all the same if you feel that way. And if it's part of your duality argument, all the peer pressure in the world won't change the inner person, it just pushes it on the inside and hidden. Some think they can punish a person into changing, that's one reason some desire freedom of speech, to know what is in a person's mind so they can exact some revenge, whereas, others desire freedom of speech to express themselves and exchange ideas. The same venue, but different ways a person uses it against or for another.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No...I'm not.

****ing gook.

What happened to "Yes, it does make you dirty by being a darker skin pigment than everyone else"? Correct me if I misinterpreted, but isn't that racist?

I'm sorry I just don't have the mentality that suggests that any two people are different because of race. Black x White is a duality, but it doesn't have to be a mindset! I think of everyone as equal! I treat everyone the same, regardless of creed, color, or religion...

Originally posted by leonheartmm
actually i dont have the mathematical qualification right now or the ability to PROVE sumthing like that. ill give you an example though, of a system in which such interactions/phenomenon can possibly happen{although that might be even vaguer}. are you familiar with the unus mundud{although im talking about only the non inherent part of it}. the idea that a collective conciousness can rise from a number of parts working independantly, having no conciounce of their own. but in a certain persepective, also have some connection which is not willing{be it, proximity in space and time}, CAN actually give rise to a coeherent collective conciounce which is at the same time, a direct effect of, and dependant on its parts, but also is completely free of them and independant of them{a virtual constructs}. i think our minds are something like that, they have a form of collectiv conciounce based on our brain cell. think for instance, my thoughts are made up ob brain cells, electrical signals, and synapses. and yet none of these things ARE thoughts, they only constitute thoughts. thoughts are a purely virtual construct which has accumulated so much CONTEXT{from the physical CONTENT, provided by the parts which have no thoughts/conciounce} that it is able to partially close in on itself and exist/develop as a seperate entity from its physical constituents. ofcourse, paradoxically, they are directly affected by the physical parts. {im terrible at explaining this stuff, srry}. the main reason i say this is because, if we were nothing more than the sum of our parts, we would only ACT LIKE we had a conciounce, or it would only be a BEHAVIOURAL conciounce so to speak, nothing would change PHYSICALLY and our physical bodies would act like robots programmed to act like they had conciousnesses. yet we do FEAL self aware{independant from acting like it}, a TRUE self awareness does exist which seems to be dynamic, chronologically, and i cant find an explanation in the purely physical state of the world, logically{well there are partial ones, but not sumthing that can logically satisfy itself as a complete definition, to me}. ofcourse, people {me included} find it hard to accept how a purely virtual construct can EXIST at all. its the same argument for computers, are they just systems of entropy spatially set up in such a way as to SEEM to us to be thinking/calculating, or create the illusion of actual processing{when arguably, their molecules are not ruled by motives/purpose, but by randomness} or is it ACTUALLY, at some level, THINKING/processing/solving? it depends on perspective, but the problem with conciounce is, that we cant simply say that perspective alone can create or destroy it as it undeniably exists in us{or atleast, for me, verifyibly, in me}. thas why i cant really give you physical piece of evidence, just what my cognition has come to see, in partiality.

Ok, so this is abstraction, once you mentioned needed mathematical proof (argument)...

Black and white are as dual as peanut butter and jelly.

Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
I'm sorry I just don't have the mentality that suggests that any two people are different because of race. Black x White is a duality, but it doesn't have to be a mindset! I think of everyone as equal! I treat everyone the same, regardless of creed, color, or religion...

Bravo! Your inner thinking matches the outer world of TODAY, that is a matter of perspective, as some have a different perspective that WAS ONCE supported by society. So, what I am stating is that everyone has an inherent duality argumet from birth, for some it's race and others it's religion and so forth (politics, etc.), just b/c you don't see religion as a strong polarity argument doesn't mean that others don't, or that peer pressure will take this away. I assert that this is a physcal issue, DNA, so it's a machine that drives us to have a duality, it may not be race, it could be a number of issues, and the duality I am talking about isn't just recognition of black vs white, but the TAKING OF A SIDE, that is inherent for us, depending on if it's popular, depends on if we decide to express it so readily. Racists end up mistaking their own racism as natural, but what's really natural is their strong desire to HAVE A STRONG OPPOSING POSITION from birth. Everyone has one duality argument, that is what I am ascerting, it may not be just religious or political or racial, and as long as it agrees with the society of the time or age, it's going to sound as if you are the moral right. If it doesn't, you are the moral wrong. I know, to admit you have no duality argument is to suggest that you are more sensible then the rest of the world, when really, these same folks happen to have the same duality argument as their soceity, so it almost seems as if they don't have one.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Black and white are as dual as peanut butter and jelly.


you're still imposing your duality "rules" of black vs white...yet your opposition from someone born with a different duality doesn't change their inherent structure and therefore, perspective on the matter, just b/c you think that way doesn't change how others think. I could say that islam and non-muslims are like peanut butter and jelly, that doesn't change the taliban.


our body is a machine, and our dna is a machine, if we are born with a duality argument, we will work toward expressing that argument either in silence (if society opposes it) or outward (if we are around friends). it doesn't matter if it is racial or religious or whatever, once you understand it's a natural aspect, then, even the racists will stop stratching their heads wondering why SOME of their children don't take to that kind of thinking but branch off into another type of argument, that's because it's natural for us to HAVE ONE, it's part of who we are, no matter if it's socially ok or not for us to express the side we are on.

Dichotomy is a touchy topic in itself, solely because of very contreversial topics...

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
you're still imposing your duality "rules" of black vs white as something that maybe different from someone born with a different duality and therefore, perspective on the matter, just b/c you think that way doesn't change how others think. I could say that islam and non-muslims are like peanut butter and jelly, that doesn't change the taliban.
Huh?

Listen, I was talking about Racial Duality, There is really no such thing. Race is a construct of the Eugenics/Dysgenics movement.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Huh?

Listen, I was talking about Racial Duality, There is really no such thing. Race is a construct of the Eugenics/Dysgenics movement.

I doubt it, race was an issue even in ancient Greece and Rome. They did have some who wrote about racial difference, why? Because it felt natural for them to do so. That's just like saying "there is no such thing as religion" and thinking that will solve all the religious wars in the Middle East. You say something doesn't exist b/c it feels natural for you to do so.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
I doubt it, race was an issue even in ancient Greece and Rome. They did have some who wrote about racial difference, why? Because it felt natural for them to do so. That's just like saying "there is no such thing as religion" and thinking that will solve all the religious wars in the Middle East. You say something doesn't exist b/c it feels natural for you to do so.
And, Eugenics/Dysgenics has been around since ancient babylon.
Also, what you said apply's to you as well.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And, eugenics has been around since ancient babylon.


And so has religion and laws (Mesopotamia)...it exists for a long time b/c it's part of the human DNA structure to pick a side of religion, law, race (eugenics), class, etc. Just because you say that class doesn't exist doesn't mean anything to the ones who's DNA structural argument says that it does....erasing someone else's reality doesn't change them, burning them or punishing them doesn't change them...remember your European history... one can burn books but all the DNA structure will do is create people with photographic memory!

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
And so has religion and laws (Mesopotania)...it exists for a long time b/c it's part of the human dna structure to pick a side of religion, law, race (eugenics), class, etc. Just because you say that class doesn't exist doesn't mean anything to the ones who's dna structural argument says that it does....erasing someone elses reality doesn't change them, burning them or punishing them doesn't change them...remember your European history... one can burn books but all the dna structure will do is create people with photographic memory!
Religion and Eugenics are not synonmous. Plus, many idea's in religion are universal.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Religion and Eugenics are not synonmous. Plus, many idea's in religion are universal.

Sorry if I can't communicate any better then I have.

Religion
Race (Eugenics)
Class
ect.

are all a part of various CATEGORIES OF a duality argument, that is why it's universal (religion, race or racism, law, government, etc.), you will not find these arguments in animals or other mammals, but you will find this among humans, as it's part of our DNA to have this type of duality, we have no choice in which one we pick, but we tend to feel at rest when our society on the outside reflects the same side of our daulity argument....again, burning books just creates those with photographic memory, you can erase or try to pretend it doesn't exist but you are only doing this b/c it FEELS NATURAL TO YOU, DON'T YOU GET IT, IT'S NATURAL FOR YOU AND THOSE WHO THINK LIKE YOU to pretend as if the side you dislike doesn't even exist, but that doesnt' change a darn thing for the ones who don't, peer pressure or not.

I can call someone who is a religious fanatic a creep or whatever, if they have a genetic duality argument, all the heckling in the world won't change their position. I can tell them that religion doesn't even exist, b/c in my mind, I don't want it to, but in their mind, they won't care b/c it feels natural for them to be a religious fanatic. WE do what is natural for us to do. Again, I've read online that some racists are having trouble with their family or friends taking a hold of the same ideals, well, it's not something they are into b/c it's NOT NATURAL FOR THEM, but IT'S NATURAL FOR THE PERSON WHO IS. We do what is natural for us, if it's no meat and only veggies, it's a daulity argument that the person is imposing on themselves and would give you hell if they found out you purposly gave them meat souce just to prove a point that it doesn't matter if it's meat or veggies. For some it's really an allergy and it's also part of their duality argument, for others it's just b/c it's a clickish or cool thing to say or do, but that's not their duality argument, your duality argument is what you will fight for and die for.

Everything is not "x" or "y." Hell, there is more than black and white just in race. Where are the Asians? Latinos? Eskimos? Seriously though, you are just trying to make shit easy.

As I said in something I wrote:

"The word good is synonymous with all things
The word bad to puppeteer the naive"

Good and bad is simply based on perception. People do things that do not find morally "good" but they justify it to themselves which is why they do it regardless. That's how it works. Soldiers in war might find killing "bad" but you are killing to protect your own which is your own "good."

Besides, most stories stick to "good v. evil" because people can't seem to fathom that there is a third side involved. It'll confuse the construct of what we all are taught.

Stop trying to find simple answers. You will miss a lot out on life.

I still think it is funny Czarina is playing into the very bullshit she is accusing everyone else of. It's cute, it really is.

Originally posted by chithappens
Everything is not "x" or "y." Hell, there is more than black and white just in race. Where are the Asians? Latinos? Eskimos? Seriously though, you are just trying to make shit easy.

As I said in something I wrote:

"The word good is synonymous with all things
The word bad to puppeteer the naive"

Good and bad is simply based on perception. People do things that do not find morally "good" but they justify it to themselves which is why they do it regardless. That's how it works. Soldiers in war might find killing "bad" but you are killing to protect your own which is your own "good."

Besides, most stories stick to "good v. evil" because people can't seem to fathom that there is a third side involved. It'll confuse the construct of what we all are taught.

Stop trying to find simple answers. You will miss a lot out on life.

I still think it is funny Czarina is playing into the very bullshit she is accusing everyone else of. It's cute, it really is.

Exactly. . .

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Exactly. . .

burning books only creates a DNA that allows for photographic memory, you can pretend as if it doesn't exist (burning books), but it doesn't change a thing, removing the physical structure does't remove anything, the DNA will just make up for what was subtracted.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
burning books only creates a DNA that allows for photographic memory, you can pretend as if it doesn't exist (burning books), but it doesn't change a thing, removing the physical structure does't remove anything, the DNA will just make up for what was subtracted.

That didn't answer anything. The "exactly" was talking about this....

Originally posted by chithappens
Everything is not "x" or "y." Hell, there is more than black and white just in race. Where are the Asians? Latinos? Eskimos? Seriously though, you are just trying to make shit easy.

As I said in something I wrote:

"The word good is synonymous with all things
The word bad to puppeteer the naive"

Good and bad is simply based on perception. People do things that do not find morally "good" but they justify it to themselves which is why they do it regardless. That's how it works. Soldiers in war might find killing "bad" but you are killing to protect your own which is your own "good."

Besides, most stories stick to "good v. evil" because people can't seem to fathom that there is a third side involved. It'll confuse the construct of what we all are taught.

Stop trying to find simple answers. You will miss a lot out on life.

I still think it is funny Czarina is playing into the very bullshit she is accusing everyone else of. It's cute, it really is.

Mind addressing it?

Originally posted by chithappens
That didn't answer anything. The "exactly" was talking about this....



Mind addressing it?


ignored.....why even bother addressing me when i said you were ignored a long time ago...

I don't know if this has been said and I don't feel like sifting.

Predestination Vs Free will

Been struggling with that since I can remember.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
ignored.....why even bother addressing me when i said you were ignored a long time ago...

Hahaha, ok ok. Someone just copy what I said and paste it. You have my permission

Your wasting your tie chit, as long as people believe they have all the answers they won't ask questions.

Yeah but it is sad she really honestly does not see she is doing what she claims the poor bias souls (pro-black, FOTN, and so on) are doing.

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
I don't know if this has been said and I don't feel like sifting.

Predestination Vs Free will

Been struggling with that since I can remember.

omg, that's a big one, that's one of the huge sub-arguments in most religions!!! If you start a subject that says every part of our life is pre-written (I did this before), you will find the ones who will be very emotional and upset, they maynot have even realized that their argument in life was to oppose the predestination philosophy until reading it, it was interesting to see the responses, esp. very hard core, on the free will vs predestination subject....

i wonder if its free will that you struggle with?

I can't be bothered reading it all either, so sorry if it's always been mentioned. but I suppose Nature Vs. Nurture could be one.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I can't be bothered reading it all either, so sorry if it's always been mentioned. but I suppose Nature Vs. Nurture could be one.

Ha, that is a good one. As nature seems to outwit the nurture, and vis versa....

One may argue only DNA, and say, since group x never created, build, develop a piano, they wouldn't know how to build it or create it or play it, but when group x comes along, whose DNA gene pool never ever seen a piano before is able to play it and some with the specs can build it...the entire argument for SOLEY DNA fails.

It's a really lose example of DNA and what is "saved" or "recorded" and what's let go. It's really fascinating to see that human race group w, can live in an environment that never required them to do a certain function, and they migrate somewhere else and learn that function really well, it makes me wonder, how much is DNA part of our global-mind (abstract) and how much of it is physical (the dna protein double helix).

Nurture says that culture or cultivation is what makes someone raise above their DNA and they usually hold this with a lot of responsibility to catch the flaws of human nature and fix/cure it or prevent it.

Nature vs Nurture effects the type of laws that govern us as well as health care (survival of the fittest in nature argument would let the weak suffer, the nurture would want to program the weak to be stronger)...

Very interesting!!!