What is your Duality Argument?

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
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by lil bitchiness
[B]
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?

[QUOTE=]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. [/QUOTE] [/B][/QUOTE]

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.

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.)?

which kinda looks like (caduceus):

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".

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?

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.

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.