I should just trust my 'inuition' when it tells me something and be done with it.
Intuition and Reason are opposing, logical analyses, used to Deconstruct phenomena.
You could use some more Reason, indicated by your limited responses thus far.
Izekil, dude, one of the things about communicating is that it should be undertaken with at least a small intent for other people to understand what you are saying.I'm trying to simplify things here!
It's not easy to simplify, sometimes.
The main problem I see in you proposal is that your 'wit' is overtaking your intent to communicate. Your 'wit' sees a truth and the route to express it, but the evidence that seems to elude you because of your self-righteous 'wit' is that the route you have chosen is not understood.
this means one of two things:
either you are completely wrong, or
you are not using terms that people can understand.
I accept all possibilities in this regard. I am Responsible
for these Possibilities.
I think you may have taken alot of LSD, hashish or any number of other hallucinagetics, because you have not come back into reality enough to see that you are not achieving what you propose - you are indeed creating your reality, but in such a way that you are alone in it.
How do you figure this? I merely define these terms in such a way, with an explicit goal in mind...to Critique Human Nature (humanism).
Of course you are arguing "a critique against human nature" because you have come upon a fact of human existence and consciousness that 'becomes amazed in itself' and 'establishes its own reality', become enthralled in this 'world' such that it is difficult to get out, so you create for yourself a space that is 'not human' and or by your twisting of meaning, 'better than human' or at least 'un-human nature'. In as much as you make your porposition you are that much being that human nature you point at and decry.
I see it more that others
conceive the world this way, than I do. My own, personal, subjective terms are not as limiting as those proposed by the masses, of common-blooded, commoners. Do you really see yourself as one of them, the "mere commoners"? No, of course not. Your ego revels in the prospect of these such propositions as I've laid them out...especially designed to do so for that reason!
The enticement exists...because of Man!
It is because, Man can
Become! Man is
Becoming! In the same way a child develops into 'Man' (from boy) or 'Woman' (from girl), through Maturation, Man becomes something else through the Transcendent propositions of His own, creative logic, and creative principles (of the imagination)!
One way out is to attempt to view one proposal of your own as if it might be wrong or not be real, and test it by offering it to another person, and then listening to what they have to say.
I do this....
Man may not be 'Good'. Man may not be 'Evil'.
I went further, already... to solve this problem (of Morality), I've posited further: Man may become
Good or Evil, as an attempt to fulfill an ideal, of social, cultural, and religious proscriptions. It is not enough to stop at the Commoner's ability to reason. This is why Philosophy is so important, here, and always.
This latter i address here:
your terms are too vague and argue in a circle - which might be instructive but the cirularity leads nowhere, it leads to other definitions that you arbitrarily put out there, none of which has any 'ground' where the reader can get on board.
You are spinning in a world of your own making and thus argue about how you can make your own world. But this world none of us understand because, it seems, you dont want any one to understand, and you would rather sit in your priviledged space and laugh at how noone understands you -- but in a way that makes you superior, as if you have something to teach us.
And this is exactly what i have described in the "I am You" thread, i you wish to read a description of what you are doing in your essay and subequent argument.
We must put things into the Perspective
of one Ego compared to another, Me to You and You to Me.
Where can we 'disagree' on anything here, any sentence or statement, except via the Prepositions, and Logic?
Consider where we Agree or Disagree, to start.
If you (and Cheeeeeze
) fail to disagree with me, then what is left to say? Nothing, but the Critique must continue!