Is it I who am ridiculous, or am I ridiculous because you say so, just as Art is Art because you say so.Hobbes' Choice wrote:Do not be ridiculous.Walker wrote:Relationships are perceived and deduced, which is a form of mind perception.Hobbes' Choice wrote:Truth is not an object of perception, Duh.
Truth is a relationship. It relates to your conception, and perception. It is the measure of coherence and correspondence between the phenomena and your conception of them. It is relative between your world view and reality.You are just not on the right Forum.
With life as the objective standard against which particulars are measured, for the same reason that the source of evil is ubiquitous but evil is not ubiquitous, truth is ubiquitious.
One man's good is another's evil.
Don’t fool yourself, ridiculous one. Cults of death are evil. Murder is evil. They are not evil because anyone says so, though folks do say so. Rather, they are evil because they assume ownership of life rather than custodial responsibility of life. Life’s owner and not life’s janitor has the inherent moral authority to destroy life.One man's good is another's evil.
Thus, you can conclude that yes, you are evil for destroying that innocent parsnip. Life measures the shade of gray for that evil act of destroying. Now that you know this, you must live out the remainder of your life with cognizance of this evil within you that destroyed the life of what feeds the beautiful parsnip flower. Such is the burden of parsnip enemies who retain a shred of sensitivity not dulled into nullification mindset by the machine.
In this vein we can surmise that Twinkie Eaters and offshoots such as Ring Dingers, ShooFly Pie Affectionatos and Chocolate Chip Cookie Connoisseurs are simply out to destroy that which is fashioned by man. They are therefore the true iconoclasts.