Ask it from your beloved friend. He's the master.

 

i should explain, the 'perfect'(.verb), was doesnt exist at all in the logical world, that was the internal error of English language and nobody has been realized.
iv researched and found that english language are most philosophical and metaphysical and theology like language in the world(e.g. japanese was structuralized like a matrix, or chinese likes totally right brain activities, less logical dominant), english using the top point view controlled anything, the people, the government, technology, and the ways of people speaking something, even people from other native languages country, learned english and controlled by designer of english language, but i should say,
the standing point of the english language was completely wrong,
the mean of perfect(.verb) at there = filling or fill somebody's energy structure, but the truth is anybody's body and energy structure was continually evolving, they cant filled the limited structure of himself at past, that was the error started from ancient western astrology.

 

I get where you coming from. Yes there some good points in there, but sadly:D the English language is the main language of the world now, and probably will not change anytime soon!

 

So you don't bother inserting any semblance of quality into your writing, and expect us to take your incoherent drivel seriously? if it's that profound, put some time and effort into it.

And yes, the results would be VERY different in impacting the reader. When I read an "article" that looks like it's been written by a retard without the most basic understanding of grammar, I don't take it seriously, and it's incoherent even if I did.

Insufferable little mouthbreather with delusions of grandeur thinks he can half-ass shit and expect us to give attention to his nonsense.

 

Section II
---------------

Conceptual Reward and Punishment.

In our thought process , we have a tendency to think in over generalized terms of "good" guys and "bad guys"
It is like with our films, Super-man is the perfect hero 100 percent good guy,
Lex luther is the villain 100 percent "Bad guy"

we falsely compartmentalize (on accident) with these concepts inside our everyday thought process.
Whether talking to ourselves with our own inner voice or thinking about others, we accidentally phrase semantically in these good guy bad guy terms, in such a way that create difficulties for us and cause us to fail at our en devours.

I will give you some examples

Imagine a situation we have all been in before.

You are with a loved one or spouse lets say.
they act in a certain way for whatever reason where they are taking care of their own needs at the expense of your own needs.

You immediately begin to formulate a storytelling in your thoughts.

"they being selfish"
"they don't care about me"
I can't believe they doing this to me"



In your storytelling there are 2 characters in a scene and the one "bad guy" character has gone through an elaborate plot to sabotage you.

These continuous thoughts create deep powerful emotions in you feelings of betrayal feelings of being hurt that they are victimizing you, they plotted against you.

this situation usually turns into argument and emotional violence or even physical violence.


What you did not do when the situation first occurred was to instead of enemy image storytelling, make observations in your thoughts about the situation from an external perspective ( as in everything in the room that is happening just he facts)

When you do this the same situation comes across very different

Imagine if you had said in your thoughts
( they are taking care of their needs, in a type of way that is preventing my needs from being met.)
but then immediately spoke this just like that to them

you would get a response like
(oh, im sorry honey, I was just trying to get what i needed , i didn't account for everything and because of it accidentally prevented your needs from being met all because i was only thinking of my own instead of a course of action which what get both of ours accomplished.)

there is no such thing in reality as a good guy or bad guy.
sure we can use those words as a shortcut to describe overall the way a person acts or treat people.

the problem is trying to conceptually attaching a "value" or "worth" of a human being to a "way they went about accomplishing things" we can call this a "strategy"

a need is a literal human requirement
a strategy is an attempted method to accomplish meeting a need.

within this process of human beings having requirements to be healthy (physical, emotional,physiological)
we create specific methods to attempt to get our needs met ( strategy)

people that use name calling , good and bad guy image in imagination
( on themselves and others)

are attaching a total "worth" or "value" to a human being
based on a human beings strategies ( way they go about doing things)

imagine if you are attempting to fix a broken laptop
You have to break down all the tiny components in a specific order
set them on marked squares to indicate the reverse order and you finally get it all about
you replace a new CPU in the machine
you make close attention to putting the parts back together perfectly in order the correct way.

finally you get the last screw in , turn it on and begin to run it .
After about 15 mins you start getting a strong black smoke coming from the exhaust and it shuts down and will not turn on.
you finally get it all apart again and realize you had forgot to put thermal compound on the CPU!
not only that you had forgot to go in the bios and enable thermal throttling !
the CPU completely burned up destroyed it and the motherboard.

you start thinking in your head"

"you fucking idiot!"
"what is wrong with you?"
" are you stupid?"
"look what you did"
"you just threw away thousands dollars!"

the thoughts go on and on, each time creating more and more devastating emotions inside of you related to your self worth, you used reward and punishment to dehumanize yourself by associating human value with a strategy ( a way of attempting to do things to accomplish a need)

in your thought process you used language to directly create powerful and impacting emotions in you related to self worth connected to " a way of doing things"

are those feelings real? or fake"

well, lets imagine the same situation happening, however
instead of thinking those phrases you thought this instead.

"I spent so much time focusing on putting the components back together in the right order that i I forgot another important step of putting the thermal compound on the cpu, and a second important step of temporarily enabling thermal throttling in the bios for few mins (just in case the cpu experienced above normal temperatures it would throttle down the speed to cool it.)"

now yes you are upset yes thousands of dollars are lost, but notice that you are thinking directly about what happened in reality itself not a storytelling of villains and heros,
you identified to yourself specifically what went wrong that what happened was you had a need ( fix laptop) you attempted to fix it yourself ( strategy to meet need)

and in doing this process forgot 2 critical steps that directly led to the destruction of your expensive laptop.

there is no connection to you being valuable or worthless,
it was THE WAY you did things ( forgot steps) that went wrong
AND because you identified what the problem is you NEVER have to repeat those mistakes again.
Instead of creating powerful(but fake) emotions and devaluing yourself,( which would distract form the reality of the situation not seeing the real problems)
you used observation instead of reward and punishment as a way to navigate with your thought process and emotions in a difficult situation.


The way we talk to ourselves shapes the way we experience the situation.
If we accidentally connect the value of a human being to an attempted way of doing things
Or if we think in language which shrinks down people to good guys and bad guys
we are unable to think about what happened literally as an observation.
we miss the specific thing that went wrong and we miss the chance to fathom the solution.

We have no scientific evidence which supports the idea that a human being's value or worth is connected in any way at all to methods ( ways of trying to accomplishing things)
if you create a way to try and do something which fails at it you are NOT less valuable as a human being.
if you create a way to try and do something which Succeeds at it you are NOT More valuable as a human being.

Using Conceptual reward and Punishment in this way directly leads to argument and is the source of all Violence

the idea of "punishing" a human being is a false construct.
it is connecting their value or worth to a way they went about trying to do things

getting angry and upset to the point of argument and violence
is the outcome of what we say in thought to ourselves about the situation.

Violence can NOT come from simply stating in observation what has literally happened externally in the situation.

 

Last edited: Mar 3, 2018

”Critique of pure reason” by Kant is one of the most important books ever written if you would like to understand the way we think in the west and why. It is very hard to understand. But if you yourself can’t even separete form from content, who will you accept your facts from?

 

Section III

POST conceptual Reward and Punishment
--------------------------------------

Once we can change our thought process so that we do not accidentally use our imagination to create compartmentalized characters of people who we turn into "good" guys and "bad" guys ( falsely making a connection between human worth and value and the strategy they attempt to meet their needs)
And we instead use observation of the situation itself, to be able to notice what went wrong,
we free up our imagination making it more potent to use in artistic areas . We prevent ourselves from accidentally using our imagination in areas we should be dealing with reality instead. By doing so we have much more potent creative energy to use properly in areas it belongs areas it can accomplish what we want it to.

We do this by remembering reality vs fantasy always existing in our thought process at all times, next in difficult situations we use observation and keep in mind we are susceptible of accidentally using reward and punishment, so we look for triggers in our thoughts related to the value and worth of a human being based on a way they attempted to do something.
when we do find a thought containing reward and punishment and we catch it, we want to re-formulate the thought with an observation instead also keeping in mind to extract the main point of the thought so it can be addressed.

it comes down to 2 components of human beings

needs ( human requirements)
strategies ( a specific way we have went about trying to meet a need)

When a person does act out with reward and punishment associating the worth and value of a human being with a strategy,It is NOT because they are worth less than normal no.
It is an impulsive reaction to what they feel as a need not being met or being prevented from being met.

Once they can have a way to find out a way to see the need in their head which the reason behind the reward and punishment they can turn to it directly, actually getting it met and removing the distorted emotions ( panic from the need not being met)
they can reformulate a new strategy to meet that specific need which originally caused them to turn to reward and punishment ( which cannot meet needs and in facts prevents them!)

this is a game changer a life changer for every human being given that we spend each moment from birth till death in our thought process.

A human being has three areas of requirements ( physical, emotional,psychological)
We then formulate specific attempts (which can fail or succeed) at meeting a need )strategy

we all have the same needs
yet there can be billions of strategies for a need
when we try to meet a need with a specific strategy OR another human being prevents a need from being met we get deeply upset, and emotional.
and have a tenancy to turn to impulsively attach the value or worth of a human being ( whether ourselves of others) to a specific strategy that failed. ( a specifically formulated method, 1 out of infinite)
If we can instead be aware that all times we are attempting to meet our requirements with strategies ( specific attempts 1 out of infinite which can succeed or fail depending on how we came up with it doe sit match reality or not, or if another persons actions prevents our needs being met.)

there are 2 core methods to meet a human requirements.( basis of a strategy)

domination ( meeting your needs at expense of others if need be)

and

co-operation ( meeting everyones needs in the situation equally)

domination leads to retaliation and violence.

if a human being attempts to meet their needs by dominating others essentially preventing the other human beings from meeting their needs, those on the receiving end will retaliate and this back and forth is where physical violence comes from ( or emotional psychological) betrayal, dishonesty, sabotage , disrespect.

However Co-operation is used all parties get their needs ( remember requirements) met, then powerful positive feelings form and strong positive family like bonds form, respect, trust, honor, dignity.

We can see that scientifically co-operation is the more intelligent core strategy to meeting human needs in all situations.

because co-operation is accounting for all variables and preventing violence and retaliation and cycles of distrust, disrespect war etc. it is more intelligent

because domination is impulsive short sighted and demonstrated to fail it is literally misunderstanding, while not accounting for all variables in the situation.


Human beings may go a long time without paying attention to their thought process.
That they have requirements (physical, emotional, psychological)
are that they form specific strategies to attempt to meet these requirements.
also they may not have paid attention enough to see that they use conceptual reward and punishment (attaching human worth to a way of doing things) at the core of a domination strategy which in fact cannot meet their needs.

it is because they have not thought much about their thought process itself
they continue to attempt meeting their requirements with a strategy which cannot succeed.

once they are able to tune in and pay attention to their thought process they will begin to see this happening, realize they are using storytelling to create false emotions in self, using domination to meet needs ( which results in retaliation circle of violence)
they can begin to turn this around dramatically improving all aspects of their life and how they experience.
this transformation is life changing and human beings can determine how quick it happens if they put enough attention and observation in use in heir thought process.

 

Last edited: Mar 3, 2018

Section IV

A better method for Improving one's experience of life, and improving cognitive and creative abilities.


HOW to use all this with music!


more coming soon.........

 

Let me simplify this issue:

doe, a deer, a female deer
ray, a drop of golden sun
me, a name I call myself
far, a long, long way to run
sew, a needle pulling thread
la, a note to follow so
tea, a drink with jam and bread
That will bring us back to do oh oh oh!!

There. Now stop talking and make some music.

 

Now I find out how much I've tormented you and all and I do apologize for my incorrigibility in the past. At least I talked about music.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Mar 3, 2018

It's impossible to separate form from content when the content comes in indecipherable form.

I will accept, or at least consider facts, from someone who can properly communicate them - and that shows enough respect towards me as to not half-ass his presentation.

 

You have obviously not read Immanuel Kant. To bad for you his ”Critique of pure reason” is one of the most important books ever written for understanding the thought process. I will post a couple of paragraphs so you will see that MMJ is extremly easy to comprehend in comparison. Placing too much importance on form makes you incapable of reading a lot of important works. This might explain not only your ignorance, but also your contempt for other people and what they have to say. You are left out to rely on others when it comes to what the most important thinkers have had to say thru the ages. I think it would be much better if the most important works were as easy to understand as childrens books, but I am afraid this is not the case. Most important thinkers have had a tendency to use the language in a way that makes their ideas difficult to wrap your head around, leaving your comprehension behind of others wading through the thick mud of difficult language in order to understand difficult concepts of importance for understanding the history of human knowledge. Here, I give you a couple of paragraphs of the maybe most revolutionary and important intellectual work ever written:

Of logic in general:

OUR knowledge springs from two main sources in the mind, the first of which is the faculty or power of receiving representations (receptivity for impressions) ; the second is the power of cognizing by means of these representations (spontaneity in the production of conceptions). Through the first an object is given to us; through the second, it is, in relation to the representation (which is a mere determination of the mind), thought. Intuition and conceptions constitute, therefore, the elements of all our knowledge, so that neither conceptions without an intuition in some way corresponding to them, nor intuition without conceptions, can afford us a cognition. Both are either pure or empirical. They are empirical, when sensation (which presupposes the actual presence of the object) is contained in them; and pure, when no sensation is mixed with the representation. Sensations we may call the matter of sensuous cognition. Pure intuition consequently contains merely the form under which something is intuited, and pure conception only the form of the thought of an object. Only pure intuitions and pure conceptions are possible à priori; the empirical only à posteriori.
[...]

Excerpt From: "Critique of Pure Reason" by Immanuel Kant. Scribd.
This material may be protected by copyright.

Read this book on Scribd: https://www.scribd.com/book/271516443

 

Last edited: Mar 3, 2018

You're defending a guy who not only acknowledges his bad writing, but also admits to not giving any effort to expressing the views he preaches so vehemently. There's no excuse for that.

And it has nothing to do with Kant. I might care enough to take the trouble of deciphering the meaning of an author who's known for special content, but I'm not going to filter through the ramblings of every schizophrenic on the internet who's sure he has figured the meaning of life. There are way too many of those.

 

Here is the thing though. This is a forum where you can start topics mainly about music creation and things in connection to that. MMJ does that. Quite a few people, including moderators and the owner of the forum, has shown their appreciation of MMJ’s writing. You did not start this topic. He did. And noone is forcing you to read it. What would then be the reason for you to aggressivly and frequently bother yourself to disrupt somone expressing his view on a topic of obvious interest not only to him but also to others. Keeping on belittleling someones obvious effort to share his views and experience on a topic of interest to him and others makes little sense. Not only that but also reverting to ad hominem attacks calling someone schizophrenic makes it quite clear your reason for writing in the topic is with malicious intent. If you do not have something to say on the topic brought forward, why not instead concentrate on a topic in which you actually are interested. Or you could for instance start a topic on how much you value good writing and go on rambling about how you will never read something which is not is keeping your standards concerning form. I am sure it will be very interesting for lots of people.

 

The reason is that I was honestly interested in what he had to say, but couldn't go through it without wanting getting a headache, so I wanted to offer constructive criticism. Then I was pissed off about his admission of not bothering to put effort into his preaching, and you started defending it. You're imagining any malicious intent.

But hey, same goes to you. If you're not interested in my criticism and want me to shut up, you can just ignore me.

 

Guys, please don't let music be polluted by philosophers. There are other places for such debates.


Philosophers don't understand music,
Scientists don't understand music,
Teachers of literature don't understand music,
Actors don't understand music,
Musicologists don't understand music, so on.


They're only trying to inject other ideas to music or exploit the music for their gloomy thoughts.

Art for Art. Artist (one who makes art not the one who talks about it) is the only person who has right to judge a piece of art.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Mar 3, 2018

hello @MMJ2017 & thank you for creating this thread ,how are you doing,i hope all is good my friend


hello @foster911 ,how are you doing,i hope all is good my friend

hmmm...you might reconsider the above ^ after listening to this :

^^^
I know that I know nothing - Socrates

i agree ^

love you foster ! :

 

I copied these questions and topics from one of the philosophy forums:

1 - Is Morality truth? Or societal a construct?
2 - The classical problem of identity
3 - When does individual human life begin?
4 - What constitutes personhood?
5 - Science is not objective.
6 - Is it possible to become God?
7 - illogical v different perspective
8 - Life is Stupid
9 - What is real?
10 - Mass is the multiverse's synapses
11 - The Case for Materialism
12 - Language is the mind of god
13 - When defining something
.
.
.

Music is degraded by such debates. Philosophers are the most supercilious persons in the society and don't make anything. They just analyze the phenomena without being thoroughly conversant with all aspects of them. They don't enjoy their lives and persecute other people.

 

hi @foster911 ,once again

As i told you before look inwards & listen to your intuition ,it is your best friend.

I feel you have a wrong start with Philosophy,& trust me it is not your fault

Philosophy simply means to love & be a friend of Wisdom.

So....do you feel that you will find the right answers in forums(Philosophical) & endless debates ?

The mind is a useful tool & creates thoughts.

Wisdom cannot come from it.

Intuition & Insight are your keys to Wisdom,so once again look inwards,inside yourself,be silent for a bit,you might hear the real you for the very first time

with love & respect to you...
Spyfx