A philosophical, meandering thread.

Jump to Last Post 1-41 of 41 discussions (132 posts)

54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
All theories are welcome.

My lab rat theory is well known. Happy to discuss and hear other theories.
reply report
1. 79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Russia and USA will get in a war over in Syria.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  what about China?
  reply report
  79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I am more concerned about pulling our military out of the homeland and into battle.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Russians and the Chinese are coming here, you know. I agree keep 'em home.
  reply report
  79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  While that is going on Obama will allow the refugees into our cities and staged the muslims.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Been there, doing that.
  reply report
  79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  All hell hasn't broken loose yet but it will break loose.
  reply report
  79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Russian and Chinese Navy set sails for Syria.
  
  But don't worry, Obama is going to launch a drone.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  
  " " !
  reply report
  79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  China reportedly sent aircraft carrier to ‪Syria to help ‪‎Russians fight ‪‎ISIS‬ and jihadists.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  "The Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning-CV-16 has *reportedly* docked at the Syrian port of Tartus, according to DEBKAfile, an Israeli military intelligence website based in Jerusalem."
  This is what Alex Jones reported on Infowars.com.
  so ?
  http://www.infowars.com/chinese-aircraf … tus-syria/
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  You are a rascal.
  
  Edit: who knows these days...
  reply report
  79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Everything is in build up stage right now. Russia is building up over there, soon we will be too.
  reply report
2. 76
  Oztinatoposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  So, what is the "lab rat theory"??
  reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
A belief is a theory.

A faith is a theory.

Acknowledgement of theory means one can examine one's thoughts.

Just thinking out loud here...
reply report
1. 93
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  But there is theory and there is Theory. One is a thought, a possibility. The other is a scientific Theory and requires far more than being a simple possibility.
  
  Either way, though, one can examine the thoughts/evidence/logic/emotions that produce a theory.
  reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
Empirical observation works well with me.
reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
As does plain, simple logic.

Example. Logic does dictate there is a higher power.
reply report
1. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  whoa! Through logic and observation one can deduct that we are not lab rats but something else?
  What pray tell?
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Love you. Let's back up and establish premises.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Love you too, but I think you misspelled something.
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Nice try.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  What?!
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  He didn't answer this question either. :-(
  reply report
2. 82
  Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I'd like to see that line of reasoning.
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  We used to think 500 years ago the earth was the center of the universe. We now know better.
  
  It is equally conceited to think we are the most intelligent beings in the universe. Sooner or later we are going to get a knock at the door...
  
  As for the more intelligent beings, who knows? They may not even be aware of us. Or care.
  
  Or they do indeed know of us. They could have indeed created us;.or not. No way of knowing at present.
  
  Or we could have simply been discovered and are being observed. And the observers are as dispassionate as we are when observing rats in a maze or bacteria in a petri dish.
  reply report
  82
  Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  So to summarize your argument:
  1) We now know there are lots of planets in the universe that may be capable of developing and sustaining life.
  2) Therefore it is conceited to believe we are the most intelligent beings in the universe.
  3) Other intelligent beings may be more intelligent than us.
  
  Problems:
  
  1) Just because we know there are other planets capable of sustaining life elsewhere in the universe, it does not necessarily follow that there is life elsewhere in the universe. That is a non-sequitur; 2) Even if there is life elsewhere in the universe, it does not necessarily follow that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. That is a non sequitur also; 3) Even if there were intelligent life in the universe, it does not necessarily follow that this life is superior in intelligence to human beings.
  
  Those non sequiturs make the argument logically invalid, but can be removed:
  
  1) There are lots of planets in the universe capable of developing and sustaining life.
  2) It is possible that life exists elsewhere in the universe (from 1).
  3) As far as we know, intelligent life on earth developed from the chemical elements found on earth.
  4) The chemical elements found on earth are present elsewhere in the universe.
  5) It is possible that intelligent life has developed elsewhere in the universe (from 1, 2, 3 and 4).
  
  The logical conclusion from the premises presented, is that intelligent life may exist elsewhere in the universe. The notion of superior intelligence is not logically supported (or refuted) by those premises. That is a leap of logic that invalidates the argument. To support that conclusion, you would need additional premises. In short: logic does not dictate "there is a higher power" (at least from the premises you have presented).
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Would you also agree that logic dictates it is impossible to transform the world toward some sort of perfection?
  reply report
  82
  Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Depends on what the premises of the argument are.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Influencing the world toward perfection is a worthwhile goal for individuals or groups of individuals.
  
  No. The fact is, the earth is too gigantic to be influenced by individuals or groups.
  
  Logically, only individuals can transform themselves. If ALL people transform, enlighten or become peaceful within themselves the world could become transformed. However, the world being what it is: full of delusions and human nature being what it is: full of emotions and desires, total world transformation/perfection can never become complete or it is highly unlikely. Therefore it is not a worthwhile goal to pursue, either individually or collectively.
  
  However, one's own enlightenment is attainable and this is a worthwhile goal.
  
  Is there a premise in there? I have no idea.
  
  My own conclusion: Self transformation is possible as opposed to world transformation.
  
  ( … and consequently, the more people who are in touch with God within and without, the more transformed the world will become …
  
  according to my view of what is true.)
  reply report
  82
  Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Ok, so your first statement is actually your conclusion. As you are arguing in the negative (saying it's not true) it needs to be changed from a positive to a negative statement. The "individuals and groups . . ." part is redundant so I've taken the liberty of removing that. Your conclusion is:
  
  Influencing the world toward perfection is not a worthwhile goal.
  
  Only three premises are needed from your comments to support that conclusion. I've interpreted your comments, so although the words may not be exactly the same, hopefully the meaning is:
  
  1) It is unlikely that all people can become enlightened/ peaceful.
  2) Total world enlightenment/ peace is unlikely (from 1).
  3) Influencing the world toward enlightenment/ peace is not a worthwhile goal (from 1 and 2).
  
  But this is not yet valid, as the conclusion does not necessarily follow on from the premises. An additional premise is needed to bridge the gap between 2 and 3:
  
  1) It is unlikely that all people can become enlightened/ peaceful.
  2) Total world enlightenment/ peace is unlikely (from 1).
  3) A goal that is unlikely to be achieved is not a worthwhile goal.
  4) Influencing the world toward enlightenment/ peace is not a worthwhile goal (from 1 , 2 and 3).
  
  In terms of soundness: it's reasonable to believe that 1 is true. Therefore 2 is true, because it follows on from 1.
  
  In terms of premise 3, one definition of worthwhile is: "worth the time, money, or effort spent". Is it worth spending money, time etc on something that is unlikely to be achieved? Arguably it's not. On the other hand, although paying for a lottery ticket each week is statistically unlikely to result in you winning the jackpot. Could it be argued that a tiny chance of winning a life changing amount of money is better than zero chance, so the financial outlay is worthwhile? And what about someone who performs an act of heroism. Would we describe that act as not being worthwhile because it was unlikely to ever be successful?
  
  Although the above argument is logically valid, the soundness of the argument (the truth of the third premise) is debatable. It's a matter of opinion as to whether a goal that is unlikely to be achieved is worthwhile. Therefore it's only a matter of opinion as to whether trying to achieve worldwide enlightenment/ peace is worthwhile. The only way to make the argument valid and sound is:
  
  1) It is unlikely that all people can become enlightened/ peaceful.
  2) Total world enlightenment/ peace is unlikely (from 1).
  3) A goal that is unlikely to be achieved may not be a worthwhile goal.
  4) Influencing the world toward enlightenment/ peace may not be a worthwhile goal (from 1 , 2 and 3).
  
  But again, this reduces the argument to no more than a tautology. Effectively it says: world peace/ enlightenment is either a worthwhile goal, or it isn't. This is absolutely true, but is not very meaningful. However it is exactly what I would expect to see with any argument that has at least one premise that is subjective. Because the truth of such a premise cannot be reasonably determined, such an argument can only be logically sound if qualified with the word "might".
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  So you are saying that world transformation might be possible and could be a worthwhile goal?
  
  Well, Good!
  
  ( It seems like a premise is not that easy to come up with.)
  reply report
  82
  Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not saying anything. It's your argument.
  
  This particular argument, after changes for validity and soundness, says: World transformation is unlikely, and it is either a worthwhile goal or it isn't (depending on what you think constitutes "worthwhile").
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  We need to clarify the transformation desired and specify what it is. A vision is involved. A good vision for the world is for it to be a peaceful place. Logically, the world can be transformed from how it is (full of strife) to something else, (at peace,) if every single person on the earth transforms himself into a peaceful person.
  
  Peace is a state of even-mindedness. No anger, no emotional attachment, no hatred, no greed, no suffering or misery.
  
  The Premise:
  When every person becomes even-minded, the world will become peaceful.
  
  What about in the ocean where all the fish are eating each other?
  What about in the jungles where all the animals are preying on one another?
  Therefore, we have to specify "the world" as "the world of men."
  
  For the world of men, peace is possible when all men, women and their children become even-minded. However, everyone knows that children are actually very hard to raise. Can we remain even-minded as parents? Can we teach children, who eventually develop their own wills, to maintain their even-mindedness?
  
  I really don't know about this world peace thing at all.
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  What with infinity being what it is, anything that can exist does exist.
  reply report
  83
  gmwilliamsposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  It certainly does.
  reply report
  82
  Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  The addition of this premise removes the need for the premises stated previously, so the argument becomes:
  
  1) Within an infinite universe, anything that can exist, does exist.
  2) Life with superior intelligence exists (from 1).
  
  This is also non sequitur, but it can be fixed by adding a premise that links the first premise to the conclusion:
  
  1) Within an an infinite universe, anything that can exist, does exist.
  2) The universe is infinite.
  3) Life with superior intelligence exists (from 1 and 2).
  
  This argument is logically valid (the conclusion necessarily follows on from the premises). However, the argument is now logically unsound (the truth of the additional premise is questionable) because we do not know whether the universe actually is infinite. The most we can reasonably say is that it might be. So to remain logically sound, the argument has to change to:
  
  1) Within an an infinite universe, anything that can exist, does exist.
  2) The universe might be infinite.
  3) Life with superior intelligence might exist (from 1 and 2).
  
  This argument is now logically valid and logically sound, but it has been reduced to no more than a tautology in logical terms (a statement that is true under every possible evaluation, but does not say anything meaningful). For comparison another example of a tautology would be "I might be wearing a hat".
  
  In short: logic still does not dictate "there is a higher power". The most you can reasonably say (even with the additional premise) based on what we know of the universe is that life with superior intelligence might exist.
  reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
Where religion falls apart is the interpretation of that higher power.
reply report
1. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  +1
  reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
What is your theory?
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
"premises" is buildings
"the premise" is what you meant.
- just trying to be helpful.
reply report
1. 54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Come on. What is your theory?
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
Premise
a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion:
verb |prɪˈmʌɪz | ( premise something on/upon )
base an argument, theory, or undertaking on:
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
My theory is

Be Here Now.

now what?
reply report
1. 54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I am open.
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
I saw a rainbow over the valley the other day driving up from LA about six in the morning.
Are rainbows magical or not?

Lets say they are not.
They are just physical phenomenon.
refractions of light …

light …

the sun

hydrogen churning into helium

such power

not awesome in the least

just phenomenon …

at least us lab rats are warm.
reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
Meet. But me being me, not soon.
reply report
1. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Like ships in the dark stormy night …
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  And back. What is your basic premise? We can go from there. Or never mind.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Try again, I was busy.
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Curious, you are.
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
Do you think schools will become obsolete and home schools will become the way of the future/on-line curriculums?
reply report
1. 54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  What if teachers refuse to teach these kids who have no ability to sit still, focus, respect or try?
  reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
And so much for that and other than that.
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
kids are being trained to use screen technology from two on.
Why would they want to go to school everyday when everything can be learned on line??
and they can learn at their own pace, according to their own interests?
reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
I mean seriously...
reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
Seems to be some posting sequence here...
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
What did you REALLY learn from school? At least kids should graduate at sixteen. As in Europe. Choose a path early on and train for it.
reply report
1. 60
  Phil Perezposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  If you live in Quebec, Canada you graduate at sixteen...I know I did.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  We need to do the same. We have very big students sitting in desks, ordered around treated as oh so young. No free will. And don't tell the teachers, but these students have had free (self-guided) will since they were fifteen. And so they rebel, or the opposite, at the sheer ridiculousness of it all. They have new cars. They have credit cards and cell phones. They have access to any sort of info in the whole wide world and we keep them in rows, in desks. YET every morning they get up and meander into school, always late. Students are not even expected to arrive on time at one high school I sub at in here in So Cal ...
  Why do these older students bother to even go to school, you ask… to party they'll tell you.
  Here they graduate, (maybe,) at seventeen or eighteen. (Some don't care.)
  That's way too old, if you ask me, which no one ...
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
all things lead to the mountain top.
reply report
1. 54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  What is your premise? You know I am agreeable.
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
My premise is that we are not lab rats at all.
My premise is that we are God individualized, but we do not know that fact.
We are all avatars of one spirit.
We are holding each other back. We are at least two hundred years behind where we should be.
Thanks for asking.
reply report
1. 54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Is basic inquiry philosophy?
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  such as, What is virtue? Yes.
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
another question (basic inquiry) could be this: What should guide human conduct ? strict rules or other considerations? based on what?
reply report
1. 59
  janesixposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Pinochio had it right: Let your conscience be your guide.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  how is conscience developed?
  reply report
  59
  janesixposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I think it is intrinsic to life.
  
  As you say, we are one, so there can really only be one conscience.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Then what about those who seemingly loose their conscience?
  reply report
  59
  janesixposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe they suppress it.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  MAYBE, janesix. How and why????
  here is a question/basic inquiry: What is human nature?
  reply report
  59
  janesixposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I don't know. My guess is that we are the universe(God), learning about itself. But it's basic nature is good.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Its basic nature is good. I agree. Have any questions?
  reply report
  79
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  It is, I am.
  Good.
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
How do we happen to fall from intrinsic awareness of right and wrong?

Adulthood is tricky.
reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
Are you serious?
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
Must be a blast being you.
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
Obama is Muslim. My friend who works for fed. border patrol also tells me he is a teleprompter president.
My, he is good at it!
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
Do we have free will?
yes we do
do we choose to do bad?
yes we do.
are we good?
not when we choose bad.
why do we choose bad?
we think it is good!

sounds like a good chorus for lyrics:

Have we free will?
Oh, yes we do!
Do we choose bad?
Oh, yes we do!
Are we so good?
Not when we choose bad.
Why do we choose bad?
We think it is good!

BFN
reply report
1. 60
  paradigmsearchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  What is your belief? Are you as me?
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  We all manifest our essences VERY differently!
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  … based on free will.
  or lack there of
  reply report
2. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  PS one more (edit) basic inquiry:
  Schools will become like ghost towns: deserted, dusty, abandoned. The "bad" kids and the lost kids will congregate there with their guns in their rags and something magical will happen. They have no teachers, but they start teaching themselves and each other. They find ragged boxes of well- preserved text books and dictionaries. They learn stuff, really interesting stuff ... thank God they know how to read ... thanks to the keyboarding and texting skills they were required to use with the vast array of technological screen devices they grew up with, since they were born! And there is no blaring light with these wonderful informative books … And these kids end up saving the world.
  
  (edit) HOW?
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
The more interest in life and intrinsic motivation we feel and generate within ourselves, the more free (self-guided) will we have.
Q. What kills interest and intrinsic motivation / free will / joy of life?
A. Blind or compulsory obedience.

Compulsory:
obligatory, mandatory, required, enforced, demanded…"

Blind or compulsory obedience is the biggest thing we have to fear from without in the form of:
1. Others
2. Religions
3. Governments

Thanks for asking.
reply report
76
Oztinatoposted 8 years ago
Paradigm
i can't see what your "lab rat theory" is. I looked at your profile and saw only one hub on "avatars".
reply report
83
gmwilliamsposted 8 years ago
What is truth? How does one determine what is true? Is truth absolute? Or is truth strongly determined and decided by the majority cultural and/or societal consensus?
reply report
1. 54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Truth and reality are one and the same. The more accurately one perceives truth/reality, the better one does in life.
  reply report
59
DasEngelposted 8 years ago
3D animated rats look wonderful on the screen. And quite experimental too.
reply report
1. 54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Every morning I wake up and wonder what is this lab rat going to have to deal with today...
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  They seem to have awareness of some sort..
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Who?
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I really want to know. Who?
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Chances for palace intrigue less than 20 percent.
  reply report
83
gmwilliamsposted 8 years ago
Rats do have some awareness of existence. They have instncts.
reply report
59
DasEngelposted 8 years ago
Might be something like lab rats, in the sense that their existence on this planet is destined to come to an end. Additionally, none of them consciously chose where they are going to be born, when and why (according to the theory). And hopefully, none of them participated during the architectural design process and the construction stage, of the cosmos itself. They're like tenants, frankly speaking.

So, all in all, the lab rat theory goes well. With reality.
reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
OK, slow on the uptake there. Yes, most of us do have low self awareness. Apparently I just demonstrated that.
reply report
1. 83
  gmwilliamsposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Even though most of humankind is in the security-survival mode, including many in so-called developed nations, there are a few who are evolving beyond this basic mode and into a spiritual awareness. These few are realizing that there is more to this world then mere struggle and survival. They refuse to adhere to the paradigm of existing. They want to live and experience life and use their utmost potential to create a life on THEIR OWN terms. They want a better quality of living.
  
  Also, fear is the cause of many people living in the basic security-survival mode. They are afraid of venture out and in numbers, they feel the most comfortable. People who are highly self-actualized are not afraid of being trailblazers and going alone. They want to make and leave their mark on society and culture. They KNOW who THEY are and are not afraid to go against the crowd and the mass people.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Dear G.M. Williams,
  I liked your post. (Also, I appreciate your old school way of writing … like mine. ) Additionally, I would like to say, I believe there are always some great souls around who can lead us (society as a whole) to undreamed of heights … there will always be more enlightened folks setting the others free. They have written books, lived political lives and have contributed to history in awesome ways. They have been seen in awareness changing movies, written soul freeing music and spoken to our hearts on stage, radio and TV. They were and are the ones in touch with themselves and not somehow bound up with heavy reigns and bits. They came here, are here now, and will come here with their own beliefs and inspiration. Through their forging, they unintentionally set the rest of us free.
  Some of us are earth riders. Some of us are drivers. Depends on what you fancy in life.
  (Personally, I like just riding, at this point. I am freeing my inward direction.)
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
Its also interesting to note that "earth-driver" types are very human.
They definitely have their flaws!
reply report
59
DasEngelposted 8 years ago
You lost this time.
reply report
1. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Fine
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Does the term "sarcasm" have any unanimously agreed upon definition?
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I used to think art could transform the world.
  but, I couldn't work out the details.
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  How do we define a loser?
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe paradigm search can help.
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Didn't see him since the last interaction.
  reply report
  83
  gmwilliamsposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Good morning, Princess of Darkness is here. Keeping vampire hours.........yet again. Losers are people who do not accept "defeat" and/or "failure" easily or as an integral part of life and growth. They contend that life should be as mistake and failure free as possible. They are the type of people who will find any excuse for their mistakes and failures, oftentimes blaming others, circumstances, and even God before they blame themselves.
  
  Losers are the ones when they fail and/or are defeated, they become mired in their failures, viewing everything as lost. They even give up on their goals, rationalizing that they were not meant to succeed in the first place. They contend that only the lucky few succeed in a given situation. They may even assert that they are somehow cursed by fate, even by God. They began to view life as one constant WTF. To them, life is one big purgatorial angst at best or a neverending, abysmal, abject hell at its worst. They are on the societal periphery, always looking in, their main motto is "Coulda, woulda, shoulda". There are some among them who can become quite self-destructive because they feel that as losers, they are not worth anything! Now, I am off to bed to rest.
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I'm watching Van Helsing. What is "defeat" by the way? Take your time.
  reply report
  83
  gmwilliamsposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Defeat is when you are beaten by your opponent and concede. You know that you were on the short end of the stick.....THIS TIME. However, the next thing is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT story.....
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Good afternoon I'm starting to read Dracula. Yet responding to forum comments. You're right in your definition but WordWeb is saying something else.
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  The looser is the one who does not acknowledge the one to be right, when the one is right. The referee is always the one who is right.
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  The referee of cricket isn't the same as the referee of football. "Deleted"
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I thought so.
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  " http://hubpages.com/forum/post/2765489 "
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  reply report
  77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  please do.
  reply report
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  report
2. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I was accused of being sarcastic, when I wasn't.
  My point: three to three.
  reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
Its too tedious for me to write for money.
reply report
1. 59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I always trust when anyone tells me about their money.
  reply report
59
DasEngelposted 8 years ago
reply report
1. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  59
  DasEngelposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  The problem with rats is that they get carried away.
  reply report
83
gmwilliamsposted 8 years ago
Now let us really get philosophically analytical here. In the United States, poverty and its resultant emotional, mental, psychological, and social ills would be drastically reduced, if not eliminated altogether, if people were mature and intelligent enough to be financially, emotionally, and psychologically prepared before electing to have children. Furthermore, if one elects to have children, have children that one can afford in order to give them the most socioeconomic, intellectual, and cultural opportunities.
reply report
76
Oztinatoposted 8 years ago
I still don't know what your lab rat theory is...!
reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
Would you like to play?
reply report
1. 77
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  That's such a beautiful question. Its nice to just let it sit there.
  reply report
  54
  paradigm searchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Would you like to play?
  reply report
54
paradigm searchposted 8 years ago
Playing it over and over, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AT_Pbtyid0
reply report
77
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_txpe6Ie2Nk
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

A philosophical, meandering thread.

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

A philosophical, meandering thread.

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies