kavaris

Piece #1 Were always on the brink of something, and many ppl are really good at noticing things that others dont see, like how cats might sense something in some extrasensory way (though tbh my cat seems to not be as hypersensitive as i once thought). But getting back on track, my point is like, god to me is a fragment of the center~during the limited expansion, wherein nobody can, or will denote the one outside of pointing & indicating whats " 1/x ", lik... "to point towards the one, is to watch everyone whos missing it at the other end~at the same time", as yas gotta understand, the one is itself a representation of the exact limited totality~of, or the "amount of". Like, to be pointing towards it, is to also be in a substratum where everyone is ignoring it. Like, theres no way out of that situation besides leaving the situation so it can resolve. I mean, its more complicated, but yous get the gist (naming things like this~i.e., as "Pieces" will help me remember if/when i need to ref. them again outside)

I fast, by virtue of not having any money to eat, like... Fasting IS in a sense a means of having sympathy for such ppl, though i personally dont see it as a good idea~BUT thats coming from my perspective and situation. I can understand the many reasons it would be beneficial, especially to those who have been practicing it for how many years? Too many. You gotta understand, theyve been fasting routinely for so long that its in their blood, its in their routine. So to ordinary ppl who dont fast or dont know what it is, they think logically so, pointing out things bout differences in their routines. Those who do practice this, and who do fast~Theyve just been doing it alot longer, so all them rules do not apply. Its sortve like people who work out constantly. You can try to tell Arnold swarzenneger at 30 that hes lifting wrong, but clearly hes doing something thats working for himself, even if its wrong to others. I mean, his goals were different, as it wasnt just to be fit, or to work out. It was things like, competition, etc., in the case for ram'donadans / ram'adonians nd such, they are like, on a whole nother planet from my pov (or really, anyones who differs) As even if they werent financially stable, and werent able to make ends meat, theyd prolly still be practicing it, though they might not be as underweight and suffering from health issues as ive been, so its two totally different worlds~One being from my exp., as well as others who dont understand, versus those that Do understand it, as theyve been doing it for so long. Thats my input. Now the specifics on the hours, i have no idea. To me, it makes sense, cause that sounds like the kindve hours that they would choose to fast. But again, im sure many ppl have chosen to fast in many diff times and many diff ways. I dont observe ppl fasting, but i do hear about it on and off, though it doesnt apply to me, so its like, i could care less.

Claude knows more bout every1 than i do. I couldnt tell you anyone besides J.Maynor as i have him on youtube. The day i learn bout someone is the same day i completely forget, as i dont look at whos talking, beyond the point that ive looked at them once already. Like, i know ppls names i mean, but i dont actually remember wat they said, or anything besides a floating name that i can identify as, having looked at it before. I have to much goin on to recognize who said wat, regardless of who said what, nd wat they said

@CredTeam "Allegory of the Cave". See now thats something you could try to emulate, in order to take what yous are saying, and remix it in a way that makes sense. As you are almost (almost) writing/speaking (or could be speaking) in a Socratic dialogue fashion, but you are like, one character, or so it feels like. If there was two characters, u could have a main char., that says /or writes such things as "Theres seven sets in the geometry of sets" And another saying "What makes you say that theres seven", then you have a piece that not only removes yourself from the equation (replacing your self w/ two chars.) but also, you can roleplay/workshop all of those ideas, in a way that can better gauge if what you are saying makes any sense or not, As you can start to ask yourself (your main char. whos posetting those statements) all of the Socratic type questions, in order to bridge from "What you think you know" to "What there is TO know". Hopefully youll take an ounce of what im tryina tell you, otherwise its like, we are tryina read what you are saying, and you arent reciprocating, but rather you are saying whatever, or atleast i cant understand it in its *current form. Good luck.

Im relistening to a translation on \*Allegory of the Cave. It goes a bit deeper than the parts that everyone knows, as its another instance of something that everyone would be surprised by, seeing as alot of these Greek texts go a wee bit deeper. Its like, finding a well (of water) and it turning out to be a 3,000 year old cave system or something.

Another perspective to take is "How do we appraoch the question of 'What is art?' typve questions, As its not always clear what art is, like "i often am just looking at things" -As i could imagine someone saying that (though, i dont feel like thats what i do/or would do; But i digress, as its going to be a hypothetical notion, for now) Lets say pers._X, is stumped at, say "I am looking at my carpet, and i am looking at my wall, and i am looking at the kitchen sink, and i dont see anything". What would yous say to this?.. I would say, "Why are you looking at the kitchen sink", like to me thats an unusual place to start. So like, for me I would say, "... Is there something you could look at thats not such an ~ Unbearably ordinary thing that you deal w/ on a regular basis, that could otherwise be deduced as a piece of art?" Like im just trying to eliminate any potential questions that like, non-art, creative minds might be crossed-up on. I mean, its not totally off track, but its also like, if you are looking at the same exact things in the same exact way, then it sortve doesnt like, push the envelope forward. So theres something about looking in the right place, in order to engage w/ it on a level that isnt your own, or like, it isnt your ordinary self looking at it.

I thought he had already been cloned and botox'd-up to be honest. I thought the cloning groups got to him already.

Im quoting this As i thought, i should add something interesting, to provoke some things that may/could go (or inspire) others to find other things that are also interesting on music (*in general) or Greek music/rhythm, et caetera. Plato is actually known for being the first (that is, text assoc. w/, or if he wasnt the first, it was someone around his time) that are first to have referred to the modes. That is, he didnt mention all seven of them (the basic modes of music) but he did list like... iuno it mightve been 4-5 of them (he left out Iionian as well i believe, as that comes later on~if i recall correctly, as its often talked about in regards to the moods, qualities and emotions they invoke as well): Ionian, Aeolian, Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, Locrian & Phrygian (And i think he left out Locrian and Phrygian, or something like that) I just thought theres something interesting there, and also, how it goes back farther, seeing as he is pulling from other music theorists, or works that he had either read or heard about. Just in general, commentators on previous Greek works are always saying things that are quite surprising, and theres many works weve not yet translated out there~Just to demonstrate how much Greek there is out there, among the thousands that we do have.

Ive changed over the years, so id have to look through my playlists, but maybe something like this *(p.s. i know im weird) p.s. the Doric and the Ionic orders / simplest orders are the ones i like the most, and theres alot of architecture that im into, so thats just giving yous a little taste of stuff that i look at, though i dont rewatch it repetitively, but in order to get the designs down, i was (as i said, i would need to really look through my playlists to find something i would deem as something i would repetitively watch)

Reminds me of effluescence, though iuno if they're related.

Corruption is more like a spectrum. We exist to deduce our corruption within the world, within ourselves and our experience. But then that means you have to ask, "What is corruption?" If a master said he \*Doesnt eat tacos on taco tuesday, does that mean hes corrupted (or \*Not corrupted for that matter) Its hard to say, and it gives people the idea that they can just do anything ~ seeing as theres no easy scenario that might involve deducing it in a straightforward manner. It goes deeper than corruption. Reality depends on these sorts of paradoxes, statements and deductions that dont add up to a true and majestic answer, Yet still, it helps to have an answer. It helps to know what you are aiming toward (Lvl 1, is what im speaking to, where you are sortve like, wandering the roads as a roadwarrior trying to get to the heart of what reality is, what exp. is, or like you are still stumped by "what is the purpose" typve ques., -which isnt the right question to ever ask, but nonetheless, people do start there, so we have to include it. And its possible to get reset, so keep that in mind! Thats going off topic) Conclusion: Its like an egg, and in the egg is a corrupted yolk, and theres a clear translucent goo around it, and that goo represents the None-corrupt corruption. But the egg requires both, as far as having a whole egg to cook w/, with both white & yolk combined. Some people dont like the yolk, or some people dont like the light goo. They are both good for you if you know how to use them/cook w/ them.

Oh, interesting reference. I have to look this one up again, as there is often intriguing details in myths. And especially being a myth of Greek association (and youd think i'd know this one already, however ive only read it briefly, a long while back) p.s. going through the /A/ section of https://raw.githubusercontent.com/philofree/philofree/refs/heads/main/public/data/index.json (the long list of rather) And i recently read something from Apollodorus of Athens who also mentioned Sisyphus (albeit it was brief i think, but nonetheless it was a~potentially informative ref.)

I appreciate you defending me, but hey, youd be better off not entertaining any of this. I wouldnt call any of that cheeky or devilish, but lets not get caught up in what is a center of what we think any of this is (As we will be here all day, infecting the forum w/, whatever names they might want to call it)

You have no idea what you are saying, and thats a problem. Its a nice idea, that is - If you were hanging out w/ someone talking about such things, this would be an interesting idea to share. But clearly you are misaligned w/ everyone here, as we do not see the world as simply as you. Why 8?... Why not 4?... *(Dont answer this question, its meant to be rhetorical)* In fact, you can simplify everything you are saying to just be "Everything = language", and then explore what that even means, through things you can prove to others (or better yet is to prove it to yourself, for it will eventually lead to a place where only you can be the observer of), instead of it feeling like you are the only man in the room who understands it. Many people have come in here saying "Aha! I got it. Theres 8 things... No wait, theres 7 things... No wait, its encapsulated in one over arching..." I mean, when you take LsD you will see that theres quite alot of things that it could be, sometimes 4, sometimes 5, sometimes 6 or 7 or 8... i mean the list goes on as to what those types of things could be. The part that you may be able to get everyone to agree w/ is that "everything is language". But thats where things have to be investigated. And, not just claiming, making claims to these arbitrary things. You have to dig deep into "Ousia". Look up Ousia. Thats the most important part (Hint it means "You" or being, these things you are trying to touch on... Thats a clue. Why not appreciate it?)

@Cred Are you not seeing how many ppl are in disagreement w/ you? Thats a sign that ya gotta like, reevaluate dude.