UnbornTao

Anger Meditation.

@Human Mint @Carl-Richard

Wow, that's a lot to tackle. Wishing you the best.

Beautiful. But Windows? Come on You might want to run https://github.com/ChrisTitusTech/winutil to debloat your system.

Nice. What do you hope to accomplish? Good luck.

I initially removed it but added it back in. We have a hard time actually communicating with our relatives, much less with "the cosmos," whatever that is. In my view, it's based on wishful thinking. I was challenging the place that notion was coming from.

Feeling something requires an additional component for another person even to conceive that someone else is attempting to convey their experience. Gesture, tone, and so on are subsets or subtypes of language. Consider once again the exercise of experiencing life prior to the invention of language. We keep failing to do so. This should indicate how deeply embedded we are in this invention.

How do you see language? I think I made it clear that it goes beyond words and symbols. I said it is what enables those things in the first place - the space in which they arise.

Feeling can occur without language. Again, you assume that communication exists "out there" as a feature of the universe. A Neanderthal may have liked someone or something - this doesn't mean language was taking place. Loving something does not entail language. We consider love as a connection with someone or something, but care should be taken not to conflate this kind of feeling-connection with communication. It's like projecting emotions onto animals. We may assume that dogs or similar creatures experience emotions, but this interpretation might be something we impose. You're talking about producing an effect on another, which is different from language. Like in the earlier example: do solar flares communicate something to you? Or a piece of glass falling to the floor? Again, earnestly attempt to experience life prior to the invention of language. You're proving my point: language is a completely taken-for-granted reality. It's not. It had to be invented at some point.

That Thinkpad would certainly take more than one bullet.

Yes, a definition can serve as a starting point. As for its depth, it isn't that we lack ideas about what it is; rather, we don't directly know what it itself is. Again, it is often taken for granted as a reflection of reality - based on the idea we live by: that our experience of the world reflects reality as it truly is. A particular language is different from the possibility of language. Rather than being a set of terms or sounds, it concerns the reality that allows those terms or sounds to emerge. When this possibility was first realized in human history, it brought the invention of any language along with it. Shouting is just shouting. Something extra must occur for the sound to be interpreted as conveying a distinction beyond the sound itself. Don't confuse producing a reaction in another with communication having taken place. For example, you could be hit by a rock I throw at you and subsequently express anger by shouting - this wouldn't, strictly speaking, be an instance of communication. An additional component must be present so that you can interpret the experience of another conscious being as conveying annoyance, hurt, jealousy, or something similar. Take away the context of language, and the shout is merely a sound. You may be able to react or respond in many different ways as a result of hearing it, but it wouldn't reference anything beyond itself. Language, as a context, is what enables communication in the first place.

I don't think you ever will. It happens behind the scenes, so to speak. Despite having moved to Brave, I still use Gmail and Drive, fyi. Do you want a tinfoil hat too?

Fair point. Some gaming laptops may be better value proposition in the long-term. Smaller, lighter laptops are probably much less resistant to drops, scratches, and general wear and tear. Did you hear about the Ukrainian soldier whose MacBook Air took a bullet and was still working? That laptop is thin but it did its job, it seems. https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/macbooks/ukrainian-soldiers-m1-macbook-air-takes-direct-shrapnel-hit-still-works-despite-battle-damage-screen-cracked-and-letter-k-missing-but-laptop-remains-functional

That's why openness is needed in the first place. It's unknown what you'll get. The point lies in the questioning itself.