Posts by Patrick Wright2

The Lakers really came through for me yesterday, so I’m feeling pretty good about riding that wave today by putting my money on both the Golden State Warriors and Oklahoma. 🙂

wiredcanyon39 said:Honestly, I wouldn't touch the Lakers right now because nothing about them is clicking for me, so everyone looks like a favorite with those tiny odds, and since this game could easily swing either way, I'm leaning toward the Heat, though I feel like I might be hunting for an upset tonight.

I keep second-guessing myself, but look, Miami is riding a three-game win streak while the Pacers are struggling through three straight losses. 🤷Maybe I'll just roll with that since the payout is better.

Anyone got any solid NBA locks for tonight?

Honestly, I’d just roll with the Los Angeles Lakers; they look absolutely dominant playing at home.

I mean, I’m guessing it all really just boils down to how good the psychologist actually is, you know? It’s totally inevitable that any therapist is going to bring their own set of biases and personal beliefs to the table, but the whole point is whether they can step back enough to look at the patient's views objectively and see how those beliefs actually mesh with their overall character.

First off, I gotta side with Martok on this one because that scene with the Rohirrim honestly gives me chills every single time.

Before I dive into all the other heavy hitters, I’ll kick things off with the legend itself;
- Unforgiven
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4UwNwc9EQg

That's right, I've killed Women and children... I killed just about anything that walked or crawled this time or another and I'm here to kill you, Little Bill, for what you've did to Ned. ☕

-Gran Torino-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQN-3p2HqPA

Got light?
As for me, I've got light.. 😢

-Pulp Fiction-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGiQs...eature=related

Ezekiel 25:17, even though there are at least ten different scenes from this absolute classic that deserve a shoutout.😍

Why are you even apologizing? It’s not like you sent a group of Jews to a gas chamber or anything. You just asked a question, plain and simple. These guys obsessed with their poorly understood political correctness ideology seriously need a ban.

Look, if you ask me whether it's nature or nurture, I'm telling you right now that nature absolutely sucks ass big time.

Frank Williams7 said:I never said that anywhere.

Most people struggling with suicidal thoughts actually have a deep sense of love for those close to them. That’s not just my take; it’s a fact.

Quentin Tarantino:

In other words, does the well-being of others limit an individual's right to control their own fate?

Also, most people are connected to their community somehow. I don't think we need to overanalyze that.

By the way, sorry if I view Life with a capital L.

Quentin Tarantino:

Back when we were students, that was such a classic story (regardless of whether it was true), mostly because it fit that professor's cynical vibe perfectly.

It would make a decent anecdote, or maybe evidence for the idea that a high IQ isn't necessarily a shield against personality disorders like narcissism or sadistic traits.

Quentin Tarantino:

Anyway, there seems to be this theory that people using suicide threats as a "cry for help" should be confronted directly, forcing them to admit they don't actually intend to go through with it.

No, it's just that the thought of suicide triggers fear in people. Naturally. Hence the "cry for help."

Quentin Tarantino:

Look, I don't know enough about this to say if Hollywood just made the whole concept up.

Unlike you, I actually know this stuff pretty well. As for whether Hollywood invented it? Honestly, I wouldn't know.

Okay, what's with the "unlike you" attitude?
I'm pretty sure Ryan Wood98 has his own take on the topic he brought up, and honestly, nobody's out here claiming they have the absolute truth, right? You ask around because you want to test your ideas, back them up, or just toss them out once you see where everyone else stands.

It’s funny how the people who act like they're total experts usually know the least—they're basically living in a bubble of their own making. I think that's exactly what's happening here because it's actually super easy to spot; someone suffering from that "fake expertise" vibe almost always drops lines like "I know this subject pretty well" and then follows it up with nothing but hollow arguments, shallow logic, and a massive ego regarding whoever they're talking to.

Ryan Wood98 said:Do you think it’s actually possible to experience suicidal ideation without it being a symptom of an illness?

In other words, if someone is feeling suicidal, does that automatically mean they aren't capable of healthy resonance? It seems to me like that might be the prevailing view in American society.

Man, that is absolutely the dominant view in society, and you can see it playing out right here on this forum too. I’ve practically bled out trying to explain that suicide doesn't always have to stem from a personality disorder or neurosis, but hey, I haven't managed to make it stick. Just chalk it up to my crappy way of arguing or maybe just the total inability—or lack of will—of people on this forum to actually grasp what I'm saying, whatever.

Look, let's lay it out like this: Albert Camus once said that suicide is the only truly serious philosophical problem—basically, whether or not to exist. It’s a fundamental question a human being has to answer. So, if an individual, someone with a sound mind, clear thinking, and deep contemplation, reaches the conclusion that they want to end their life, why should we step in and stop them? We might try to fight it, sure—we probably would, especially if it were someone we loved, or even just a stranger—but ultimately, we’d be forced to respect that person's own will or intention, because anything else, like using force or repression to stop them, is just a massive violation of personal freedom.
That’s why this kind of repression gets legalized through medical diagnoses. Sure, people who are suicidal are often neurotic or depressed (though, honestly, most of the time because of how things work on this forum, I don't even view depression as a real disease since there aren't any actual standards and everything just gets lumped under it), but it doesn't *have* to be that way. Even when someone wants to die, whether they are sane or insane, it's their choice, whereas our desire is to live—to keep them as part of our lives—so we do everything we can to protect ourselves and our own desires, regardless of theirs. It's pure egoism, just like everything else in life.

Can someone please change the title to 'is there such a thing as gender identity if it isn't shaped by your environment?'

Michael Parker92 said:So here’s what I’m wondering about: What do you guys think actually needs to happen? We’ve got all the actors, we’ve got the directors, and the tech is better than it’s ever been in history, yet great movies just aren't happening anymore, so how on earth do we fix this broken film industry, how do we spark those fresh, groundbreaking ideas again, and what’s gotta change if we want to see another masterpiece like 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Deer Hunter, Taxi Driver, The Godfather, or Pulp Fiction?

Just lower the bar.

I honestly don't think there's anyone out there who actually believes mental health issues are just some kind of convenient excuse. 🤷

Look, people just don't change, at least nothing massive enough for anyone to actually notice, and honestly, they might try to camouflage themselves or throw on some masks and play a part just to make it harder for you to see who they really are, but deep down that core personality is always sitting right there, totally constant and unshakeable, maybe just slightly polished around the edges, but that's really all there is to it.

Money is power. You can never have enough power, which basically means you can never have enough cash.

Susan Price30 said:But maybe those 0.99 percent🙂😁 plus you imagine that there isn't another "way of being," or that a human is nothing more than a bag of meat and bones (and whatever else).

* I was just commenting on the idea presented; I'm not getting into your right to think what you think, so relax.

Look, I’m not about to sit here and play make-believe with you. It’s dead simple to prove that a human being is just a bag of meat and bone, but on the flip side, trying to prove there's something more out there? That's an absolute impossibility. So honestly, there’s really no point in looking for anything useful in a structured debate when all you can do is keep hammering the same tired claim over and over, just praying that saying it loud enough somehow magically turns it into the truth.
Like I said before, this is just the classic move of people who can't actually hold their own in a real debate, so they just resort to these mindless tactics because they have zero actual arguments to bring to the table.

I’m honestly just not feeling it with you right now because, man, that level of math ignorance you're throwing around is actually pretty alarming.

Susan Price30 said:Maybe not you, but 98% of humanity believes so. Of course, every rule has its exceptions...
and those exceptions are just that—exceptions, deviations, or outliers from what we consider the norm.

So you're basically telling me my take on death is some kind of weird outlier based on a random percentage you just pulled out of thin air? 😲🙏

Maybe what you actually meant was that a huge chunk of people imagine they know some other way to exist. But let's be real, there aren't different ways of existing just because you want it to be true so incredibly badly.

mellowangler59 said:Death is really just the end of our physical, material existence.

There’s just no such thing as a second life as far as I can tell, and honestly, there isn't a single shred of evidence out there to make me think otherwise.

hiddenhound3 said:I have contemplated the concept of death on countless occasions. My encounters with it have rarely been direct; rather, I have witnessed it through the passing of loved ones, whether they reached the natural end of their journey or were overtaken by the heavy weight of illness or profound sorrow.
The sudden passing of an acquaintance online has once again prompted me to reflect deeply on this subject. While others offer condolences and shroud the deceased in mourning and gloom, I find myself experiencing a strange sense of lightness.
A person is finally liberated from all suffering, pain, and those endless existential dilemmas that plague us. They have finally attained ultimate truth, cast off the heavy shell of mortality, and now dwell in an undisturbed eternity. To my mind, this is news of the highest order—so profoundly good that nothing could surpass it.

How do you approach the idea of death? Do you harbor fear regarding your own end, or do you find yourself consumed by grief for those who have passed?

WIND-SWEPT TOY

Suffer without tears, live without curses,
and embrace a peaceful misfortune.
Tears are hollow, and lamentations
will not soften the bitter sleep.

Surrender your faith in life to the drunkard,
and let the winds carry you wherever they may;
allow yourself to be swirled like a leaf
within the frantic whirl of a mad gale.

Fly like a leaf caught in the vortex,
for flight is your very essence, soul.
Not for the earth, nor for the grave,
is the flower that possesses no roots.

T. U.

I honestly don't have any fear regarding death, because there's just no point in being terrified of something that's absolutely inevitable.

Death is simply the finish line for life, and since life is the only state of existence we truly know, it’s worth wondering if some new state kicks in once this one ends, though there isn't really a rational way to prove a positive answer.

So yeah, I just live my life fully aware that my time is finite.

The whole situation is heavy because, in this country, we basically strip adults of their right to make their own damn decisions. Plus, you’ve got people being forced into treatment when they clearly don't want it.

But honestly, even beyond that, the linked article is just absolute nonsense, especially the intro.

It claims: "You're probably wondering how a doctor or the director of a psychiatric facility can be someone who, despite the scientifically proven fact that homosexuality isn't an illness—and which they 'treat' even though it's not even on the World Health Organization's list of diseases?"

There is no such "scientifically proven fact." Look, I'm not saying homosexuality is a disease, but I am saying there is no scientific proof backing up that specific claim. It seriously gets under my skin when authors let their blatant bias and lack of objectivity totally override the truth.

steelridge58 said:I think I follow what you mean when you talk about intellectual inconsistency, though I tend to view it a bit differently—more like an inconsistency with the very definition of what intellect actually is, since at its core, intellect is all about perception, cognition, and true understanding, which really shouldn't be closed off to any kind of exploration, especially since the whole point of using our minds is to investigate the very possibilities that allow us to keep searching, meaning we have to stay open to every single facet of a problem we're looking at.

That's exactly it. We've been blessed with this intellect that gives us the ability to truly perceive the world, so when we start chipping away at knowledge or trying to break it down into tiny, isolated little pieces, we're basically just degrading our own capacity to understand anything.