Must be nice living in the big city...
in Movies ·
On top of the twenty theaters we already have scattered across the country, we are set to welcome an entirely new multiplex boasting thirteen state-of-the-art screens 🙂🙂🙂
Home ›
Eric Wells3 › Posts
Posts by Eric Wells3
85 posts shown.
Rape: Fact or Fiction?
in Philosophy ·
me!i!i!i- said:And I simply fail to see how that could ever be considered a punishable offense, especially when we are talking about an adult who isn't suffering from some sort of mental instability🙄
Because what we have here is nothing more than a restricted guarantee of freedom
Rape: Fact or Fiction?
in Philosophy ·
Jack said:Take a scenario where a guy sleeps with a girl, just a one-night stand, for instance.
And then the next day, she claims she was assaulted, while he naturally maintains his innocence.
Who would a neutral observer actually believe in such a situation?
At this stage, her specific reasoning or any underlying motive becomes entirely irrelevant.
A truly neutral observer doesn't place any weight on mere words; they rely solely on hard evidence.
We are all one!
in Philosophy ·
In the grand architecture of my intellectual and physical being, I claim virtually no credit; my only true agency lies in the continuous refinement of the self.
Now that we have arrived at the inescapable conclusion that I am not my own architect, and that I am merely a "transient creation," I find it entirely superfluous—indeed, utterly pointless—to engage in any debate regarding where I derive the audacity to make such an assertion.
The very notion of my free will and my autonomy in legislating my own existence as a human being is, in its core essence, unnatural and illogical; therefore, while one may attempt to do so, it is absolutely unproductive to waste breath discussing the logical cause behind the existence of my consciousness.
That underlying cause is, in fact, completely irrelevant to anything of substance because, firstly, it loses all justification, and secondly, from the perspective of the world around us, consciousness would lack that vital sense of beginning and ending an act (which is what necessitates responsibility); instead, there would be a perceived sense of continuity within the order and nature of the universe, which simply does not exist in reality. For when I perform an action, I do not say, "that was destined to happen," but rather, "I" did it, and all those external circumstances that supposedly "helped" or "hindered" my movement effectively vanish and cannot be factored in even slightly as a determination of my direct (and I emphasize *direct*) decision.
The true, immediate cause of any rational decision we make is neither logically nor scientifically explicable, yet it remains undeniably real; thus, the problem of "who created consciousness" ceases to exist for us and for anyone observing us.
I, as an individual consciousness possessing a sense of belonging to a broader unconscious system, explain my own atheism by denying the existence of some vast, external consciousness that drafted the template or scheme for my mental processes. The idea of an external conscious legislator is, quite frankly, an insult to the concept of man as a man, and indeed to the phenomenon of humanity itself.
Consciousness is fundamentally incapable of perceiving itself as a limitation; instead, it is capable only of viewing itself as eternity, and it is precisely here that we arrive at my central thesis, which serves as the catalyst for this entire discourse. The need for God exists by the very nature of consciousness itself due to its undeniable desire to view itself as eternal and its refusal to acknowledge its own finitude.
I shall reiterate once more to conclude—it is both impossible and unnecessary to contemplate the logical cause for the emergence of something that is, in its very essence, illogical: namely, consciousness and its freedom. Consciousness is a universe that appears limited from the standpoint of any other consciousness, yet from its own perspective, it is eternal—and there can be, and is, absolutely no compromise to be found there!
Now that we have arrived at the inescapable conclusion that I am not my own architect, and that I am merely a "transient creation," I find it entirely superfluous—indeed, utterly pointless—to engage in any debate regarding where I derive the audacity to make such an assertion.
The very notion of my free will and my autonomy in legislating my own existence as a human being is, in its core essence, unnatural and illogical; therefore, while one may attempt to do so, it is absolutely unproductive to waste breath discussing the logical cause behind the existence of my consciousness.
That underlying cause is, in fact, completely irrelevant to anything of substance because, firstly, it loses all justification, and secondly, from the perspective of the world around us, consciousness would lack that vital sense of beginning and ending an act (which is what necessitates responsibility); instead, there would be a perceived sense of continuity within the order and nature of the universe, which simply does not exist in reality. For when I perform an action, I do not say, "that was destined to happen," but rather, "I" did it, and all those external circumstances that supposedly "helped" or "hindered" my movement effectively vanish and cannot be factored in even slightly as a determination of my direct (and I emphasize *direct*) decision.
The true, immediate cause of any rational decision we make is neither logically nor scientifically explicable, yet it remains undeniably real; thus, the problem of "who created consciousness" ceases to exist for us and for anyone observing us.
I, as an individual consciousness possessing a sense of belonging to a broader unconscious system, explain my own atheism by denying the existence of some vast, external consciousness that drafted the template or scheme for my mental processes. The idea of an external conscious legislator is, quite frankly, an insult to the concept of man as a man, and indeed to the phenomenon of humanity itself.
Consciousness is fundamentally incapable of perceiving itself as a limitation; instead, it is capable only of viewing itself as eternity, and it is precisely here that we arrive at my central thesis, which serves as the catalyst for this entire discourse. The need for God exists by the very nature of consciousness itself due to its undeniable desire to view itself as eternal and its refusal to acknowledge its own finitude.
I shall reiterate once more to conclude—it is both impossible and unnecessary to contemplate the logical cause for the emergence of something that is, in its very essence, illogical: namely, consciousness and its freedom. Consciousness is a universe that appears limited from the standpoint of any other consciousness, yet from its own perspective, it is eternal—and there can be, and is, absolutely no compromise to be found there!