Posts by Thomas Nelson25

Paul Rogers94 said:People generally act like "soul" and "mind" are interchangeable terms.

But what actually constitutes a mind? What defines a soul? Honestly, figuring out if either even exists is something everyone has to tackle on their own...

Spirit, soul, mind—it's all just semantics at this point.

If you look at spiritual experiences, tons of people describe the exact same feeling.

So yeah, there’s definitely a state of being that’s totally different from the everyday grind. Whether it’s brain waves, self-suggestion, trance states, or just some brain chemicals—whatever. It doesn't really matter how it happens.

Spiritual experiences can definitely stem from the ego—or maybe that's just consciousness itself—but it always feels like you're expanding or just totally drowning in everything.

Now, whether that's just some brain trick or the real deal... honestly, who cares.

Other theories suggest the soul is the self—the core center of being. It’s mostly just unconscious, though, so the whole point of spirituality is basically just waking up.

Man, you're overthinking this—taking it straight from psychology back into metaphysics.

The soul is basically just the (deep) ego. (That's just a fact)
Your everyday ego—if you want to call it that—is just surface-level stuff, developed as a way to deal with existing.

War economies matter—and right now, Putin’s got the upper hand there.

Just hang tight until you find someone who matches your vibe.

Growing up in that old-school socialist era back in the 80s—personally, I feel like today's system is way better for us.
It works great for individualists like me, but most people just aren't wired that way. That's where the friction starts, and honestly, that's why we're stuck where we are.
There’s definitely been this massive mental dulling happening—just constant psychological pressure from everyone around you. Between technology, the internet, and the current economy, it’s basically a perfect storm.

Just an illusion. Purely an illusion.

feralranger said:On the contrary, I suspect that what you see is merely an illusion... typically, a certain clique of more or less identical individuals—largely unread and decidedly anti-intellectual—tends to jump at my posts, creating a defensive posture that isn't a 'true' reflection of who I am. In truth, it fails entirely to represent the person you might perceive had you known me outside of such a narrow 'frame' or specific context...

Some time ago—back when I was still just a high schooler—I attended a lecture on his philosophical thought at a Dominican center in Chicago, and I am aware that Carl Jung held him in high regard and frequently drew upon his perspectives.

I fail to see how agape can possibly fit into a concept that isn't dualistic. I would be most interested if you could explain your perspective on this.

I find myself unable to write extensively tonight, but I would be delighted to read or learn more about what you are proposing, whether you choose to write it out or simply provide a solid link related to the subject.

So you're pushing for sexual love on that philia level?

Honestly though, I don't really get that whole concept from the forum crowd.

I'm not trying to dive into spirituality or physics right this second.

feralranger said:I am well aware of the various classifications out there... however, for instance, the concept of 'agape' implies a certain dualism, a distinction I simply don't subscribe to... within a non-dualistic framework, 'agape' actually falls under that non-Erotic spectrum, much like the philia category...

The concept is key—it could be Christian, but I'm not really into theology.
Besides, it works—you ever heard of Meister Eckhart?
(Dualism? Please, no way.)

You're basically putting artists (and yourself) on a pedestal like they're saints—I mean, just look at how they actually live.

feralranger said:...well, we find ourselves circling back to this issue simply because some people lack basic discernment. It’s quite similar to when you attempt to provide someone with fundamental mathematical instructions; the problem lies in the fact that certain individuals fail to grasp the glaringly obvious distinction between erotic love and philia within the Homo sapiens sapiens species.

In the sphere of philia, most people aren't prone to jealousy or possessiveness—> for the most part, they don't insist on a monopoly over their partner.

In the erotic sphere, however, most people are inherently jealous and exclusive—> they generally demand a strictly 'monogamous' arrangement.

It isn't truly a matter of "complex mathematics," yet somehow, it remains an impossibly complicated concept for some.

If you want to get technical, there are four types of love.

You seem pretty hung up on that whole hippie/artistic vibe—hey, if that's how you want to play it, fine.

Joseph Rivera75 said:Thomas Nelson25
Because it takes two to tango. People who get dumped usually have a blind spot when it comes to their own bullshit.
If he’s cheating, there’s clearly a reason—he obviously wasn't happy with me.
Kuzis?

And we’re right back to square one: people refusing to admit they messed up.
I once watched this couple up close where she was being a total nightmare while playing the victim. She couldn't see how her own behavior drove her husband straight into the arms of someone else—someone who actually had some redeeming qualities.

I get where you're coming from here—it makes sense. It’s not about being "left," it’s about the context of the betrayal itself.

Joseph Rivera75 said:🤦

I'm not claiming anything; you're just quoting yourself.

Has anyone else looked at it this way?

If I cheat, it's his fault. If I get cheated on, it's my fault.
Which version is easier to live with? 🤔

Why would it be your fault?

Sam Jones8 said:People cheat for all kinds of reasons, and I seriously doubt only bad people cheat. When you're dealing with someone who has such a selfish, primitive personality—especially when they've got that "saint vs. sinner" complex going on—I don't know if there's any saving them, especially if they aren't even feeling guilty about it.
Personally, I think people like that are always going to be true to their own worst impulses, particularly if they're already acting like total jerks in every other part of their lives.
Why would he ever bother changing when life is working out perfectly for him? 🙂

Agreed.

Extortion via fraud usually boils down to a weak character or just acting on pure impulse.

Olivia Smith2 said:True love shouldn't involve suffering—some people just don't get it. 😁

We could actually get philosophical here.

Sam Jones8 said:That kind of crawling? It’s totally fake if there isn't some actual, deep-seated repentance and a total overhaul of who they are. Look, I believe in genuine remorse and people actually turning their lives around, I really do, but I also know all about those "quick fixes"—those temporary transformations where someone acts all fired up to make things right, only for the flame to die out, leaving them right back where they started, with all those same old reasons for cheating bubbling up to the surface again eventually.

Honestly, yeah. There’s no point in living with the knowledge that he only loves you halfway.
Plus, the whole "other woman" dynamic basically proves it. He gets the passion there, while the wife plays the role of the mother figure. It's a little schizophrenic, honestly.
The second love isn't mutual, it's just one-sided suffering.

Joseph Rivera75 said:Thomas Nelson25

Why would a guy act all high and mighty about forgiving a woman he actually loves, especially when she’s reciprocating?
What's even the difference between genders here?
What reason should a cheated-on woman be "happy" to forgive? That she finally has someone to cook dinner for and clean up after?

"If he really loves me, he won't let anyone else touch me."
It's just basic guy logic—and honestly, it's just straight evolution from back in the day.

A woman with a family and a marriage usually sees that as a serious institution—it's a huge part of her life—so if he still loves her (assuming that other woman hasn't stolen his heart), she'll probably just play nice and deal with it diplomatically.

feralranger said:According to various studies—which, if I may say so, align perfectly with my own observations—the majority of women exhibit higher levels of jealousy or possessiveness when it comes to emotional betrayal, whereas men are more reactive toward sexual infidelity. Of course, there is significant overlap between the two, naturally, and there are plenty of outliers, which is exactly what one would expect.

If a guy cheats, he can usually crawl his way back to his wife and family—provided he plays his cards right.
But even if he acts all liberal about it, deep down, that betrayal might still hit him harder than he realizes.

feralranger said:Monogamy, when contrasted with polyamory, inherently implies a certain level of jealousy or an exclusivity regarding third parties, which serves as the very bedrock of a monogamous relationship.

It is primarily a characteristic of the erotic sphere rather than philia; consequently, exclusive "monopolies" on friendship are quite rare, though I have observed that some individuals do indeed exhibit jealousy or possessiveness in that realm—for instance, I've noticed certain women becoming visibly agitated when their "best friend" decides to hang out with someone else instead...

I mean, it's good to know the different types of love, but honestly, it doesn't really change the topic at hand.

Also, women tend to process cheating differently—they usually find ways to move past it easier.
Men handle it differently, and let's be real, they probably have a harder time getting over it.

Plus, it was female Homo sapiens who actually came up with monogamy, not the males.

feralranger said:If the person you are dating (truly, mind you, rather than just paying lip service like most people do) wouldn't feel any jealousy—meaning they wouldn't suffer if you were to share an act of affection with someone else—then why would there be any drama at all, and why would we even bother calling it "cheating"?

The same logic applies in reverse.

At the end of the day, it’s just monogamy versus whatever other ways people love, if those even exist.

Jealousy is just two sides of the same coin.
You being a guy probably means you've got an ego to deal with, too.

Joseph Rivera75 said:They sacrifice themselves because they don't think things through in the moment. They just don't see the danger coming.

So you end up in a relationship or marriage like that.
Or rather—statistically speaking, that's how most people live. Not gonna lie.