Posts by Casey Gomez

When you’ve got sheep, you’ll never run short on wool. ☕

Laura Reyes3 said:Pornography doesn't always have to be about sex—though, let's face it, that’s usually where the lower classes find their fix—it can just as easily be about food prep, cooking, or sitting down for lunch...

After all, what is a reality show if not just another flavor of pornography?

We can take this concept as far as we want...

So, what you're saying is you're into Food Play?🙂
I'm certainly not judging; I always say there's a place for everyone... and let's be honest, I've got my own share of paraphilias. 😳
For me, I actually quite enjoy xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx in certain aspects of xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx.

Eric Newman75 said:So, what were you reading— Justin or 120 Days of Sodom? I actually got caught red-handed with the latter once. My middle school English teacher told me that definitely wasn't appropriate reading material for an eighth grader and sent me straight to the library. I brought it back, though I wasn't exactly thrilled about it. When I asked the librarian why they even stock books that kids our age aren't supposed to touch, she didn't have an answer for me. 😳

Was she actually being helpful, though? The librarian, I mean.

Anyway, I’ve read Justine. I haven't found any specific instance where Nietzsche explicitly references him or attempts to frame him within his own work, but if you consider their shared leanings toward ethical relativism, one could argue de Sade was essentially an early influencer for Nietzsche.
By the way, de Sade is almost always framed in a purely negative moral light, which is really just a byproduct of ignorant, prudish hysteria.
Personally, I’ve always interpreted that kind of reactionary outrage as nothing more than weak cortical activity resulting from cerebral calcification.

I recall being a bit of a degenerate myself... I mean, as a young adult, I was already diving into de Sade... it’s a little kitschy, sure, but honestly, who isn't? ☕
In truth, his logic is actually quite sound. ☕

Volar said:If you actually believed philosophers could provide a straight answer to a single question, what would you bother asking them?

Exactly. Honestly, I’m genuinely curious about how anyone plans to stay relevant in the workforce with ChatGPT breathing down their necks. Is everyone just going to pivot careers overnight?
Because look at the situation—poor guys went through trade school to learn manual labor, and now this happens...
I mean, Nvidia drops a GPU that's twice as powerful every two years, and suddenly everything changes. 🍿

It’s honestly quite pathetic how amateurish this argument is. There is a glaring, blatant failure to distinguish between the instinct for self-preservation and the drive for reproduction. They aren't one and the same, even if they occasionally overlap.

ruggedraven36 said:I've read Brave New World myself.

But did you actually grasp the point...?🙂

Bravery is nothing more than that sudden surge of unearned confidence you feel behind the wheel after eating a questionable bag of gas station potato chips.

Anything that isn't ugly is technically beautiful. As that famous poet once put it, truth is inherently ugly, which implies that lies are inherently beautiful. To paraphrase the poet slightly... if you actually had any taste, you wouldn't go around thinking you're attractive. 👍

First off, let’s be real: the women here aren't nearly as attractive as their profile pictures suggest. 👎 If they actually looked like that, they wouldn't be wasting their time on a forum; they'd be busy building followings on Instagram.
Secondly, the men are statistically below average height. ☕
I mean, what, 5'6"? Sure, that works fine enough in bed... but at least their oversized heads suggest there might actually be some brain matter inside. 👍
As for me, I finally went under the knife to fix my kyphoscoliosis. Now I’m right in line with the average guy on this board—if not slightly taller. 👍

Once again, victory slipped through my fingers by the narrowest of margins. 🙂 Even though they love to preach that "the early bird catches the worm" nonsense, let’s be real—this was anything but fair, considering the opposing candidate held a seven-day lead. 👎

Regardless, congratulations on your (highly questionable) win. I can only hope the next topic of discussion involves something more substantial, like nature or viticulture. 🙂

🙂I almost missed the deadline. To be perfectly clear, the correct answer is "in vino veritas." 👍

ruggedraven36 envisions it this way.

It means living in harmony with the natural world. ☕

Ugh... I really need to cook up an answer to all these frivolous questions... I have to let it simmer. Maybe marinate it for a month or two in garlic and gasoline to make sure it’s tasty and highly combustible... something that ignites instantly. It requires a certain amount of... shall we say, a pinch of intellectual finesse. But seriously, can I even go first? A new millennium is coming, and before it arrives, this entire American forum will be smothered in radioactive dust. I need something capable of satiating the hunger of the intellectual giants lurking on this subforum. So, here is my dilemma... I am facing a profound economic-ecological-ethical crisis. 🙂 .. .See, crows keep stealing my walnuts... and I want them gone. Believe it or not, I actually came up with this myself 👍 ....so my plan is to drive them away by feeding them pancakes loaded with laxatives. 👍
I am currently spiraling through a feverish emotional-moral dichotomy..😠
God, how my heart aches for wisdom... yet here, it is just one fool chasing another 🤷....

Linda Hughes18 said:What’s your take on resuscitation? Are you all for it, against it, or does it just depend on the circumstances?

I work as a nurse at a local hospital, and we recently had to perform CPR on a woman in her 90s because the doctor ordered it. To me, it feels pointless at that age. Honestly, I think she would have preferred to just pass away peacefully, but hey, who am I to make those calls? 🤷

The thing is, I’ve been thinking about it, and I don't even know where I draw the line. At what age does it stop being "saving a life" and start being "prolonging suffering"? When is it actually better to just let someone go? 🤔

So, what are your thoughts on this?

At that age, performing CPR almost always results in broken ribs, and frankly, I have serious doubts about what would even be left of that poor old woman.

Silence is rational. Yet, for some reason, it refuses to be quiet. 👍

fadedbison said:First off, addx never even mentioned herd mentality. Second, patriotism isn't some exclusive club for the "right wing." And third, calling it a "politicized herd instinct" is just wrong. That’s three massive misses in such a short post. 🙂

No, he was talking about "reflection in the other" as a fundamental part of being human... the idea of mirroring oneself... honestly, I’ll admit I didn't quite grasp that specific point... I mean, what is the core essence of a human being needing to mirror themselves in someone else? ☕
But where did we lose our way... ah, yes... mirroring... 👍 ...for a human to feel that need for reflection, that impulse has to emerge from somewhere, right onto center stage... consciousness, I suppose? Now, here’s a bonus question for anyone who has spent a year breathing in the residue of chemtrail aerosols: where does that drive come from? 🤷 This urge to mirror oneself within the collective—or ultimately, to follow the collective? 🤷
So, you get one attempt at an answer. 🙂
Generally speaking, I didn't claim patriotism belongs solely to the right... it's just that the right tends to have more intense feelings of love for the homeland... and the cross, right? Basically, everyone gets a little romantic in their own version of herd exaltation, so I’m being a bit cynical... I mean... it shouldn't be hard to read between the lines... 😳

Besides, a person doesn't need another human being "to become whole"... if they are already insisting on wholeness, some unreachable ideal... which means Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, David and even 👍

As Søren Kierkegaard once put it... human existence ultimately boils down to our relationship with others... though he was an existentialist, not an idealist.

hiddeneagle98 said:@La baba yaga

What are you even talking about when you say "dead right-wingism"?

That’s exactly what I was getting at. Even Sigmund Freud touched on this idea—that Jesus' radical individualism wouldn't even hold water if it were kept strictly "private" rather than being out in the public sphere.

Solitude, isolation, or just a total lack of community can have perhaps the most devastating impact on a person, especially on that core "humanity" within them. It actually reminds me of a documentary worth watching based on true events regarding the Deepwater Horizon era—well, specifically about a sailing race. There was this one around 1968, which felt like the first and maybe only race of its kind. All the competitors were out there completely solo; back then, without GPS, satellites, or any modern comms, they were truly alone on the water. The story follows this one guy who basically enters as an amateur, loses his nerve, and ends up anchoring himself off the coast of South America, just waiting for the race to end so he could head back to port without ever actually circling the globe (since nobody was really tracking them anyway). He faked his logs and lived in this state of constant paranoia. Among the racers was this Frenchman, I think he might have been some kind of philosopher, Bernard Moitessier who actually managed to circumnavigate the world. He was supposed to hit the finish line first, but just a few miles from the goal, he had a change of heart and decided to go around the world one more time just to follow a dream. I think he had a wife and kids waiting for him, but something just snapped in his head... if I remember correctly, he wrote a book about it later, which might be worth a read. In the end, only one person finished, the whole thing was a mess, and nothing like it ever happened again—at least not quite like that.

In a pure nature setting, a person would achieve very little for their own sake; life would dwindle down to mere survival, and whatever humanity they possessed would either atrophy or drive them insane. Woodrow Wilson is really just a way to delay that inevitable decay.
Practically every human achievement that elevated us above the animal kingdom was driven, in one way or another, by the "energy of society."

Would Jesus or Socrates have become who they were if it weren't for—from their perspective—the flaws of society? Their radical individualism is essentially a reflection of what is wrong with the collective; it wouldn't have any meaning without that society to dance against.

You’re sitting here lecturing about pack mentality... acting like you’ve actually figured out what it means to be a human being... which immediately reminded me of that whole "patriotism" nonsense. Honestly, I think right-wing politics is just nothing more than a highly politicized version of that exact same pack instinct.☕>