MFW CONSUMING PYSCHDELIC DRUGS, MEDITATING AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, DECREASING MY IQ
the basedgod fucked the anti-buddha's bitch
PYCHEDELICS INCREASE IQ I AM THE SAMRTEST IVE BEEN IN YEARS I CAN SEE THE WHOLE UNIVERSE TUN IN DROP OUT THROW UP POOP OUT LET THE TUSSIN GET YA AND LET YOURSELF ENTER THE COSMOS MAN
who is behind this thread?
>>25149582
Me. Problem?
>>25149595
You're bullying my daily life, now I feel sad.
>>25149616
Haha, take it bitch!
Do you think he approves of drugs like PCP that decrease empathy and let you see everyone as just another roach?
>shitty childhood full of shitty memories
>whenever I look back on my life I get crippling anxiety and depression due to my failure as a human
>start drinking cough syrup and eating allergy medicine to get high
>shitty life so nothing to lose anyway
>my memory gets permanently broken
>cant really remember my past anymore
>fully disassociated from my memories
>anxiety and depression free for first time in years
feels good
>>25149639
I fuck qt roaches
>>25149670
I did the same thing with cough syrup. When I visited home, I tripped my balls off and suddenly I lost all memory of my abuse and the violence/pain my parents have caused me. I can still remember good childhood memories too.
THE BASEDGOD FUCKED THE ANTIBUDDHAS BITCH FOR 9 WHOLE HOURS WHILE HE SAT AROUND TALKING TO HIMSELF!
THIS A PINK BANDANA PARTY BITCH
THE ANTIBUDDHA IS LITERALLY A KEK
>>25149639
Not many have done PCP. On youtube you see videos of people being on PCP, then you see the same video but the title was changed to meth or crack.
It has this "spooky scary drug D:" reuputation among normies for whatever reason.
>>25149759
check your email if you're reading this
>>25149793
woah its empty
>>25149629
nou phaquet
>>25149793
please
>>25148867
the mind is so complex when you're based
WHERE IS THE ANTI BUDDHA?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmJzeo3MEaQ
>>25149777
Cause some negro ate a homeless mans face when on it
BITCH I THINK I KNOW THE BASED GOD
>>25149825
Don't talk to me in French.
>>25149912
"This." - Smuggest Wojak.
>tfw you run out of acid
>>25149777
Yeah, it's not some spooky scary drug, but it does make you less empathetic from what I've heard of others who have done it and other PCP analogues. Sometimes that's not a bad thing, and you just need to figure stuff out within yourself instead of focusing on others. I think PCP can be a therapeutic tool/enjoyable experience if you're prepared right. But even so, the dopamine rush and painlessness, combined with the confusion of the dissociative experience, can make you really violent or do stupid shit if you're not. I plan on trying 3-MeO-PCP sometime soon.
>>25149978
>tfw it's been six months since you had shrooms
>>25149978
THE BASEDGOD FUCKED THE ANTIBUDSHAS BITCH UNTIL HE RAN OUT OF CUM
>>25149670
Dude, me too!! I used cough syrup and other dissiciatives and now looking back on my past is no longer painful. It feels so good
>>25150054
It IS some spooky scary drug through. My uncle did it and it triggered schizophrenia in him
>>25150589
All dissociatives do that, they mimic schizophrenia and alter the glutamate system.
>>25148867
The true epitome of sweet apples, the opposite of sour grapes.
'I always have my pride in my self-awareness of my inferiority (in this thread satirically defined as conscious embrace of "psychedelics" and "meditation"). I am an indifferent degenerate, and you can do absolutely nothing about that, even though (particularly since) I know you'd like to -- and I am going to elevate that ambitional gap between us to the level of a virtue, whereby I am stressing consciousness of my embrace of it -- whereby I am implying that self-governance is good even if it is thoroughly misplaced.'
If anyone is 'insecure', it is people who do that. If you want to be worthless, don't pretend that there is inherent value in it. If you want to imply total self-destructive nihilism, don't pretend that there is value in your embrace of it in spite of everyone else's natural drives to the contrary.
> mfw I realized IQ is bullshit, while I was on mushrooms.
>>25150723
how long have you been awake for? it's 4am for me, have you checked your email?
>>25150875
While I do essentially make a new one for every site I register on, there is no registration on 4chan, and so I have no 4chan-specific e-mail either
>>25150901
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9CXmEUwvgM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0yWelXwSfk
Goodnight, Anon.
did you honestly remain completely calm while that happened?
i sure wasn't
The fuck is this thread? Anyone?
DONT LET ME RELAPSE!
>>25151167
it sure is spooky
>>25151221
ikr, and what about bg fucking antibuddah?
don't you need a friend?
>>25151289
i think i need friends...
don't you think you've spooked me hard enough already?
have you done this with anyone before? did you enjoy this?
>>25151376
>>25151498
Did you get a mail or smth?
>>25151376
>>25151498
>>25151562
Wonder if inclination for inside expressions and ideas, designed to exclude other people from the circle in the know, and for playing pretend, whereby one person, the leader, proposes an imaginary scenario and other people are supposed to play along, are related to claims of 'language is limited, 'everything is subjective', 'everyone has his own reality' when one stops being underage.
>>25151637
stop masking ur stupidity with big words buddy.
Who /hiphop/ here?
>>25151746
Don't confuse desire to impress with desire to represent nuances exactly. This is not very related to my post, in which the only word that was construably, but not, redundant, was 'designed' -- just a general note.
>>25149825
>>25150057
these posts spooked me too
do you believe you have interacted with me before today? nobody has made me feel this loved before
also the smug neet threads were what sucked me into this board
should i go to sleep now?
im not sure if i want to sleep or keep asking questions
THIS IS GOATHREAD NOW
>>25151848
you don't make something clear by trying to make it look pretty.
your posts contain too many unnecessary words.
can i sleep now?
>>25151956
Perception of necessity depends on awareness of connotations. For a trivial example, for one historically ignorant, 'monarch', 'despot', 'tyrant', and 'emperor' would all be more or less fancy synonyms of purely aesthetic difference; it takes knowledge to know that those might have come from different cultures and, for instance, various past historians have proposed various classifications of government where each of those is abstracted to represent a different e.g. executive system.
why did you do this for me?
>>25152081
weak argument
am i being a pest now?
>>25152264
yes you are my good man yes you are
good night anon
bye
>>25152081
your connotations are different from mine. you could say im ignorant of history(which is a fiction), but if I simply have a different idea of what happened in the past you'd be just as ignorant regarding my idea of history.
so if you want to illustrate the nuances more clearly, you ought to define what exactly you mean with each word. and make sure that the definition is rational and non-circular.
anyone can improve their language, but first you need to understand the purpose of language, communication, and how to make it easier.
>>25152408
>you could say im ignorant of history(which is a fiction)
Don't imply that I implied that.
>if I simply have a different idea of what happened in the past you'd be just as ignorant regarding my idea of history.
Appeal to ignorance.
>you ought to define what exactly you mean with each word. and make sure that the definition is rational and non-circular.
>anyone can improve their language, but first you need to understand the purpose of language, communication, and how to make it easier.
The purpose of compiling threads I have posted would be exactly to open to judgement the question who abides by those principles most.
>>25152493
>threads I have posted
*threads I have posted in
did you know about me before i first communicated with you?
>>25152493
>Don't
I didn't, it was hypothetical.
>Appeal to ignorance.
History is a fiction. what is history to you is not what is history to me.
>who abides by those principles most.
You don't need to compile anything, the answer, which is quite irrelevant b.t.w, is me. the point is that when communicating, you somehow have to dumb what you are saying down, to reach the level of complexity of the one you communicating with. you sacrifice some clarity for a much better chance of achieving communication.
>>25152677
You are relatively masterful at connoting non-existence of objective truth ('history is a fiction', which is 'reality is in the mind'-tier), justification of ambiguity ('clarity must always be sacrificed to some level'), and so on. But it is boring once seen through.
>>25152708
>>25152677
And at any rate, I prefer to discuss facts, such as >>25152081 or >>25151637 or >>25150723, and not cliches and their users.
Why did everthying fall into place?
>>25152708
You are always employing a logical fallacy yourrself and even as the basis of your entire argument(in this one, you attack my credibility instead of anything I said).
I don't mind, because I don't expect all communication to be completely focused on ideas, though mine always is. You concern yourself with what you "should" and "should not" do, but you genuinely lack the intelligence to make any independent conclusions so instead you look for "patterns" of behavior and ideas to see which is "correct".
If you had stopped up, and looked at the words that form your thoughts, you would understand why you run around and around in circles with absolutely no purpose.
>>25152816
If you expect me to concede that you have 'won', you are mistaken. You have 'won' before I made my very first post on 4chan.
>>25152874
What you do in this thread doesn't matter the slightest to me. You can't struggle against something that is right.
>>25152912
I shall give you one more bump to reply to so to push my replies to people other than you farther up so to obscure them.
Bump.
>tfw anti-buddhist anti-psychonaut anti-meditation thinks he's better than those people because he looks up words on thesaurus.com and argues with strangers online as a way to feel good.
>in b4 a 4-paragraph flood of nonsense about the definition of "feel" and then "good"
>>25153005
>anti-psychonaut
I'm not anti-psychonaughts, I'm anti-'psychedelics'. I don't hate people, I hate those people's ignorance of their consequences which causes their adoption.
>>25153005
stop bullying anti-buddha you braindead /x/-fag.
>>25153069
>/x/-fag
Just like Xmas is Christmas, Xfags are Christfags. Not Buddhists.
>>25153005
What the fuck is a psychonaut exactly?
>>25153116
have u ever been to /x/? everyone there and their grandmother is a psychonaut. have you ever seen a self-proclaimed psychonaut say something even remotely intelligent? i for sure haven't.
>>25153066
You're CONSTANTLY going on about "druggies", which are people. Checkmate.
>>25153128
Someone whose brain has been metaphorized by drug use/abuse* so thoroughly, they cannot refrain from using metaphors even in self-identification ('I'm navigating the ocean of the mind').
*A solutionless dilemma: 'drug use' implies that it is harmless, and 'drug abuse' implies that there is complementary harmless 'drug use' as well.
>>25153152
I know, I know. Just a lame pun. Sorry.
>>25153128
People who do drugs, but only/mostly psychedelic drugs. They avoid hard drugs such as cocaine or painkillers and instead stick with natural plants such as Salvia and Mushrooms and some chemicals like LSD and DMT.
New-age hippies basically, they do drugs for religious/spiritual reasons without actually being part of a religion that has drug-consumption as one of the tenants
>>25153128
Someone who seriously explores altered states of mind. Of course, there's a lot of people claiming or are claimed to be psychonauts, but they could just be people doing drugs.
A good example of someone who seriously engages in this activity is Alexander Shulgin. One might say that his work is rather absurd or meaningless in some sense, after all it's not like he's working on the cure for cancer and he gets a reputation for being a druggie wierdo because of the drugs. But even so, he is firmly set of researching these chemicals both as a serious chemist and as a test subject.
>>25153212
>they do drugs for religious/spiritual reasons without actually being part of a religion
This. Literally every religious person will say they're not religious. Then they resume 'logically demonstrating' how consciousness permeates the universe.
>>25153066
magic mushrooms increase IQ and empathy
GG.
>>25153230
>both as a serious chemist and as a test subject
That's like believing that a serious neurosurgeon operates on himself.
>>25153261
Careful, he'll actually argue that things like appreciation and empathy are bad
>>25153242
>Literally every religious person will say they're not religious
da fuq
I was actually waiting for you to correct yourself there like you usually do because you're always too excited and illogical to check your own posts before uploading them.
I can't tell if you knew of me or not.
>>25153393
>he'll actually argue that things like appreciation and empathy are bad
Way to cite the conclusion and not the reasoning, namely that appreciation, properly disambiguated into the soppy reactions 'drugs' contribute to, affects the memory to contain one's emotions as one talks with or looks at something, which results of less comprehension of the non-emotional aspects of it, such as implications or mathematical structures (a couple of examples of which I gave in that thread).
Also.
>not proofreading your posts is illogical
In druggie lexicon, 'illogical' has truly replaced 'bad'.
>>25153514
>which results of less comprehension of the non-emotional aspects of it, such as implications or mathematical structures (a couple of examples of which I gave in that thread)
...which results in less capacity to help people and animals in need.
>>25148867
Question, is there actually a way to actively decrease you IQ to carefree dumbass levels? I feel like if I was mentally impaired I would worry less about everything
>>25153263
False analogy, as neurosurgery one one's self is all but impossible. There have been plenty of various other surgeons who have succesfully performed on themselves.
Also, Albert Hoffman.
>>25153591
Huff gas and sniff paint.
but then you won't so much feel like you're mentally impaired, but actually be mentally impaired.
>>25153416
I was baited too perfectly. Yes or no?
>>25153514
>which results of less comprehension of the non-emotional aspects of it
complete and utter bullshit.
Emotion is what drives people to learn.
>>25153642
not the guy you're replying to but I did that for 6 months straight when I was in military school as a teenager. I still have a 126 iq and pass tests with no studying. I'd recommend excessive alcohol and weed use. I've been doing that and lately have stopped being so cynical and overthinking of everything.
>>25153591
You should literally kill yourself for just entertaining that idea, but -- no reduction to a sentient level would fail to entail thorough, constant, excruciating memory of abilities you have lost. tl;dr you're just an average person who has no conception just how much IQ affects.
>>25153609
>False analogy, as neurosurgery one one's self is all but impossible.
That's LITERALLY THE POINT of the analogy. Just as it is not possible to operate on one's own brain without causing crude damage, it is not possible to use 'psychedelics' without misevaluating their consequences (again: shift out of the empirical perspective of relating them to long-term life outcomes, subjectivization of language ('it is good for you'), and so on). You are retarded. Though not as retarded as you will have proven yourself to be when you'll point out that that Hoffman man 'still conducted chemistry' after his trips.
>>25153677
Congratulations, you just failed to perform the proper disambiguation I referred to in the post you replied to. Emotional attraction != intellectual attraction.
>>25149670
that's p cool i guess
>>25153723
I'm not talking about the IQ as the number itself, I'm just asking for a way to impair my brain enough to stop caring about anything like a lobotomy-lite
>>25153723
There's no such thing as "intellectual attraction".
Even if there is, you have no proof that the two are mutually exclusive.
actually 100% of what you say is always utterly baseless and only exists in your circular reasoning.
> it is not possible to use 'psychedelics' without misevaluating their consequences
[citation needed]
>There's no such thing as "intellectual attraction". Even if there is, you have no proof that the two are mutually exclusive.
You observe it innumerable times every day. When you complain about women only caring about music for pretty musicians, or about people only listening to the lyrics (not really) instead of following every instrument individually, it is just that. When you accuse autistic people of 'not understanding facial expressions' when in reality it is regular people who don't understand them, it is just that.
>[citation needed]
Ah, here comes your anti-scientific mindset. Took some.
>>25153860
>>25153789
meanttoquoteblox
>>25153860
>only listening to the lyrics (not really)
Meant to say you don't really complain of people underappreciating instrumental music.
>>25150057
>tfw its been 15 months
>>25153723
>Just as it is not possible to operate on one's own brain without causing crude damage
it technically is possible in a few years, just pretty much pointless as it is.
Already brain surgeries have been performed on conscious patients.
http://www.iflscience.com/brain/man-fiddles-his-violin-during-his-own-brain-surgery
the things is, it doesn't compare to psychedelics, neurosurgery is an extremely delicate and physical procedure. Psychedelics are not.
Scientists experimenting on themselves is not something that's exclusive to the world of chemicals either.
>>25153860
>You observe it innumerable times every day. When you complain about women only caring about music for pretty musicians, or about people only listening to the lyrics (not really) instead of following every instrument individually, it is just that. When you accuse autistic people of 'not understanding facial expressions' when in reality it is regular people who don't understand them, it is just that.
none of what you wrote relates to your so-called "intellectual attraction". You're talking about autistic people who don't understand social clues and Justin Bieber fans.
>asking for proof of claims
>anti-scientific
I'm sorry, what?
>>25153860
>>25153789
In fact, it really is irresponsible to indulge druggies' requests for citations, considering that they demonstrate their true colours far better when they just insult you, but I just remembered about that prominent theory representing that dimension.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathizing-systemizing_theory
Its author might be just one of the few researchers who really understand autism.
>>25153985
I am referring to your anti-scientific, ideologically-motivated insistence that in absence of studies at some arbitrary standard of quality relating some two outcomes, such as use of 'psychedelics' and choice of life pursuits, one should not seek out studies on that at other standards.
>>25153994
>a poorly-cited wikipedia article of a heavily criticised theory
okay, so where does that prove your entire argument that empathy and appreciation somehow negates intellectualism?
![chief_keef_by_aarpom-d8qjjsm[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/rLSZJ9s.png "chief_keef_by_aarpom-d8qjjsm[1].png")
TRAPPING IN YM VACANT
SERVING ALL MY PATIENTS
>>25154083
>>25153985
>inb4 you conveniently omit the 'in absence of' bit as you've always so far done
>>25154084
>empathy and appreciation somehow negates intellectualism
A false dichotomy, druggie? And such a blatant one? There are lots of other fallacies to indulge in, druggie. Where's your ambition?
>>25154083
Could you rephrase that in an English sentence that makes sense?
>>25154084
Also, of course it is 'heavily criticized'. If you had skimmed that article, you would have noticed that it mentions a difference between male and female brains.
>>25153994
Does doing this day in and day out entertain you?
I'm incapable of understanding your motivations
You're at the bottom of the barrel with everyone else here and then you insist on going after them for wanting some sort of escape?
You are seriously the most autistic person I think I've run into on 4chan.
Do you realize how pointless and silly your posts are? This is 4chan, you aren't going to be changing to many opinions.
I mean if this is all part of an elaborate shitposting scheme, you could be putting a lot less effort into your shitposts and still getting a pretty good response ratio.
![QVhCxaX[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/AUdT7tv.jpg "QVhCxaX[1].jpg")
TAKE THEM BOYS TO SCHOOL SWAGONOMETRY
BITCAH IM BLEADING BAD LIKE A BUMBELBEE
>>25154125
>there are no studies fulfilling my imaginary arbitrary standards of reliability
>therefore, again, IN ABSENCE OF THE ABOVE (for fuck's sake), I am going to arbitrarily forbid you from forming conclusions based on ones with different ones
Literally being anti-science. Utterly baseless.
>>25154214
For instance, your arbitrary standards that a 'proper' study is only done by a such-or-such university. Or doesn't involve self-reporting. Or doesn't involve physical measurement. It is all imaginary, anti-intellectual crap.
>>25154266
>Or doesn't involve physical measurement.
*Or involves
>>25154206
SCREAMIN BRING BACK GUCCI MANE
>>25152927
HAHAHA BTFO
THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE
>>25154171
Kudos (?) for for some reason choosing not to insult you.
Thus let me say that I am aware of the balance of gains and losses I get from posting, not even owing to occasional pseudo-reality-checks such as yours here.
>>25153591
On a lifelong scale, IQ of the individual always drops to zero. To identify with a single body is to doom one's own intelligence.
>>25150723
antibuddha please
>>25154471
Show, don't tell.
What do you disagree with?
>>25154487
I agree that everything you say is 100% correct, from your own entirely unique, self-constructed, and self-policed point of view. You will change your mind, many times, and then you will join those you disagree with, and become them -- proving they, and you, correct.
>>25154311
Your post is a bit confusing.
You kind of fascinate me though, I can't think of anything I care about enough to argue about it all day on 4chan.
Want to be friends? You could tell me about how foolish my drug habits are and I could try to get you to partake with me. Maybe we could get a sitcom deal.
>>25154574
'I-I-my argument is, uh-I--TIME MIGHT YET PROVE ME RIGHT AND YOU WRONG, SCIENCE WORKS IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS!!!'
>>25154577
>Want to be friends?
No, I want to die -- me, and, more importantly, you.
>>25154646
>No, I want to die -- me, and, more importantly, you.
God you're a silly mother fucker
>>25154646
That is certainly what you hope I mean. Hope is a very fleeting comfort. Realization is a far more lasting one.
Also cheer up! Get some sleep and some food in you.
>>25154574
>>25154680
In other words, typical misequivocation. 'You are "correct" in the sense that "correct" doesn't exist in the first place, in the sense in which every single claim is "correct".' In other words, you literally just redefined the term 'correctness' to mean 'the property of being interpretable in this or that sense or context as true or false'.
You know, Buddhist sophist, I wouldn't mind your fallacies. At all. The problem is they are so painfully heavy-handed, so crude, so uninspired.
>>25154725
Not a Buddhist, though you may feel free to classify me in any way that helps you win this game you have created for yourself. Only you know the rules, or how to play.
>>25155129
>>25154725
ur both fukn gay desu
>>25155129
>helps you win this game you have created for yourself
Translation:
'You are not truly liberated from the shambles of ignorance and failing to see the broader context, namely, the context of the figurative, negatively-charged "game" that your current actions I imply are, your playing which I arbitrarily assert is "excessive" and "irrational", until you do as I imply of you -- namely, until you stop pointing out my sophistry, go into the corner and shame yourself, repenting for your baseless discursive temerity through meditating on subjectivity and relativity of all knowledge for an hour or two.'
You could pass for a Buddhist sect leader, but only an average one.
What is heart-breaking that there are real Buddhists out there, who use this manipulation on real people.
>>25155286
In short, you are implying that I don't 'understand' a purported 'broader context' that 'whoops I am wasting my time in this discussion'. Utter crap. There is no such thing as objectively wasting time, fallaciously positing which is exactly what you obscure your aggression as.
>>25155286
Each of your novels says far more about you than me. Classify and subdivide all day, tap tap tap. Spot the inconsistencies. Flay the hypocrites. You're so close to getting your point across...to yourself.
>>25155378
>Each of your novels says far more about you than me.
That's true, by the way. Considering you're just a shitty baiter, the group my posts say most about is Buddhists who've devised those fallacies in the first place.
>Classify and subdivide all day, tap tap tap. Spot the inconsistencies. Flay the hypocrites.
This one is particularly vile. 'Yes, I acknowledge that you're being logical and rational and this and that -- but this still means nothing if it's MISUSED because you missed the bigger context!!'. Buddhists do this so to diminish every single particular act of being right with 'yes, but what if the bigger context is wrong?', in a race to obscure the fact that they have been just proven wrong. This is essentially sour grapes: 'I, uh, I don't care about the fact that I'm being proven a retard over and over in this discussion -- what matters is that I have my pet tautology that every right and wrong is subjective and a proper always reasoning can be applied to an evil purpose, what say you to this?!?!'. This is the age-old religious flight into abstractions. Buddhists break out of the established context ('objective truth doesn't exist either way') so to evade responsibility for their particular failures.
>>25155526
>>25155378
>...to yourself.
Or, the Buddhist's evasion of choice might be slightly different, such as, here, 'you can never convince anyone of your point anyway'. This, or that, or the original 'observe your mind'... doesn't matter. It's escape, evasion, deflection, every time.
I love how the 'anti-drug/meditation' guy looks down upon those people as being retards and them wasting their time and precious intelligence, and yet seemingly all he does is argue with them for like 72 hours straight at a time, like that's a good use of his own time and life and supposed to make him better.
>>25148867
Oh my fucking god is this thread still up? Well done guys you took the bait.
>>25155693
>seemingly all he does is argue
>seemingly
>realizes the unknowability of that accusation
What the fuck. You're too clearly intelligent to be a druggie/Buddhist/'meditator'/religious person. What are you doing in this thread?
>>25155693
And seriously?
>'The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.'
People whose sophistry I explain (>>25155526, >>25155286, >>25154725, it is idiots all way up) are idiots, but explaining it is harder than spouting it. Consider this an exercise at literal definition.
>>25155747
Well of course you sleep and brush your teeth and whatever else, but this thread was posted 7 hours ago, and you were at it in another before the other day. That is most of one's day.
So you're literally everyday arguing with people that you see as being retarded.
Why?
When I see a homeless person on a street corner ranting about how the lizardpeople want to kill him, I don't spend 8+ hours of my day everyday trying to argue with him.
>>25155876
Your lack of verbal abuse is unsettling.
Also.
>>25155876
>brush your teeth
Holy shit, I wish you fuckers could stop assuming thing for JUST. ONE. MINUTE.
>>25155894
Well?
Why do you spend your days in the company of what you see as buffoons?because it gives you emotional pleasure?
>>25156373
>because it gives you emotional pleasure?
This is a free will-tier explanation, 'I did it because I wanted to.'
But kudos for remembering and referencing the distinction from earlier ITT, that of 'emotional' and 'intellectual attraction'; so maybe this hypothesis wasn't as empty as it might sound.
A *part* of the reason is, it is damaging to let go, e.g. of pointing out harmful sophistry mentioned in >>25155828. One must not double- or triple- or even ten times check that one's concession that 'one must prioritize and let go of unimportant things in life eventually' does not accidentally catch too much, i.e., that it might result in letting go of things that one *could have*, in fact, managed to do nonetheless. One must do it a thousand times. One's definition of things to do should always remain just a hair under the level of collapse. Only strain builds. Cf. the religion of authors of pages returned by searching >how to let go.
>>25156612
In other words, it is much harder to cling than to let go.
>>25156612
>'I did it because I wanted to.
>want
>constantly exposing yourself to ridicule and abuse
Sounds like you could use some Buddhism in your life tbqh
>>25156691
>you could use some Buddhism in your life
Says a Buddhist.
>>25156712
>>25156691
Also, did you miss the quotes?
>>25156732
You quote everything all the time, especially things that were never said by anyone ITT
>>25156770
>especially things that were never said by anyone ITT
Not my fault you're unfamiliar with quotation marks to the point of thinking they only serve to cite immediate interlocutors.
Also, what I meant is, >>25156373 hypothesis regarding my motives was vague, because literally every action is impelled by *an* emotion, which makes it a tautology, 'I did it because I've had it in me to want to do it'.
>>25156825
>'I like to to shitpost with 15 strawmen in each one of my posts'
>>25156887
Whatever you say, Anti-Strawman.
>>25149489
Fuck off with all your Buddha shit
