Wiccan Wedding Dresses

Slight Zhizni 11

Love you man retort:
«Soul can happen in 14-18 years at the stage of identity formation. I think that you more. And that means that you will be hard that either overestimated. »

R.CH. Love it:
Yes, it is difficult, all the "protective" mechanisms interfere - but what do I have to live and work in such conditions is not simple. Self-understanding of the philosophical system - already involves the reevaluation of values, ie spiritual development.

Abdullah then Love and R.CH.:
What Love says about the age Rules of identity formation - in my opinion, this is a blatant naivete and misunderstanding. Identity can not, as I understand, / formed. For Person, must be believe is the one who refuses to final formation of the consciousness of his own Ya After all, what the formation looks like no zakosnevenie, adaptation, extinction samorazvitiynoy activities. When You Love, said Georgi that you think you already know what is good, because you have already formed personality, it was funny. Because logically turned out nothing but if you say: "I know what is good at somewhere 18 years of the person as it is at that age, I formed and completely entrenched views on life. " Sorry, but those sformirovyvayutsya as a person with the onset of puberty can not, as I understand, and solve issues of Genesis. Uma does not suffice. After all, for such complex fabrics need minds is not something like a collective formed personalities, but it is what continually evolving and developing personality.
And you retort man did not say that thought out of courtesy ... Love it? But I prefer honesty ... and I even, somehow, do not want to apologize for it. Because I think this is the best manner of communication.

Love R.CH.:
«vozdnystvie on consciousness by psycho could have implications even more negative than those from which you want to get rid ....»
agree and about the same and say: dangerous thing, there should be "seven times measure, cut once." You can, incidentally, is not psycho and a prayer to God, ask him to get rid of something. Although some believe that it is also a form of psycho.

Abdullah:
I tell you one clever thing, but you will not be offended. I think that getting rid of bad memories do not need. On the contrary, they need to worry and worry, chew and chew until the World of Enlightenment. You understand what I mean? It is this self-torture and there is, I think, the way to manhood.

Once in my childhood, my father expressed the idea, saying that "bad" memories are forgotten, "good" remained. I had then thought, "What cowardice! a glaring lack of creative interest! how childish .... "

Nietzsche:
Search should be guilt and misery ...

Abdullah:
Because of the continuous deepening of the jungle laws of life and peace and the absence, thus the formation of views on life, I've been in the nuthouse much as six times. And I think now my intelligence begins to beat the disease. I learned how it seems to me so well to understand what is happening in my mind that only last month returned several times to himself from the chain of thoughts that, as I know from experience / in its essence / are leading back to the clinic. How do I manage it? That's because I'm learning to understand the essence of a general nature, the symbolic nature of the signs to recognize exactly those maneuvers of my mind. And with each return from the path to disease, I feel more confident and more confident.
As Freud suggested?! Artificial self-deception to build new defensive mechanisms, more powerful old, do not resist? / It's the same idiocy /! We have to go ahead, forward to more complete truth about our soul to self!

Karen Araevich Svasyan:
(PHENOMENOLOGICAL
Propedeutics KNOWLEDGE AND CRITICISM
Chapter 4
RAID is self
§ 1. Delphic commandment)

Gnwqi seauton - Know thyself. It is the word inscribed on the temple of Apollo at Delphi - one of the oldest words, bestowed upon the man before the end of time. It - the invisible center of a dazzling colorful circle of all human culture, from the lyrical breath of some of Catullus by smarmy cynicism of some Abbé Galiani to warped neogeometricheskih spaces and hypercomplex numbers, from the Socratic cup of poison through beaten with a stick Epictetus and Hypatia was torn with the crowd to roar posleverterovskih suicides and idiotic mutterings obsolete Baudelaire is the leitmotif of this blessed: Know thyself. Center - force gravity, a solar proton, around which rotates and is held back all the fullness of the cultural circle, depriving the center of this circle, and he immediately disintegrate into meaningless fragments, cultural symbols will turn into empty volumes and the decay products. So, when confronted with the center of the circle, facing we are the central theme of culture, and the theme this is humanitas: man as a point silyaschayasya know yourself and to expand to the circle, to fulfill the highest mission of their calling. Circle of culture is here transpariruet Imagination intelligent countenance. "Over the years, - we read in one poem, Jorge Luis Borges - a man inhabits the space of images of provinces, kingdoms, mountains, bays, ships, islands, fishes, houses, tools, stars, horses and humans. Shortly before his death, he discovers that the patient labyrinth of lines carefully composes the features of his own people "[1]. Thus saith the poet, and the truth of his words are echoed by the scientist. Werner Heisenberg, going from the other side, suddenly finds himself in the area literally microphysical shocks. And he called that, exploring the universe and looking at it objectively property, "a person meets itself" [2]. Strange roll call, all the more strange that the consent of the poet and the scientist escapes back to the earliest symbols of a mythical cosmography, where the unity of microcosm and macrocosm is perceived through the formation of man from the parts of the world and the world of the parts of human [3]. Thus, in one of the hymns of the Rigveda shows the appearance of the world torn body of the Purusha, and in later Christian Germanic mythology is revealed the reverse situation, where Adam's body is made up of eight parts on the basis of their compliance with land, sea, plants, etc. Such is the Seven-Limb map of the world Hippocrates, depicting the earth as a human body. Today, evaluating these ideas, we're talking about a naive anthropomorphism, which was destined to fall under the crushing impacts of progressive scientific knowledge. Physics thoroughly eradicated these images, replacing them with the increasing power of abstraction, until finally, the structural space of myth was not finally eliminated the functional space of mathematical science, where the dismembered body of "first man" was transformed the theory of invariants related, according to the Erlangen program "Klein certain transformational groups. The fact that naive anthropomorphism harbored in itself something more than just naive, it turned out, the visibility of children's pictures (plotinovskaya metaphor of space as a "decorated corpse" Enn. 11, 4, 8) to hide the deep meanings of unopened, in which both had a chance to glimpse one of the founders of Physics of the Microworld. In-depth mathematical formula vaunted one for the purity of abstraction and other ponosimaya for inhumanity, she turned suddenly encounter with existence, - not without "a grain of salt: Niels Abel, a brilliant young man, a mathematician, formulated the impossibility of solving algebraic equations of degree 5, could rightfully challenge kirkegorovskuyu monopoly on the mystery man.
Meanwhile mystery prokidyvalas shadow of the new Sphinx. For the big hit of growing knowledge about the world remained invisible simplest to mind the question: what is man? Analytical spring, attracted by opportunities stretching, moved, seemingly precise point at which deformation begins, and lost the elasticity of the impossibility of returning back to itself. Differential equation Rights, drawn up in the course of centuries, as if lost relationship with its integral, the person has a spice, a specialist, brilliantly mastered the "Legion of methodological aspects and thus ceased to be generalists; The universality of man was transferred from plane to plane realism nominalism. The reality remained beyond the "special": chemist, logician, poet, mathematician, postneofreydist and neopostantifreydist, "expert" was given its own without the rest, the person is taken as the integral of all these spices, was forced to take thirteenth place at the table: he became flatus vocis, pustozvuchiem, socratitas, scholastic Latin, rhetorical flourish, gongorizmom, a note to the text of the "thinking computer, "Kai school of logic, in a word, he stopped and began to be mean, doznachivshis to a record level of" theory of knowledge without a knowing subject "[4]. Who knows, if already wandering in the clear as day, "propositions" of the theory of the ghost of an ancient cynic with a lantern in his hand: in the edification of seeing?
Self was similar to the images of children's books: there, in a motley amalgam of patterns, lines and spots, it is proposed to find a figure of hidden "spot" here in the rattling information boom, you want to find (and save) "apprentice sorcerer," drowning in a new Flood own stunning achievement.
Search for a person was searching for the ark. To him, in fact, led all the way when a traveler ability to resist the temptation of stops and a final rest in the acquired specialties. It was necessary to realize the human self-knowledge in the subject, and it meant: to start from the end, with the mood of Faust, pull the cup of poison in the Easter night, with a decrepit Faust, overcome them in the culture of intelligence "spices" and found the new unheard of youth through the power of magical awareness of themselves as "poor fool" with Faust, disenchant culture-Circe in the subject of infinite loyalty to the rhythm, walks, paths. It was necessary to curb the centrifugal knowledge centripetal of-knowledge and more - with self-knowledge, so that the center has expanded to a volume and the volume has shrunk to the center, for creativity - in whatever it manifested itself - there is always samotvorchestvo; otherwise it is - nothing, cymbal rattling, an idol in the mask of the ideal, a shallow affair, sophisticated self-deception, unmasked once and for all of Tolstoy's immortal rage "Confessions." Only then can dehumanize function will turn the world anew inkarnatom anthropomorphism, is not naive, and Sophian, wise, and the measure cultural world will, in the words of Goethe, "the triumph of the purely human: all meaningful only insofar as humanity and promotes the growth of humanity. Disappear, perhaps flawed science division at the natural and human, humanitarian (and so far natural) will, without exception of science, so that the humanist future will reveal itself as clearly in a reasonably sensible and humanized scientism as a humanist past - in philology. Only then a new rise undying true maverick Greek, sealed misunderstanding of the century: "Man is the measure of all things." Measure of a blade of grass, kolyshimoy wind, and measure of the icy outer space, the measure of his own pride and a measure of their own shame. But that truth is not seduced by false consequences, should would exhaustively brighten her horizons and understand it in totality. He therefore is the measure of all things, that all things are, in turn, serve as a measure and a reminder of their own his humanity.
Abdullah:
As this brilliantly edited by an Armenian translation (M. Ontonovskogo) "Thus Spake Zarathustra" ... I am / just bastard / from this translation.

==========================


: LOVE:
I certainly had a view of creative transformation. But your response has given pause. If you discuss the theme of eternal life, then perhaps a supporter of the theory that man does not live one life and in past lives and future and the present. I am far from a world view and believe it to be unfounded, but it's close to your thoughts. Or am I not right?

Abdullah:
No, I too believe this outlook unfounded. In any particular sense I am a materialist to the core.

: LOVE:
I enter into polemics with the fact that overcoming depression - the action, and the term "bogootstavlennost" felt pronounced "depressnyak. I already wrote earlier, that the good is the way to the good. As well as knowledge of the essence of Christ - is a process. But I'm trying to understand your idea of looking common good through Christ, and the position of "bogootstavlennosti" I think that goes against your own theory.

Berdyaev:
Experience bogoostavlennosti not to deny the existence of God, it even suggests the existence of God. This is the moment of communion with God in the existential dialectic, but the moment painful. Bogoostavlennost experiencing not only individuals but entire nations and all humanity and all creation.

: AL:
Information field is for each person. And then there is the effect. The Young person is born with the "collective unconscious", there was already "navliyali" many generations of ancestors. So why same Savrasov through you to influence others, and some sort of your friend, with whom you occasionally drink coffee and walk to the exhibition - is not affected? What do you think is the difference benefits of Savrasov, the benefits of Kant's and benefit from the familiar?

Abdullah:
We all have influence. But it all seems to me, it is not the same in terms of qualitative and quantitative The difference in the parameters ... "benefits from Savrasov, the benefits of Kant's and benefit from the familiar" I think it is in these settings ...
Kant povliyatelney much, perhaps, will Savrasov ... But Christ, I think, where something as influential to Kant, in what respects this plan is the second in a familiar thread ... Nietzsche as, for example, is so influential (potentially) be Kant's, as far as the second influential on my prikidochnoy assessment Savrasov. So ... when I say for DII (spiritual and intellectual hierarchy), I just relations degree of influence in promoting non-refoulement and mean. Of course, all these are my Personalities prices purely about-intuitive, hypothetical.

:: LOVE:
: Abdullah:
: How do I ask anything of those who will live through the years thousand, and those who lived a thousand years ago?
: Love: Why so far to go! In living creatures, you can ask.

Abdullah:
How can I do this? If I had been given to the world-in microphone and offered an opportunity to ask - does anyone anything could understand? This, in my opinion, almost the same as if Michelangelo asked to have the granite boulders: "And whether you want to I'll ennobled?". And then ... You talked about the assent of mankind, rather than his contemporaries in a separate vzyatosti! Contemporaries - only a moment, a fragment of mankind (interpretation of the "living" as "humanity" - regard as an illusion of objectification). They can not be responsible for all of humanity, as not equal to all mankind. And I, at the same time, do not call to improve humanity today, but / humanity in general. I just do not see an opportunity to improve something concrete, objectified taken.
knows what this illusion of objectification, In my opinion, is connected? In my opinion it is related to the concrete setting of the human subject (nedobogochelovecheskoy) psyche to perform tasks within the duration personal life.

: AL:
In this case, we can issue - / attainment of eternal life / is a universal good ??????

Abdullah:
question refers to me as a logically unjustified. It's all about the word "achievement" with regard to "eternal life".

=========================


SB:
: But the beginning of my confusion:
: I understand the inequality of men, I understand the professional excellence of one person over another (dentist surpasses me in a doctor's art, but I may have it in prevoshozhu those abilities that God gave me), but I do not understand what it means to the superiority of the individual over the individual (where the criteria? not a profession - to be a person) and especially do not understand where the idea of inequalities, conclude the superiority of one person over another.

Abdullah:
Maybe it's not used to? Very posing question may simply be too / custom / ...
Indeed, it is impossible to understand who the best specialist, where there is no understanding of the specialty and the nature of specialization. And if there is no idea of the purpose of personal самовзаимосовершенствования, then there can be no representation on / target / congruity detection degrees of personal growth. But the fact that "there is no such profession - being a person" - does not mean after all that "and should not be! Clearly, this may not be such a profession, where for the qualification you can receive and pay compensation. It should be, I think, is something purely spiritual, where the reward is directly Increased self CHANCES.

«yourselves vagina does not wear out, a treasure unfailing in heaven, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys, For where your treasure is, there your heart will be.

Luke. X increase antientropiynogo Might of the Creator, Development, Heavenly Father. "

«who does not gather with me scatters.

Luke. XI, 1923 »

I understand that a whopping historical attempts to outside financial and objectified gathering had occurred in the earth's development of society in general. But these attempts a purely spiritual self rapidly degraded, corrupted, I think, in the conventional period (term Aurobindo) precisely because of its primitiveness nedoosoznannosti for development purposes. While there is a monetary relationship, until the inevitable spiritual smezhovyvaetsya even with mundane, illusory - indeed BE should remain in force for assault not only on legal but also on personal and qualitative equality of all people. You know what I mean? I think that as long as remains at least a grain, though the shadow of the financial relationships - not to be another kingdom of God. While even an ever remains in force the power of libido, tseleneosoznannogo (Subliminal) in H - Harmony does not come purely creative endeavors of all the children to the Development Objectives of the Heavenly Father. For where does mankind legal, and where to begin student-quality? If someone "marks in a teacher - so immediately, instinctively perceived as an infringement of a competitor for всеобщей конкурентной возни и подпольной борьбы. Каковы его мотивы? Чего он хочет? (Поэтому и был распят Учитель). Люди моментально понимают это исходя из своегО metamotivatsii level, a level of "understanding" super-task.
You know perfectly well how to treat Freud to all this. He proclaimed the principle of pleasure, as the driving force of all mental processes of ordinary people. Same creative people he considered almost as an anomaly, a deviation in nature. He was not only a theorist but also an enthusiastic practitioner, and in accordance with its weighty observations led - that nature rukovodstvovaniya in the processes of consciousness at the basis of its very nature of the unconscious. No ethical assessment of all these findings, he stubbornly refused to give than puzzled many. The clearest example of puzzled - Maslow and Frankl.


SB:
: All people are equal, but equal in their unequal, and if there is an unequal extremely unequal, then this is Yavroz superiority.

Abdullah:
Sorry, dear leader of the seminar, but do not you think that you have something too tricky bent? That means in this context, "but equal in their unequal"? They gradually unequal, a little bit? And there can be a special inequality? Ah-ah-ah! Seems to understand ... I realized that You want to say ... One of the inequality in one sphere - into each other - but in general we obtain parity with that ... I just can not agree. The truth, as they say, is more expensive. You said yourself somehow that is, they say, monsters, ferocious villains, and something like that ...
I think Sergei, what's even thinking especially not on anything. People are unequal it is as an individual human being, the degree of gracious living for its thoughts and feelings. It's so obvious and obscheponyatny fact ... even to challenge it do not want to. Another thing - how to treat this, to discuss possible zatabuirovannost our public consciousness on this issue. When
Here in Azerbaijan, it comes to someone missing the stranger, and yet they say "a good guy, made a sudden osekatsya and politely respectful slander - "Let there be no better than you (present). ... I like something, not very understanding in these subtleties, I remember, said about someone without that coveted reservation. I hostile killed with the remark: "good - for himself." I do not understand and asked again, saying "What?". Patiently repeated: "good - for himself." At the same time face was cold, alienated, "prison-conceptual"; claiming to be instructive pathos. It was formulaic odergivanie "bespontovyh. Fairly quickly realizing what was happening, I'm just like Jesus, uttered an overwhelming philosophical refutation of this "concept". The meaning of what I said in reply was as follows: "Good is not he who / discover good / but the one who is good for others." I have not found an answer to such a custom logic improvisation. Because of these ostroumstvovany me some dislike ...
I think this example illustrates that it is relevant to the issue at all. The ratio of the mass of people psychology to the issue of personal qualities is the same as the whole world, to life in general: it - / consumer /. In fact, if you treat the whole primitive-consumer - Then the equity in that all share "a brother", no one cheated. Where not vaccinated yet creative approach to themselves, their neighbors, to the universe, the historical processes - there continues to rule the herd instinct. Basic needs, basic satisfaction, contentment is elementary. They have their understanding of "good" and "bad" guys. Good - a strong, able to fight for the existence of the guy (He can be consolidated and fight together) bad - schmuck who can not defend the place under the sun (why he did need one?). Everything should be simple.

Nietzsche:
Beware also the holy easy! All for her folly, it is not easy and she likes to play with fire - the fires.

Abdullah:
among elementary revealed the good guys all should be as brothers. All are equal in their goodness. What is the hierarchy in the relationship! any complexity! Why all this nonsense heaped need? Here's how talks Innocent simple folk. After all, the good - it's so easy! This is food, shelter, more money, get married - and it all each / for yourself. What is there to think about! Why think! Fuss!

Nietzsche:
... terror is for us a degenerating sense, which says: "all for me."

Abdullah:
So what good can be only to / for myself. And they are immutable laws that can not be broken. If you hit, insulted - you must answer. But do we have here in the county joke is I ruthlessly violated this law and they go unpunished. After 2000, several times I was beaten, insulted, and I did not answer. And because / as / I did not answer, they everyone understood that I / not just / quote Christ's turning the other cheek and, but that behind all this is that kind of surreal, spiritual, all of them completely unknown force.
And you say: "... and if there is an unequal extremely unequal, then it is Yavroz superiority." I'm just that it is extremely unequal, and it is not an illusion inflamed imagination. Extremely unequal one who breaks the old tables and approves new, actively implements the presentation a new understanding of the values and rules of life. His actions, words, thoughts, feelings make trouble and embarrassment. And it does not know how to treat. The coolest kids in private are childishly naive asked me to retire again in meditation, do not go into the yard. Because they think I'm just crazy, and / without knowing /'m doing confusion curiosities in their collective consciousness and instinctive relationship that was something probably bad against their will and I will be logical to just gently ask for ... oh how my soul laughed at the same time.
But somehow they're right. I need to learn to go back to meditation. By six months, happened, I did not leave the house. And this was, I think, very helpful ... I have suffered spiritually like no other. But now this is not enough and there is no coercive power to solitude. A free to retire at their own, I still have not learned well. When I talked to Victor about amebapodobnosti my life - I may be a bit cunning in his thoughts, gave the desired for real, exaggerated.

SB:
: Regarding your advice on the assessment of H-ideals: "no ambitions of media ideals should (and could) lead the process ideology of integration, but ... fair identify objectively the potential heritage values of all cultures ... "then I think it's because of utopias. Anyway, I am personally taking part in a great number of ideological, scientific, literary, political, religious, educational, philosophical events and actions, nor seen a single person with the stated degree of impartiality. Sorry, do not watch it and you. And I'm too biased.

Abdullah:
And what do you suggest? Keep going napovodu have ambition? Do not recognize anyone's personal superiority and no one to learn from anyone?

SB:
: Getting rid of addictions, the person gets rid of I, which is absurd by definition.

Abdullah:
My research leads me to believe that all the passions of all I'm in a metaphysical principle, in the ontological basis directed to the same object. Identification of the object, the awareness of its nature must, in my opinion, lead to integrate all I, all attachments. That is not zhizneotritsayuschee I get rid of (the Buddha, Schopenhauer), but awareness of its consubstantial, life-affirming aspirations (Christ-Nietzsche-Abdullah) is offered me. And what do you suggest:

SB:
: Output is not impartial. Output - in nepokushenii on preferences of other people.

Abdullah:
... in my opinion, this is an elementary rejection of any changes at all.

SB:
: You ask: "Is there anyway to any ontological reason to teach someone else to live, to understand, to feel? ". The answer is: of course.

Abdullah:
What?

SB:
But further questions arise: what it means to teach? someone who has the right to teach? what to teach? etc.

Abdullah:
Live Learning - what else! The point is to survive, as I understand it ... and no other ontological reason, I think, can not be.
A "someone who has the right to teach?" - A question, in my estimation, is not quite correct. Teach, as I understand it - is a duty, a sacred duty, not a right. If you ask again, "someone who is obliged to teach?" Answer, so better than perfect.
As for "what it means to teach?" - My answer is: it means spiritual and intellectual improved.

SB:
And on my forum with some buddies get it.
: There once was me. Many years. He lived in everyone: good and bad, stuffed cones He got experience how to live better. Suddenly, the Internet out of nowhere appears a virtual imyarek and says: "live as I am, I am the Truth." I answered him: "I have lived so I will not do so. " And he said: "live, as I said, I am the Truth." And I told him: "Yes, you finally listen to the voice of my ego. And he told me: "I am the Truth, live in my opinion, yes you will be saved. " And this you call learning??

Abdullah:
What is your question? If only the latest to issue a proposal - it is almost the essence of what I mean by learning. That salvation (self-preservation) is understood by me as the essence of Learning in general. But to say "I am the Truth, live in my opinion - little information ... exactly how this imyarek lives? This must be considered. Otherwise I can not say.

SB:
: I do not quite appreciate, whose lifestyle is better: yours or mine. It's hopeless lesson - everyone has his own way.

Abdullah:
I do not think so. We have, I believe, can not be "everyone has his own way", when naiglobAlneyshem consideration. And just so I've only been considering for some time now my DIR (spiritual and intellectual growth). I think that in its essence - this is a truly religious attitude to the world and life in general. And in this, naiglobalneyshem respect, I do not see / miscellaneous / lifestyle, because everyone and everything is taken as a whole.

SB:
: little resemblance to our ways of life - the metaphysical thinking of the virtual forum. In this respect we could learn from each other. For example, I agree with your statement, that "inopredmetnost - nonsense for philosophy." But you sometimes confuse tactical knowledge to the strategic. Of course, I'm not opposed to discussing any topic, but here's imagine - and incidentally, that there be - I really suggest you write an article on the results of the forum pages of such things at 5-6. For publication. Well, as you can cram all there? And much to teach people? Try, and there and see.

Abdullah:
Thank you, but in the publications of philosophy Articles do not see the necessity with the advent of internet-sofilosofstvovaniya of forum.

PS
Why did you delete my posts? You are, you will, that something was wrong doing something ... uroduete, in my opinion, this wonderful forum raskromsaniem whole context of talks.

I have not found reports of George to me. Prepared a response and minutes ten sought where it should be published. Realized that it simply has no reason ...
may themselves come up with, to put this answer:

***********
: GP Let
give the definition of an ideal world.
: In my opinion this is not the world energy and material world.
: It's a world of ideas that exist objectively and purely informational, as a kind of "field of ideas."

Abdullah:
Do I understand that, do you think the world has the perfect attitude to the world of energy-material? If the wrong understand ... if / how / it, in your opinion, has to do with it? I can describe it how you see the possible relationship?
I do not think what else / Atheistic ideals / may not be relevant to the world of the ideal.

Berdyaev:
revolt against God could only be in God's name just for the sake of higher idea of God.

GP:
: Only if infoobmene we get the new without losing the old. It is clear that the highest form of infoobmena - is an exchange relationship, because the ratio You can work out in itself, as the installation.

Abdullah:
/ I / think the highest form of infoobmena - is the coordination of value (blagostnostnyh) orientations (Integration in the field of flavors, the identification and perception of more / good / mother / the will / volition).

GP:
:: Abdullah:
:: I believe that the "treat others as want to treat you "- the idea is untenable. Because it makes a difference / desire / the subconscious feeling. Should people flatter others, if he wants to flatter him?
: GP
: Here and choices. If I want to love me whether I should radiate hatred?

Abdullah:
Why did you / want / to be loved?

GP:
: Flattery - an action and I'm talking about relationships.

Abdullah:
None. You, as I understand, talking not only about relationships, but also about the alleged property relations. Relationship should be more perfect, godly ... and this criterion is put forward by you ... elementary desires. I was about will and asked a question, rather than flattery. You think rukovodstvovaniya desire self-sufficiency? I do not think so. The very desire, as I understand, it should be forever on / good / razhivat. And for that we need more fundamental slogans with claims of conversion, improvement of the will of Christ ...

:
Seek the kingdom of God.

Abdullah:
example: "Do people flatter others, if he wants / to flatter him?"?
Can / desire / be the criteria? What is the criterion measures gracious (TsELEosoznannosti in A.) of the most desires.
If I / want / to implement the eternal object of my desires hauled to contribute, whether I should contribute / Desires / other? And if these desires are not formally dock with my desire, how to define a bigger truth of desire?
I think things are not so easy to solve problems with such slogans ("slogan" in German "solution"): "Treat others as you would like them to treat you."
attitude, as I understand it, should not be just to specific individuals, but to the cosmos for all eternity the formation of matter and spirit at all.

Nietzsche:
above love of neighbor is love to the distant and the future; higher still than love to the man I love to put things and ghosts.

GP:
: GP
: Sergei free subktivizirovat any idea of making it for yourself installation.

Abdullah:
you think so?
And I think what you have, in fact, since "he was free / objectify /. The objectification of views of phenomena and noumena is, I agree with Berdyaev, the fragmentation of imperfect consciousness of perception and judgments but also individual objects in an object. Subjectivity same / all / ideas is, in my opinion, to unite all the ideas, the idea at all, to Christ, to the maximum effectivization (harmonization) of all interactions the path of salvation (by the way all the large increases in the rate of increase chances of No Return to Chaos).

GP:
: here / it is only necessary to know / that it will be at the level relations on which this installation "works."

Abdullah:
/ should / only know! A / why / it / you think / need to know?

==========================


retort H:
: Abdullah:
: And you retort man did not say that thought out of courtesy ... Love it? But I prefer honesty ... and I even, somehow, do not want to apologize for her. Because I think this is the best manner of communication.
: Retort man:
: Here is an interesting question for me. Why certainly in explicit form, in the form of objective apodiktichnoy truth, to express his thoughts? Why not take the form it is a subjective opinion (even if you are absolutely sure of the truth of his ideas)? Can you justify your choice of shapes?

Abdullah:
If you are somewhere you can see my mneniyaizyavleniya categorical terms, it is, I think, or your carelessness, or omission of mine ... but ... may be an omission not without a share of provocative intent (seriously).

retort H:
: Abdullah:
It is this self-torture и есть, думаю, путь к богочеловечеству.
: Ретортный человек:
: Согласен. И эта мысль мне близка. Когда же я говорил о уничтожении плохих воспоминаний, то это I tried to look into the distant future of mankind. And suppose that then, maybe, for improvements already made at the time of universal benefits will have to address the bad memories. Since the benefit from them will have all taken (taken all their cleansing and uplifting power of God), and they remain as the only negative facts only, already deprived of its good strength.

Abdullah:
In my opinion - is superfluous. Awareness of the metaphysical meaning of conflict consciousness is, it seems to be the solution.

==========================