#truth?)

[publicembarrasmentblues]

maybe im crazy but sometimes i can just tell certain people want to die by my hands

[ask-the-curtis-gang]

TIMOTHY SHEPARD TELL ME YOU DID NOT KILL A MAN.

I did not kill man.

[r3starttt]

me and my gf

my gf and I

[infiniterequiem1743]

Code and Geass: The False Truth (Contains Spoilers)

The following is a collection of my opinions and my perspective on the story of Code Geass. Everyone is free to their own views and arguments, I simply ask you to keep them constructive. (I DO NOT OWN CODE GEASS)

The geass' magical ability is something that can change the world with its mere existence. Throughout the series, we have seen countless times how potent of an ability the geass is. And while it is an awesome ability, what can be seen as an ability designed to further the story is actually a destructive portrayal of what each and everyone of us can do. If everyone had a geass tailored to fulfill their deepest desires, then the global war Lelocuch caused would be nothing compared to the chaos and bloodshed a geass-filled world would create. Geass as a concept, as previously mentioned, is the manifestation of the user's desires in an ability that can help them reach their goals. The geass is obtained when it is bestowed upon them by a Code Bearer, an immortal who had forsaken their geass for immortality. The most famous contract between geass user and code bearer is the one between C.C. and Lelouch. But code and geass go hand in hand as complete opposites, creating a yin and yang style relationship of misfortune.

But what geass is varies. It is a symbol and power designed to be destructive, coming from the base instincts of humanity. But the idea of a geass is a mind-altering idea, a concept that so few understands or comprehends correctly. Just the mere IDEA of Lelocuh having a geass was enough for the Black Knights to get scared into joining Schneizel. It is that same fear that manifests the geass, the ability to control one's own destiny. The power over people, fate, reality, time, death, anything the user desires. But the price of obtaining geass further separates the mortal from mortality and morality. The more someone uses a geass, the more it consumes them. It drives the user further to depravity, cutting off their bonds and isolating them from the rest of the world. But honestly, why shouldn't they? They are the second closest things to gods on the mortal plane, commanding concepts thought to be out of human reach. We see this as the geass user starts to mature and as time goes on, especially with C.C. Someone who had just wanted to be loved found her entire reality shattered because of her geass. She was given love, just a false love. A love that manipulates the emotions of others for her own personal gain. That is not what love is, but it was the love she understood to be love. Geass picks the user up at their lowest before breaking them back down even deeper. It is a cruel and unrelenting curse.

But geass isn't the only curse, as the immortals of Code Geass had shown time and time again. Code is what code bearers need to become immortal, but must lose the ability of geass in the process. The only exception I can currently think of is Lelocuh in the Resurrection movie. (Sidenote: What do y'all think of that movie? Comment your opinions and I'll do a genuine deep dive into the benefits and downsides if this does well enough. Anyway, I digress.) But in my opinion, code is the complete opposite of what geass is. Instead of a mortal trying to play god, it is a god trying to play mortal. They have reached the pinnacle of human stature, an immortal that can't die and can make contracts that create demigods. The cost? Everything. All ideas of humanity, everything that you once knew, is now gone. Code bearers don't fear death, but instead crave it. The idea of wishing for death is more than abnormal for humanity, especially with the uncertainty that comes with it. But as an immortal, there are no rules or punishments you have to play by. So when a human loses their humanity, they become a shallow husk of themselves. There are some obvious outliers, ones that go against my previous statements as shown through the main story. But think of how long humanity has lasted and how many code bearers made contracts with humans. Imagine the emptiness of watching the worst of humanity manifest itself through a power you created. Watch as the person you once knew only became subject to their basic instincts of desire. It is a fate that no regular person can overcome on their own, one that takes away everything you love.

Geass is the manifestation of one's own desires, forming into a power that is almost impossible to control. But as time goes on, the user simply becomes the physical representation of what the geass is. As for code, it is the taming of geass to become something far more powerful. But with greater power comes greater suffering. Code strips away what was left of the geass user, simply becoming an immortal shell that is forced to walk the earth. These two can teach a lesson on how to behave ourselves not just for our own good, but for others. Do not let the appeal of power or godhood define your actions, as it will end in a neverending hole of wanting more. Instead, it is through the acceptance of one's humanity that people find purpose.

Random Question: What's your favorite OST to write to? I've nearly gone through all the anime one's I like, so I might need some recommendations.

[aclatural-tilt]

Book: Alice in Wonderland & Philosophy Perspectivism & Tragedy: A Nietzschean Interpretation

[Page 153-154; First Line] 'In order to have knowledge or 'truth,' we must first embrace some illusion and falsity.' [Page 165; Last Line] 'tragedy teaches us that life is to be celebrated.' Seeing these lines side by side, the first thing I think of is, 'you need to believe in the little lies, hogfathers and faeries in order to believe in the bigger ones - honour and truth.' I don't think this quote will ever leave my mind, it is such an interesting way to shw the importance of story while also referring to them as 'lies.' It's hard to see any other connection between these two claims. Neither is very intuitive. As the essay is about perspective - it could be an attempt to show contrast. In order to appreciate something, you need to know or understand its' counterpart. You learn more from your failures than your successes is another phrase which comes to mind. You can't accept something as truthful without first looking at all the possibilities. You need to think through the information provided to you and have something to compare it to. Lots of the information about the world we receive young. That is accepted as 'knowledge' unless we choose to examine it. For many, it informs prejudice, religion, what is 'good,' or 'bad,' etc... even how we should expect to be treated by others throughout life, what responses to have if these expectations are not met. This might be what is meant by 'embracing falsity.' Some knowledge needs to be assumed as knowledge 'else we would live in a constant state of paralysis. It would destabilize us. On Tragedy... Though I don't think tragedy teaches us to celebrate - other lessons can be learned through such cautionary tales. The pitfalls a person may fall into - under the right circumstances. Instead of the assertion that tragedy teaches us life is worth celebrating - it shows us what is worth celebrating. What we need to be happy, more importantly, what we don't. [Page 154] 'We are forced to construct a meaningful world in order to survive the chaos and the madness that surround us.' Is this combination of ideas leading to an idea of distraction? The 'modern world' (if you want to call it that) is infinitely good at that but it hasn't lead to a sense of meaning. More like aimlessness. A distinct lacking, lost. If not exactly this then the crutch of rationalization hich as examined in this essay - Ayn Rand & Bioshock - has some awful and somewhat unintended consequences. Humans need to be emotionally connected. That might be what Nietzsche is trying to get at by praising art and tragedy in particular... what would the focus on hardship and tragic circumstances do to people? People learn through practice. You need to practice finding joy, calmness, and contentment. Examples of stories that show smaller lives well-lived. Artwork not fluffy or ridiculously naive but which depicts struggles we all have... seeing them as rites of passage. Proof that you're living out the full breadth of your humanity. To be fully invested in all of its' seasons. Background Nietzsche: 'will to truth - affirmation of life rather than truth being absolute. 'will to ignorance - avoidance of confronting uncomfortable truths. Embracing illusions, lies, or simplifications to preserve psychological well-being, social harmony, or sense of meaning. There is value in seeking truth while understanding that some ignorance is necessary to maintain mental and emotional well-being. What is meant exactly by, 'affirmation of life' in this context?

Embracing Reality including suffering. Do not seek to exacape any aspect of life.

Rejecting nihilism. Creating meaning for oneself through action, creativity, and self-overcoming.

Will to Power. Self-overcoming, personal growth, and continuous reshaping of one's existence in ways that enhance life's vitality. Creative endeavor then leaves a mark on the world. Grow and live your unique potential. Overcome limitations. Can extend to domination over others (political, social, psychological).

Eternal Recurrence. Life will repeat infinitely in the exact same way. Accept life's totality.

Criticizes those that restrict individual potential or perpetuate weakness and hard morality. Seeks to inspire and affirm others; life rather than simply dominating them.

Vitality: Life force or energy that rives groth, creation, and expression. Embrace both reason and emotion. Acknowledge you own role in broader social contexts.

Thoughts: I'm seeing a slightly different spin here to Ayn Rand's ideology. Though Nietzsche embraces emotion. - Art concretizes the human condition.

You don't necessarily have to overcome them but find a way to live alongside it. It's to omuch to expect a person to solve every complexity. Although Nietzsche would see to agree given his 'will to truth/ignorance' dynamic. It does say you would at least not dwell on them. Not really nearly as much similarity to Ayn Rand's framework as I initially thought. Important - Unimportant - Unimportant - Important [Page 154; First Line] 'Knowledge requires leaving some things out.' [Page 155; Last Line] '... to choose, to select, and to simplify what counts as real.' With it stated like this, it seems to imply that nothing is actually 'real.' That it all ies in our choice of perception. Like Nietzsche, I don't much value absolutes. So, in this line of thinking, I would argue that consistent action and thought patterns would be what becomes 'truth.' It is how personality is defined. A collection of habits, action, and thought patterns over a period of time. As we experience, we can always re-examine whether or not or previous adaptations make sense. But practice is what will determine if your change in course will stick. But I'm still not sure what this section of the essay is actually trying to get across. Perhaps just to display the dynamic between 'will to truth' and 'will to ignorance.' [Page 154] 'Nietzsche also looks at the world as a succession of adventures tha to provide us with relief from the boredom of our lives.' From what I understand, particularly withthe idea of 'eternal recurrence' Nietzsche is about embracing every moment of life no matter te emotion or circumstance and to live your life in a way where you wouldn't change a single minutia of it. Adventure - yes. Take action and be who you wish to become... but not for boredom. He wants you to push the boundaries of yourself to forge a life entirely your own. This essay is incorrect here. I do not agree with every aspect of this ideology but the nuanced way it willls you to live and wholly be yourself... that, I can get behind. That would be the 'embrace reality' aspect of the balance of knowledge and emotion. I am surprised at some of the similarities in Nietzsche and my thoughts. But the recurrence thing, I think is a little ridiculous. Cycles are great and are how much of life works but we do not continuously exist. Our energy sink down into the earth to feed a new kind of life. I also wouldn't want to live my life the same exact way... I would like to explore another set of options available to me and see what that version of myself might have become.

[Page 154] 'Our experiences are subject to many different interpreations and no one specific perspective is the correct point of view. Bt in order to form perspective, we need to ignore many others.' This is true and a succinct way to explain how 'will to truth/ignorance works. I will say that while it is technically true how there is no 'true' version of a story, there are definitely more skewed retellings of what happens than others. And that some of which might seem wholly different could both end up being 'true' for each person telling of how it affected them. This demonstrates why I, particularly dislike black and white notions. Life is always a blend of so many factors. [Page 154] 'In this way, we create 'truth' though we convince ourselves we have 'discovered' it.' Is this distinction truly important? I understand that one allows us to acknowledge that it was our judgement and nderstanding that drew a specific conclusion while the other makes it seem as though it was lying there fully formed and realized. We might question our ideas nut not what appears to be complete. Either way, we are likely to draw the same conclusion with the same us and the same information available to us. THis might lead to a moot point with the distinction itself. My other thought is that we create 'truth'(?) Is that the result(?) I think, instead, we create a narrative which allows us to contextualize broader information.

Background: Nietzsche Discovering Truth Mistaken for objective fact. Provides a false sense of certainty. Creating Truth Encourages the role of our own agency. We do create narratives around our lives but in doing so we create what we take as 'truth.' Our conclusions are taken as 'truth.' Nietzsche wanted to redefine the word 'truth.'

Thoughts: I don't see the need to use the word 'truth' when it is subject to and expected to change. Essentially this section means that the frameworks we use to understand the world around us means we are required to discard other ways of processing. This makes what we take as 'truth' relative to the filters we use. It takes the idea further that we should be ready for these frameworks to shift as we experience the world. They are not fixed systems. Rabbit Holes & Abysses In looking for the first and last sentences (topic sentence and conclusion) I am again wondering at the seemingly disconnected way this essay flows. It seems to find the statement that Rick Mayock is attempting to argue around is strewn across a few (or more) sentences or questions that steer away from the main point and focus instead on our assumed stance on truth... I find it confusing. I don't even mean to criticize the writing style as with the tone you know it is building to a toss of the blackboard to reverse all of those statements but, for these analyses, it can be difficult to parse precisely which idea the writer is arguing for or against. Which also means I can't determine if I agree with the presentation or wish to dispute it. [Page 155; First Line] 'Truth is sunject to imterpretations and fluctuations. What if what we thought to be realit were to dissolve beneath our feet?' [Page 157; Last Line] 'We depend on narratives that keep us engaged, keep our attention from wandering.' Here I've reverse engineered the way the writer conveyed his message to find the purpose of it in the first place. So the first one is not actually a direct quote thought it is the focus of this section. It is also largely what's already been discussed. What we understand as wider rules for ourselves, society, expected etiquette, or behaviour, or morals can generally be expected to evolve. They cater to our 'groundedness' in the world but they, themselves could be called into question and aren't set in stone. istory has chaned what thought to be 'good' or 'correct' a thousand times over. We live here and now but what is done later can be expected to e radically different to us. As far as the last line, I believe it to be partially correct. In some background information, I laid out the relationship between narrative and 'truth.' Our narratives create what we understand as 'truth' and we use these as foundations for how to navigate the world... however, conbined witht he idea that it is to hold our attention is where this takes a wrong turn. The purpose of the narrative is to balance our confrontation with the worl's hardships 'will to truth' and protection from emotional and psychological pain that results from living a human lifetime (will to ignorance). We need to be flexible enough to challenge ourselves and our assumptions but provide respite from them at times. To encounter narratives (or stories) which remind us what is possible. That all emotion serves a purpose and enrichens us. Experiencing our humanity in a way that engages us to live as we best see fit. It is so much more than holding our attention though that is a byproduct of this way of existing. I'd also like to ask... where would our attention wader to, if not the life we have to live out? No amount of distraction would alter this simple fact. And merely being distracted hasn't ever given people what they need to call this life living. I disagree with this essay's take on attention but agree with Nietzsche on our need to embrace the agency we are afforded. [Page 156] 'We create adventures to relive ourselves from a life of dullness and indifference.' This is the aspect I disagree with. Stories and adventure or experiences can and do accomplish this but it is an incomplete view of their purpose. They exist to teach us, to show us a different way, or to challenge us. They might even provide us with a new value or way of life we wish to integrate.

[thebirdhivemind]

i own a wedding dress because one day when the moon is right im going to go in the middle of nowhere, walk away from my car by like four kilometres, and stand on the side of the highway staring into space in the dark so when cars go by they think im a ghost

[youropinionsareirrelevant]

I don't know who to believe any more...

youropinionsareirrelevant 10.2023.

[joes-sha-la-la-la-girl]

Surprise surprise I’m obsessed with another Def Leppard song:

[apocalypticink]

00100010.

Dialectical

Thesis and antithesis

Joined in synthesis

Humans and androids combined

This is how networks are formed.

[midnight--architect]

People really need to put a time stamp on this so we can tell how expensive the world has gotten in such a short span of time. 2 million won't stop poverty, but maybe you can take a break and try to recover.

[golden-letters]

bitch this is all you’re gonna get. this life, this face, this body. you better not ‘maybe in another universe’ your way out of everything. sit your ass down and face this. go make tea and have a picnic and read a goddamn book. kiss your loved ones, send that damn text, and hug your siblings. this is all you’re gonna get.

[ryanlewisandclark]

i cannot hate myself into a version of me i will love.

[smokeweedeattherich]

I'm convinced Mythbusters needs a reboot. Misinformation or mythinformation if you will, is at an all time high. We NEED the show that promotes critical thinking to come back. It doesn't need the same cast, in fact I think it would be better with some fresh faces. Imagine all the good it would do if you could just show your crazy uncle the Mythbusters reboot episode that debunks his anti-vaxx conspiracy in an easily digestible and entertaining format.

[soul-from-another-era]

Unconditional love isn't a free pass to hurt me.

[keithmosher2]

Can't Have Nice Things

The Ketamine King Musk has shutdown the IRS's Free Tax Filing system.

Of all the things a government could off, a way to Freely calculate and file your taxes seems like a good one. But the richest man in the world thinks we shouldn't have that.