Arguments

Actually, ddavidd, I give this one to Luce.

I responded with my earlier post because

1. knowing Deepak Chopra as a brilliant man, albeit a sensationalist, I could expect him to say something akin to your statement, although I suspected you misquoted him somewhat

2. it appeared to me the salient issue was not "forgetting" but "denying"

3. I tend to bracket out the irrelevant

In this case, our young ingenue is brilliant

Did oz ever give anything to the tin man?

Play Music
"Tin Man"

Sometimes late when things are real
And people share the gift of gab between themselves
Some are quick to take the bait
And catch the perfect prize that waits among the shelves

But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have
And Cause never was the reason for the evening
Or the tropic of Sir Galahad.

So please believe in me
When I say I'm spinning round, round, round, round
Smoke glass stain bright color
Image going down, down, down, down
Soapsuds green like bubbles

Oh, Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have
And Cause never was the reason for the evening
Or the tropic of Sir Galahad

So please believe in me
When I say I'm spinning round, round, round, round
Smoke glass stain bright color
Image going down, down, down, down
Soapsuds green like bubbles

No, Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have
And Cause never was the reason for the evening
Or the tropic of Sir Galahad

So please believe in me

Actually Larry as long as I am right you could give this to anybody who rocks your world (most likely by compliment...)
Your political bias is not my concern. It saddens me because it is you, but it is you who have to live with your karmas.
I only used your post about interpreting the quot. which was more and less what it meant.
so why should you bring the sensationalist of Deepak Chopra or the integrity of my quoting to question now? To become the hero and supposedly save the day for a little innocent girl who is being bullied by a monster? You proved that; you prove that you are the hero of the fairy bubbly world.
What did you want to achieve by calling on his supposedly sensationalism? Out of desperation that you had nothing relevant to hook your argument to? To discredit him? so what? First you haven't proven his sensationalism by a vague slogan. Second I am not his defender I agree with him on occasions, third if even he is proven sensationalist, it does not prove that in this case he was wrong. And if even you, one in a million chance, managed to prove that, it doesn't prove anything and that even proves that you are in the same enclasp that EL. is ( no wonder why you call her wobbling mind, brilliant) you brought yourself down, not her up. For I just used that sentence to depict an Irony of "lets argue about the argument" What is these fuss are all about? You were right in first place and you even tried to explained to her what that mean. But now that she appeal to you by her compliments, ( good political move El.) you have second thought your position. But this is not an honest approach!!
The comparison of the brain with the liver was factual I heard it myself. In this, though, I did not hide that I am quoting him from my memory to begin with. So here as you doubt the integrity of my quote, I doubt the integrity of your judgment.
So give it to whoever you want, that matter do not matter in the eyes of the truth, and neither your judgment any longer, and this is the only thing that really really matter.

Cavity (n.) Look up cavity at Dictionary.com1540s, from Middle French cavité (13c.), from Late Latin cavitatem (nominative cavitas) "hollowness," from Latin cavus "hollow" (see cave (n.)).

Between the heart ,mind and soul the chamber of the heart must contain the breath that is the metaphorical soul or spirit which feeds the mind . A cavity has no substance therefor lacks organization to support life as we Know it

"Arguments often evolve into semantics"
ddavidd would you agree with the statement in quotations ?

I believe

I did explain that by cavities I meant: anatomy parts. It is a mistake often happens when you translating a thought from your mother language to an other.

So what ??

I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw

So what ?? you are so defensive to the offensive you missed my point ,and my question

"Arguments often evolve into semantics"
ddavidd would you agree with the statement in quotations ?

You talk with metaphor It is hard to understand if you are not familiar with the sources of those metaphors.

Edited
what I understood was you saying that I did not use the proper terminology. EL. already motioned that. and I already explained.
but if you meant something else sorry I missed

And yes now I am a little defensive regarding my history in here and the uncalled for frowns I am getting.

Yes I do in the perfect world but not here though. Here only evolve into team, clubs, and who you can have behind you to support any wobbling mumbo-jumbo you say. Almost irrelative to the semantic.

But I said yes already . I believe.

You can take an organ out of a cavity , and fill that cavity with a cavity , but you are left with a cavity

Google refudiate

I was reading a poem of yours where you use adjectives in a very unique way and I love colloquialisms

I have been accused of not knowing my anus from a cavity in the ground :)

Haha that was hilarious.

but I could, mine ... would never gets mixed with the crawlers of the ground to begin with, thanks God.

And for the first part no if it is an "anatomy parts"

I compare much of your work to Michel De Nostradamus (English with French colloquialisms and or a mixture

First of all thanks for paying attention to my works. poor works they are my victims.

Second, I know who he is; thanks this is a compliment,(I suppose)but why??

"I was all the friends
who've turned to icicles
in the winters' nights,
hovering forever,
upon the rain pout of these frames
on these walls."

This personification of rain pouting in the frames of your walls

over my head so to peak

Don't be so thin skinned
some days you eat the bear, some days the bear eats you

besides, she doesn't need any heros

Haha the humble hero now

I am not tin. I am defending my truthfulness as you doubted it unrighteous-ly.

When you go after king you have to bring your righteous sowed as yours is broken now.

The king is the truth my friend not my ego

Hinduism and Buddhism have least differences in defining various psychological terms such as self, ego, soul, etc.

You are too full of yourself, ddavidd.
You presume much in responses that are simply not there.

.

Buddhism, came from Hinduism. If I remember right but they are interrelated.

all the religions and believes said different thing about different things, they killed and blood bathe one another and then they all end up saying the same thing

edited
you could say so Larry but I answered that in my respond about ego few post before. Ugly ducklings just seem and sound that way to gorgeous ducklings such as yourself.
And yes she dose, that's why she called on you for rescue and that is why you jumped back to the argument. I SEE, you know??
You are very protective of girls like EL. Abby, perhaps Silvershoe and siby... you must have a daughter that is very endear to you.

As we were discussing semantics I think it was Ingrid that brought to my attention the root word of rational is ratio . I received the first eight years of my education in a dogmatic setting only to find the fundamental truths should all end up saying the same thing. I even remember you boldly starting a thread on collective consciousness in the days a certain moderator would suspend accounts if he did not like your tone lol

I am glad you remember that. It means that you pay attention.

I said the same thing right before this post.

I like to metaphorically compare extended forum threads to the bible story some think is BS "Bible Story" about the Tower of Babel /(babble to some)
of conscience or self knowledge as merging with collective consciousness easier imagined than reached (as in the illusion of blue skies and oceans )

It is the same thing.
religions actually glamorize the same story. I have found it out in my poetry that we are connected. Though our attentions are devised to take us to the world of individuality and separation. But slowly we shall discover that connectivity, by love, by charity, by care, by compassion by devotion, by scarifying our interests for the one of others.
Actually religions are made to help us to discover those connections. But we make those religions as the means of our separation again. We Pay attention to our fingers ( pointing at the moon) as Bruce Lee said, instead of seeing the glory of the moon. The finger is our flash the extension of our egos, preventing us to see the very thing that it is there for. We do not comprehend, that only from the angles of our individualities, it seems that the other indexes are off, in pointing at the moon. Our fingers are the point of our separation, our unity with our isolated eyes. Because as collective consciousness we all know that all our fingers are pointing at the same thing, at the glory of the moon.

This also goes with the story of religions that we all were in the present of God and then we got separated and send to the earth.

I once recalled that connection through my left eye driving by a church at night in highway seven Toronto. 16 years ago.

Larry: " some days you eat the bear, some days the bear eats you"

haha larry I do not eat bear I hardly eat meat, so that equation does not exist now. If even the bear eat human, or they only kill us. The way you and EL kill me one way road, by your logic.

I guess going by your reason I am the brilliant one now!! Or maybe not, because I do not qualify, I am not an ingenue!!

dear Larry sorry for my thinness and my sadness but I always felt you are like a father looming through these clouds but I know now you are only another man.

"If you want to know an answer I can't turn your life around
For I am just a painter passing through the underground

...

If you want to know my secret don't come runnin after me
For I am just a painter passing through in history."

Gordon Lightfoot - A Painter Passing Through

And we still are fond of that painter even if his brush sometime doesn't smudge.

More smudge these days than fine detail.

My wife says what I do with my hands I kick away with my feet.

Haha who am I to argue with such inteligence

No man could claim to have no ego or have never been an egomaniac. The conditions are simply that humanity comes at a cost of this "ego." So, therefore it becomes a matter of size for this ego. Believe me, ego is one of the fields that SIZE matters at. I would have personally applauded any of you if you could take responsibility for the matter and boldly expressed your ego rather than calling each other egomaniacs.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but it takes words to really screw me up

"I would have personally applauded any of you if you could take responsibility for the matter and boldly expressed your ego rather than calling each other egomaniacs."

Too many want to settle disagreements with weapons

Words are weapons in the war on ignorance

. Believe me, ego is one of the fields that SIZE matters at. I would have personally applauded any of you if you could take responsibility for the matter and boldly expressed your ego rather than calling each other

^^^

OK...you go first..I will be second...

Haha
O Mohammad thanks for bringing your ego to the equation.
first people sometime mistake the lack of ego (or having minimal ego as you rightly mentioned) as being an egomaniac. Because being different to the crowd of mobs, makes people very angry. people do not like those who dress, talk, look and most of all who think different to them. As Don John said: the awareness of average, norm , in the society is always interconnected and is in the same position. If a person start to exhibit different position, if he allows those differences become observed, or he is not able to keep them concealed, than that generates a great amount of anger in the crowd. Because all we are in the final analysis is energy and that connection affect all of us energetically.
So in that scale, being called egomaniac SOMETIME, is a blessing.

As I said, by criticizing the Judges ( in the example few post before) bases on the knowledge of moral imperative, I knew I was going to be seen an egomaniac by this site's mobs, but if I did not , I KNEW I was, in my conscience, and in the eyes of the truth. So only the hero chooses the hard path and sacrifices his connection with the others, in order to save something that belong to everyone. O captain my captain: ONLY A CAPTAIN COULD STAND ON THE TABLE WITHOUT VOBLING!! But the irony s that he chooses to save them, he chooses to save the collective, by sacrificing his individuality and ego and then everyone, the collective thinks that HE, is the egomaniac. This is the dynamic that nobody understand , not even a soul in this site, not all these poets who are the collection of the most sensitive and soulful people of our time, they all are clueless about where the true soul is.
This is the brilliant logic that it brilliancy is not seen and discovered by the mediocre, though they call their collective mediocre logic brilliant. Everything as the Great Persian poet Ahmad Shamloo said: looks opposite in the eyes of ass backward world.

Mohammad: "Believe me, ego is one of the fields that SIZE matters"
haha funny this is another reverse equation. A size of a man's humbleness versos the size of his manhood. ha-ha so what about woman??
But you are right size really matter as the matter of embarrassment here.

So..ddavidd...have you put Hazel to rest and morphed to Mohamed???

O where is Hazel I miss her. I guess you guys scared her off.
O yes Mohammad is another me now.

haha you always see the fashion not the pattern.

Arguments are helpful when both sides listen and attempt to understand one another.

I think this thread demonstrates that this is quite rare.

As for egos, I think the most egoless people I've ever met are people who are unfamiliar or disinterested in the whole concept. The more you talk about it, the more you massage it into existence. As writers and artists, we all have one. Usually a massive one. Ridiculous to claim otherwise.

Haha Abby comes and save the day by just a few sentences.

What you and Mohammad say both are the case and sound in the eyes of reason, though both are bounded by the personal experiences. But there are some positions of "assemblage point" that everything in them seem exactly opposite. What we do is trying so hard to deny those occasions . This is normal, We always deny the things that do not fit in to the confine of our norms. this is how the norm sustains its existence as norm.
For example Abby, if you, say accidently, come across the information that nobody read your poems since it was nominated, what would you do? (Assuming that you are not egomaniac and the only reason that it upsets you is the immorality)
Let's do it Everlasting way Annalistically:
1- Ignore it a-because it is not wise to go after the judges b- because everyone instantly take it for granted that you are upset because you did not win (as you did) or think you are egomaniac ( as Everlasting), therefore c= you would lose friends and respect.
2- you would do something about it a- because it is right thing to do b-and staying silence is not conscionable thing to do according to the law of moral imperative duty, so c= it would be immoral to choose your comfort zone over acting on the sense of imperative moral duty.

Here number one (that is obviously your choice) seem so sound and safe. None would even see you and suspect your ego and you be save and continue to be loved by everyone but your inner conscience.( because you saw something wrong and did not do anything about it assuming what the world be if everyone in the world acted like this -- this is by the way what the Kantian moral imperative duty is)

Number 2, you become the public enemy number one. Everyone would think you are egomaniac BUT your conscience. She knows!!

The problem is our conscience, if awaken, we see her wide open eyes staring at us all the time in such way we cannot afford ignoring them. But we put our conscience to sleep slowly by committing these acts of ignoring ones imperative duties, one by one, until she is totally numbed. That is why Nietzsche said : GOD IS DEAD. because we killed him inside of us.
Because God is collective consciousness and we denied it by constantly considering our self interests and counterfeiting them as collective's.

History has a communication problem that escalates the misinterpretation of an assemblage point

Marie Antoinette had time to prepare her argument yet sill lost her head

Ddavidd, if I see something immoral or unconscionable, I always speak up about it if I can, hopefully to the right people and with some perspective.

And then, like you, I make myself out to be a hero afterward.

If anything showcases your determination to prove your egolessness, it is your complete lack of humbleness. It's great.

This is exactly the focal point of our differences: I do not want to prove or to showcase anything, I am just me loud and clear. The interpretation of it in others eyes is determined by how they replace themselves in that image of me instead: a mirror of self reflection.
I did not get here easily. This is not a source of any pride. For that clarity 15 years of celibacy is the list price that I've paid.
You Abby are an intelligent woman tell me if I am so concern to prove to others so hard that I am not egomaniac , why am I acting like this in this site? If I were the way you say, I would exactly act like you and were loved by every one. So you rationalising my acts to your standards.
Here unlike your understanding I am not trying to prove that I am not egomaniac I know I do look that way. I even provok that image profoundly all the time, and I am aware of it, it is so obvious. My insisting is my desperate try for at list the most intelligent of you to understand that it is not about how you look, It is about how to be.
And why should one be humble about it? really? you just are, and live by your sword of imperative moral obligation and then you look right in the eyes of the truth and collective consciousness, screw the eyes of individuals, they all are up their bungholes all the times.

Yep, everyone is all up their bungholes, that's for sure. I'm not saying you should be humble, I'm saying you've definitely shown you don't care for it, which is honest. "Don't care about what others think of you" is not a new philosophy to anyone... not sure why you're lecturing all over this thread, I might have missed something.

15 years of celibacy... yeesh. Wouldn't be worth it for me, ddavidd.

A good orgasm is about as close to honest truth and god as most people get. Why else is it so smuttified by the church.