share your theories with me

[gambitx73]

anyone out there wanna share their theories..I have one to share...my theory is that imagination and memory is the same fuckin' thing..think 'bout when u go to remember something you imagine what you saw or heard of felt etc...if memory isn't alway accurate that what makes it different from imagination...as Art Curry would say

"calculation without imagination is no calculation at all"

[deanna11]

i agree. sometimes, i'll be talking about something that happened, then i stop and realize, "wait, maybe that didn't happen. it could be a false memory." well, i never actually figure out if these instances are "actual" or false memories, but whatever; they're as good as the same thing

[ezdreamer]

I remember I imagined something... oh wait, I forgot...

------------------

I had a dream... a wet dream... looks like God is pissing on me again...

[dbilas]

Interesting idea. I often remark on how thinly separated dreams and reality are. Of course, you would rarely mistake reality for dreaming, but it is easy to mistake dreams for reality. Which leads to the Matrix line of thinking--would it really be so bad to live in a dream world forever? Did Cypher really have the right idea?

Here's another question for you to argue: Are human beings born evil by nature? Must we be taught to not be evil?

Peace,

David Christopher

------------------

Get into Cheetah for only $5! Visit http://www.headrushmusic.com.

[shadowchaser]

my theory about imagination is that...

if that the pilgrims shot a bobcat instead of a turkey, we would be eating pussy for thanksgiving.

------------------

got drama?

[djmikedr]

a theory:

in the end, (sub conciously)<sp?>

it always comes down to sex.

think about it, no matter what the species must procreate. no matter what, threw war and fights, (dont forget makeup sex) there is always that desire.

we base most of our relationships in our life times on how attracted we are to others. Most people wont even admit this idea to hold berring, but really think it out, do we tend to hang out with "ugly people"?

------------------

aim: djmikedr

DJmikeDR@aol.com

[This message has been edited by apotheosis (edited 01-17-2001).]

[blueangel]

Originally posted by apotheosis:

a theory:

in the end, (sub conciously)<sp?>

it always comes down to sex.

think about it, no matter what the species must procreate. no matter what, threw war and fights, (dont forget makeup sex) there is always that desire.

we base most of our relationships in our life times on how attracted we are to others. Most people wont even admit this idea to hold berring, but really think it out, do we tend to hang out with "ugly people"?

Ay vey! Are we back to that topic again.

First, there are species out there that are A sexual. Meaning they don't need to have sex in order to pro-create. I believe some reptiles are A-Sexual. You'd be surprised what you learn on the Discovery Channel.

Second, "Ugly" is what YOU think is ugly . .. just like beauty. So, the determination of "Beauty" and "Ugly" is a personal thing . . . there are no general identification unless you follow the description of fashion magazines. Who knows, to YOU, I may hang out with ONLY ugly people. Get what I mean?

BlueAngel

------------------

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love." - Anais Nin

[gambitx73]

Originally posted by apotheosis:

a theory:

in the end, (sub conciously)<sp?>

it always comes down to sex.

think about it, ....there is always that desire.....

I feel great sorrow for those who believe in this. Fleshly thoughts from fleshly entity. And spiritual thoughts from spiritual entity. Does not a true human consist of spirit/flesh. I'd like to think so. For those who feel/think that humans are just of flesh then their thoughts will be limited to such. Those who live by law, live by the law. Those who live in faith, live in faith. So also in spirituality. "He who seeks to save his life shall lose it...." -was once said by Jesus..and excuse me for quoting the bible..but my point is this. I believe in that. I believe in spirituality and life after life. So if procreativity and survival being the essence the true purpose the true driving force of all living creature on earth, then that is true for those creatures that believe that. Or it is true for creatures just simply living on pure animal instinct. But for those enlightened being like the Christian or Religious people that die without complaining for the sole purpose of their belief (no matter how insane this may be for some) have rid themselves of fleshly desires and had gone to their level of spirituality.. that i must emphasise "their level of spirituality...not necessarily yours or something we all have to agree on. I believe in love..and was once in love to a point that I would have done anything for that one person even die...that in itself destroys the theory of "sex" or "procreativity" I would say I'm beyond the Sigmund Freud theory but then again I never was the one to go beyond it..just simply I am who I am and I am who I am not..

As far as we being born evil and having to be taught to be good....I kinda agree that for the most part...humans are instinctive in nature..and must learn to rid themselves of desire..that is the only way to freedom. And ofcourse that's just my opinion..

[djmikedr]

the term "ugly" was meant to define what each indivual thinks is "ugly", not what I think is ugly.

and "ugly" meaning the opposite of those who we seek to associate to "better-off" ourselves. I believe its called "Hipness threw association".

Casey, stop thinking I'm imposing MY views, I'm not. come rollerskating! love ya

AND LAST: can someone come up with a better theory that explains why our species survives threw everything?

------------------

aim: djmikedr

DJmikeDR@aol.com

[This message has been edited by apotheosis (edited 01-17-2001).]

[blueangel]

Originally posted by apotheosis:

the term "ugly" was meant to define what each indivual thinks is "ugly", not what I think is ugly.

and "ugly" meaning the opposite of those who we seek to associate to "better-off" ourselves. I believe its called "Hipness threw association".

Casey, stop thinking I'm imposing MY views, I'm not. come rollerskating! love ya

AND LAST: can someone come up with a better theory that explains why our species survives threw everything?

I don't think that Mikey, I'm just saying that it's not always the case. But let's not go into that again. No rollarskating for me, thanks!

BlueAngel

------------------

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love." - Anais Nin

[theorynyc]

Theory (n): 1.A VIP <A HREF="http://www.clubplanet.com/guestlists/" TARGET="_blank"> guestlist</A> for New York city nightclubs. 2. Relativity.

[ancientskewl]

My theory, with respect to relationships: There's no such thing as the "Right one" as in the only one. There are in fact many individuals whom could fit this description for each of us.

Consider: If you happen to live in the NY area all of your life, and it is your desire to have a relationship with someone, you probably will -- a lot can be said for timing and desire. If however you choose to abandon all potential mates in this region and re-locate to say, Cali, or Europe, or where ever... you can and most probably will meet someone there...so does that make him/her the "right one"?

What happens is you meet someone whom meets your requirement for companionship -- someone whom you enjoy being around, who may satisfy your needs, etc. It is foolish to believe that this is the only human on the face of the Earth whom could fit that need.

Eventually, you meet someone who meets "most" of your requirements but fall short in some other area (no one is perfect). You overlook and accept those shortcomings and thus, you allow a relationship to form. Again, does that mean that he/she is the "right one"?

JMO but I believe that there are many "potential" ones for each of us, and once we decide that we've found an individual who meets our needs, AND, we are no longer willing to look further, we decide that that person is the one for us -- not some pre-ordained cosmic guidance that created that particular person just for us.

------------------

"Those who know, don't tell. Those who tell, don't know."

[gambitx73]

Originally posted by ancientskewl:

My theory, with respect to relationships: There's no such thing as the "Right one" as in the only one. There are in fact many individuals whom could fit this description for each of us......

don't wanna come down on u so i won't. I actually agree with u to some extent...but I must say this..people who share this view are the ones who at one point were truly in love like mad love, like head over heals love; like, suicidal love,..and then got hurt...have u ever been madly in love and thought that this one person is for u and no one else..that no one else will do....then got hurt...hmmm...

but as far as needs and requirements..i believe all relationships must have a sense of true love that will exceed the need of the relationship. Also in the words of Myrlin (myrlin from this board) "there must be a driving force within"...

[blueangel]

The best kind of love is the "No matter what" love.

BlueAngel

------------------

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love." - Anais Nin

[nycetouch]

My favorite theory:

Most of the violence, destruction, and otherwise horrific events of our time could have been avoided if girls would give it up more often to the right people.

Think about it: if Hitler was a major pimp in Germany circa 1935 or so, I mean if he had bitches calling him all night and day, do ya really think he would go through with all of the genocide nonsense. He would be too busy getting busy!! He'd be a happy man, and when his fellow nazis would call him and wanted to hang out and kill some people, he'd be like, " Nah, I got this chick I met in the Cabaret coming over tonite, sorry maybe next week."

Another case in point: I go to school in PennState and every football weekend the streets are full of people and eventually just angry no assgetting guyz are walking around insulting you as you walk with your girl, or throwing stuff from the balconies of apartments. Simply sexual frustration (because they are complete dorks) coming out as violence and aggression.

Just food for thought, just a theory. Go ahead ladiez tell how it is. (Dont shoot the messenger)

[mik-e_smilez]

Originally taken from Blue Angel's post:

[quote: Originally posted by mik-e_smilez:

How else can one legitimize the Holocaust. In Hitler's derranged little mind he believed that he was doing the right things.

Okay, first of all . . . Hitler was a pyschopathic person. I don't think he was trying to legitimize ANYTHING.]

He had to legitimize what he was doing. That what his book Mein Komf (sp?) was about. He aslo had to legitimize to his people and soon to be followers/soldiers that this was the right cause. Which was thorugh the use of propaanda such as DW Griffith's "Triumph of the Will", and through the impassionated orations given by HItler himself. He believed that he was right. He was definetly wrong, deranged, socioppath, but in his mind he legitimzeed it, and it helped him to legitimaze those horros that were about to take place to his followers.

(damn, i love conversations like this, but isn't this board for clubs.

------------------

'i wish U Heaven'

"People who talk in metaphors should shampoo my crotch"

"and remember Kids, You Can't spell cracKed out with K"

aol IM=MikE420DKE

[mik-e_smilez]

Originally taken from Blue Angel's post:

[quote: Originally posted by mik-e_smilez:

How else can one legitimize the Holocaust. In Hitler's derranged little mind he believed that he was doing the right things.

Okay, first of all . . . Hitler was a pyschopathic person. I don't think he was trying to legitimize ANYTHING.]

He had to legitimize what he was doing. That what his book Mein Komf (sp?) was about. He aslo had to legitimize to his people and soon to be followers/soldiers that this was the right cause. Which was thorugh the use of propaanda such as DW Griffith's "Triumph of the Will", and through the impassionated orations given by HItler himself. He believed that he was right. He was definetly wrong, deranged, socioppath, but in his mind he legitimzeed it, and it helped him to legitimaze those horros that were about to take place to his followers.

(damn, i love conversations like this, but isn't this board for clubs.

------------------

'i wish U Heaven'

"People who talk in metaphors should shampoo my crotch"

"and remember Kids, You Can't spell cracKed out with K"

aol IM=MikE420DKE

[gambitx73]

Originally posted by ancientskewl:

I hear you G...thanks for asking for clarification first. Sometimes it's difficult to clearly say everything through these posts without writing a full dissertation.

I can't say that I've ever experienced "suicidal love" IMO: NO ONE on this planet is worth taking your own life for. Madly in love...yes. Been hurt..of course. Thought that no else would do..definitely, many times!

What I was trying to get at was that you can have these feelings for a number of individuals in any given lifetime. I just don't believe that there is only "One" single Human Being for each given person. Rather, if you meet someone today you can develop those feelings, but you could just as easily have met someone different tommorow or next year and develop the same feelings. So, used in that context, was the first one the "Right one" or the second?

All I'm saying is that the "Right One" is more of a decision we make as opposed to a "mystical" or "cosmic" selection by some unseen force.

Hope that clears it up.

true, true

[blueangel]

Originally posted by mik-e_smilez:

"ANother train of thought is that greed is subjective. What one person may call greed is another person's way of trying to do a good job for their loved ones. Yes little Johnny could live without a PS2 and a 48 screen tv for his playroom, but perhaps you feel that by providing this you are being a good provider, so your loved ones have all their dreams. This of course is not good in the long run, but many people do not worry about it since they do not want their loved one to know pain. This type of "greed" can be in the person in question's mind altruistic. Not necessarily the right thing to do, but seems like the good thing to do.

I believe the word you're trying to describe ambition. Ambition is to try to achieve the best to your ability. Greed is when you have it all but want more.

BlueAngel

------------------

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love." - Anais Nin

[blueangel]

Originally posted by mik-e_smilez:

He had to legitimize what he was doing. That what his book Mein Komf (sp?) was about. He aslo had to legitimize to his people and soon to be followers/soldiers that this was the right cause. Which was thorugh the use of propaanda such as DW Griffith's "Triumph of the Will", and through the impassionated orations given by HItler himself. He believed that he was right. He was definetly wrong, deranged, socioppath, but in his mind he legitimzeed it, and it helped him to legitimaze those horros that were about to take place to his followers.

(

You're right. I suppose to his own mind he being perfectly right for what he was doing.

BlueAngel

------------------

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love." - Anais Nin

[orchid21]

Originally posted by blueangel:

Ay vey! Are we back to that topic again.

First, there are species out there that are A sexual. Meaning they don't need to have sex in order to pro-create. I believe some reptiles are A-Sexual. You'd be surprised what you learn on the Discovery Channel.

Second, "Ugly" is what YOU think is ugly . .. just like beauty. So, the determination of "Beauty" and "Ugly" is a personal thing . . . there are no general identification unless you follow the description of fashion magazines. Who knows, to YOU, I may hang out with ONLY ugly people. Get what I mean?

BlueAngel

reptiles are not asexual, only one cell organisms (procaryotes) like bacteria are asexual. so i think mike has a good point.

------------------

[back2basics-]

Originally posted by apotheosis:

AND LAST: can someone come up with a better theory that explains why our species survives threw everything?

Yeah it's called evolution.. I would change the word sex to procreation... it's not ALL about sex, it's about conceiving and surviving... then natural selection takes over.

There are only a few species, including humans and certain monkeys, that have sex for fun.

So we don't all survive through everything.. many die.. but the ones most suited to deal with the problems that time brings will survive and over time pass down those traits to their siblings... etc.. Natural Selection in a sentence

------------------

I want to go out blazing..not fade away.

I can STILL resist ANYTHING but temptation.

[blueangel]

Originally posted by back2basics-:

So we don't all survive through everything.. many die.. but the ones most suited to deal with the problems that time brings will survive and over time pass down those traits to their siblings... etc.. Natural Selection in a sentence

OooooOOOOooo Darwin's Theory! I was awake in my science class that day!!

BlueAngel

------------------

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love." - Anais Nin

[mik-e_smilez]

Originally posted by dbilas:

Are human beings born evil by nature? Must we be taught to not be evil?

Well people cannot and will not do purely evil things, just for evil's sake. They have to believe that whatever they are doing, while it may be worng, serves a greater good. Sometimes this greater good could be just to advance themselves. Sometimes they believe that the evil things they do will benefit mankind. How else can one legitimize the Holocaust. In Hitler's derranged little mind he believed that he was doing the right things. In every Holy War both sides believed that they were doing God's will. It is not that the people are evil, just misguided or in some cases lazy. The person at the office who takes credit for your great idea and gets the promotion knows that what he or she is doing is wrong, but is too lazy to go and think of a better idea or do the work to advance themselves, so they take a shortcut. Still does not make them inheriently evil. Just a lazy fucker.

Now of course the above theory is totally blown out of the water if a person happens to be the actual spawn of the Dark Lord, but that really doesn't occur too often

------------------

'i wish U Heaven'

"People who talk in metaphors should shampoo my crotch"

"and remember Kids, You Can't spell cracKed out with K"

aol IM=MikE420DKE

[blueangel]

Originally posted by mik-e_smilez:

How else can one legitimize the Holocaust. In Hitler's derranged little mind he believed that he was doing the right things.

Okay, first of all . . . Hitler was a pyschopathic person. I don't think he was trying to legitimize ANYTHING.

Originally posted by mik-e_smilez:

The person at the office who takes credit for your great idea and gets the promotion knows that what he or she is doing is wrong, but is too lazy to go and think of a better idea or do the work to advance themselves, so they take a shortcut. Still does not make them inheriently evil. Just a lazy fucker.

And second, that's called greed not laziness. And greed is bad.

I agree with you that there are many cases where people are misguided . . . that's definatley for sure. However, there are evil people out there. Don't think there aren't. There are people out there that likes to see others in pain and suffering.

BlueAngel

------------------

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love." - Anais Nin