This was an interesting article on David Hume's thoughts on altruism. First, he talks about how all altruism has an essence of selfishness:
All is self-love. Your children are loved only because they are yours: your friend for a like reason; and your country engages you only so far as it has a connection with yourself. Were the idea of self removed, nothing would affect you: you would be altogether unactive and insensible: or, if you ever give yourself any movement, it would only be from vanity, and a desire of fame and reputation to this same self.
He does not find this to be at all problematic (nor do I) because as he says: "The virtuous sentiment or passion produces the pleasure, and does not arise from it. I feel a pleasure in doing good to my friend, because I love him; but do not love him for the sake of that pleasure."
Yes, surely often that is true, but I don't think that is 100% the case. I think plenty of people do altruistic things not for the pleasure it gives them to serve someone that they love but for the pleasure it gives them to do any number of other things: appear good in front of others, get someone to owe them something, feel important or needed, etc. So, ok, old news -- altruism isn't as selfless as people sometimes pretend it to be,
But more interestingly perhaps for this crowd are his assertions, centuries ago, the oft heard (on this website) explanation for why would a sociopath ever choose to do something altruistic him or herself:
In the second place, it has always been found, that the virtuous are far from being indifferent to praise; and therefore they have been represented as a set of vainglorious men, who had nothing in view but the applauses of others. But this also is a fallacy. It is very unjust in the world, when they find any tincture of vanity in a laudable action, to depreciate it upon that account, or ascribe it entirely to that motive. The case is not the same with vanity, as with other passions. Where avarice or revenge enters into any seemingly virtuous action, it is difficult for us to determine how far it enters, and it is natural to suppose it the sole actuating principle. But vanity is so closely allied to virtue, and to love the fame of laudable actions approaches so near the love of laudable actions for their own sake, that these passions are more capable of mixture, than any other kinds of affection; and it is almost impossible to have the latter without some degree of the former. Accordingly we find, that this passion for glory is always warped and varied according to the particular taste or disposition of the mind on which it falls. Nero had the same vanity in driving a chariot, that Trajan had in governing the empire with justice and ability.
In other words, if all altruism has an element of narcissistic or selfish pleasure, then vanity can motivate altruism as well as a love of virtue. Yes, ok Hume, I follow and I agree. Plenty of sociopaths love to do altruistic things because it appeals to their own vanity, a la "I can do this thing better than anyone else, so I will and earn the self-satisfaction/praise/honor/reputation/gratitude/etc."
The only off thing about Hume's thinking to me is that he follows that thought immediately with this non sequitur: "To love the glory of virtuous deeds is a sure proof of the love of virtue." What? Didn't you just finish telling us that the love of virtuous deeds can come from vanity? So maybe I misunderstand him, do I?
All is self-love. Your children are loved only because they are yours: your friend for a like reason; and your country engages you only so far as it has a connection with yourself. Were the idea of self removed, nothing would affect you: you would be altogether unactive and insensible: or, if you ever give yourself any movement, it would only be from vanity, and a desire of fame and reputation to this same self.
He does not find this to be at all problematic (nor do I) because as he says: "The virtuous sentiment or passion produces the pleasure, and does not arise from it. I feel a pleasure in doing good to my friend, because I love him; but do not love him for the sake of that pleasure."
Yes, surely often that is true, but I don't think that is 100% the case. I think plenty of people do altruistic things not for the pleasure it gives them to serve someone that they love but for the pleasure it gives them to do any number of other things: appear good in front of others, get someone to owe them something, feel important or needed, etc. So, ok, old news -- altruism isn't as selfless as people sometimes pretend it to be,
But more interestingly perhaps for this crowd are his assertions, centuries ago, the oft heard (on this website) explanation for why would a sociopath ever choose to do something altruistic him or herself:
In the second place, it has always been found, that the virtuous are far from being indifferent to praise; and therefore they have been represented as a set of vainglorious men, who had nothing in view but the applauses of others. But this also is a fallacy. It is very unjust in the world, when they find any tincture of vanity in a laudable action, to depreciate it upon that account, or ascribe it entirely to that motive. The case is not the same with vanity, as with other passions. Where avarice or revenge enters into any seemingly virtuous action, it is difficult for us to determine how far it enters, and it is natural to suppose it the sole actuating principle. But vanity is so closely allied to virtue, and to love the fame of laudable actions approaches so near the love of laudable actions for their own sake, that these passions are more capable of mixture, than any other kinds of affection; and it is almost impossible to have the latter without some degree of the former. Accordingly we find, that this passion for glory is always warped and varied according to the particular taste or disposition of the mind on which it falls. Nero had the same vanity in driving a chariot, that Trajan had in governing the empire with justice and ability.
In other words, if all altruism has an element of narcissistic or selfish pleasure, then vanity can motivate altruism as well as a love of virtue. Yes, ok Hume, I follow and I agree. Plenty of sociopaths love to do altruistic things because it appeals to their own vanity, a la "I can do this thing better than anyone else, so I will and earn the self-satisfaction/praise/honor/reputation/gratitude/etc."
The only off thing about Hume's thinking to me is that he follows that thought immediately with this non sequitur: "To love the glory of virtuous deeds is a sure proof of the love of virtue." What? Didn't you just finish telling us that the love of virtuous deeds can come from vanity? So maybe I misunderstand him, do I?
"He does not find this to be at all problematic (nor do I) because as he says: "The virtuous sentiment or passion produces the pleasure, and does not arise from it. I feel a pleasure in doing good to my friend, because I love him; but do not love him for the sake of that pleasure.""
ReplyDeleteThis is an important distinction and actually this is the way we tend to naturally understand graciousness.
"Yes, surely often that is true, but I don't think that is 100% the case. I think plenty of people do altruistic things not for the pleasure it gives them to serve someone that they love but for the pleasure it gives them to do any number of other things: appear good in front of others, get someone to owe them something, feel important or needed, etc. So, ok, old news -- altruism isn't as selfless as people sometimes pretend it to be."
Yup, and the frequency of this depends on personal history. 50% of people (roughly) have insecure attachment styles and these people use tactics like this often unwittingly because they have learnt that style of relationship from childhood. Many people simply aren't aware things can be better - I count my entire family in this group. (Things can, of course, be better. This ability of the brain to heal itself and constantly find new and better ways is astonishing - cf my "personal comment" on the previous post. My operating principle, seemingly effective so far, is that the healthier one is, ie the more capable one is of looking after oneself, the easier and more free social interactions will be. Why am I here? because I love seeing how this plays out across the neurodiversity spectrum cf Gardel's comment on previous post re allowing that which is within to flow out and, of course, M.E.'s journey.)
"The only off thing about Hume's thinking to me is that he follows that thought immediately with this non sequitur: "To love the glory of virtuous deeds is a sure proof of the love of virtue." What? Didn't you just finish telling us that the love of virtuous deeds can come from vanity? So maybe I misunderstand him, do I?"
LOL. Classic philosophy. It's a fine thing to articulate one's complete understanding of the world, but difficult to do without seeming contradictory at times. You know, there's actually a thing called The Principle of Charity in which one evaluates an argument on the best formulation of that argument :) But yes, this is what fascinates me about collaboration on ideas and finding this best possible way forward. There's such richness to account for - just imagine the infinite array of experience and possibility. Let's not, by any means, close off our thinking but extend it in sensible and workable ways.
On a biological note, it is the hormone serotonin that makes us feel good when praised, and when giving praise. It's key in the operation of societal (and familial) hierarchies. It's why, as Simon Sinek puts it, we have graduation ceremonies. It is the "leadership chemical."
How to Save Your Relationship And Marriage from Divorce or broke up, Dr Frank Ojo saved my marriage by bringing my husband back home today..! My name is Natasha Becky. I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband with two kids. A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{Templeofloveandprosperity@gmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband back the next day.What an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my husband who didn't call me for the past 9 months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster. So, If you have any problem contact him, I give you 100% guarantee that he will help you, Thanks to Dr Frank Ojo for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again, so here his email address { Templeofloveandprosperity@gmail.com } Website address: http://lovespell2.yolasite.com, Thanks Dr Frank Ojo for restoring my marriage.
ReplyDeleteDoing good and being good are not the same thing.
ReplyDeleteAnyone can be on their best behavior when they want someone from
someone. "Trust but varify."
Love you M.E. and "A."
"Doing good and being good are not the same thing."
DeleteI like that, very succinct while also getting the point across.
"To love the glory of virtuous deeds is a sure proof of the love of virtue." What? Didn't you just finish telling us that the love of virtuous deeds can come from vanity?"
ReplyDeleteIf I'm not mistaken I think Hume is not contradicting himself here. He is incorrect in my opinion but he isn't contradicting his position. Vanity is what leads one to love the GLORY of virtue. "True" virtuous deeds are not done for ITS glory but rather to satisfy an innate need to be virtuous. The materialist needs to explain this innate need to be virtuous because he does not attribute it to a predisposition encompassed in our design.
Having said that, I believe it IS also innate in humans to seek glory or at least praise & appreciation for their good actions. Is that selfish? I suppose is in the end selfish to some extent but this is exactly where Hume is misleading. Most disagreements are a result of the misuse of language. "Selfishness" has a negative connotation because it is an excess desire to benefit oneself only - indifference to others or at their expense. Desiring good for oneself is very much possible - and is indeed virtuous as well as innate -without being selfish. Hume is using selfish so broadly that he extends it's meaning to incorporate a normal, unselfish human need for satisfaction into it. What's the ultimate result of him doing so? Well gradually now one CAN become actually selfish and call that virtue when actually there is a fine line between the two. This is why philosophers are self-contradictory and always contradicting each other. It is an enterprise which emphasizes "creativity" over Truth. HOW you argue ends up determine what is true as opposed to WHAT you argue. That's sophistry and the start of a decline of any civilization.
One cannot get creative with numbers. That's why the truth of mathematics - in particular arithmetic - is accepted universally and has never been in dispute. Language, however, can be distorted and misused in it of itself to confuse and mislead people. Words have certain meanings for a reason and to expand those meanings to incorporate a different word or a new phenomenon (requiring a new word) is like slowly polluting a fresh pond of pure water with tiny specs of dust. Eventually it'll be nothing but mud.
ReplyDelete@Jihadi Jon
ReplyDelete"You should try that "A" instead of spreading hate and ignorance, willfully."
How is it, exactly, that *I* am the one spreading "hate" by simply stating some objective, verifiable TRUTHS concerning the religion you are urging everyone here so strongly to adopt?
I have not said anything about your prophet that isn't true- and none of it is rooted in ignorance.
I am, in fact, *very* knowledgeable about the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, as well as the Qu'ran. But I do not come here to engage in comparative Scriptural analysis and exegesis. I come here because I take sadistic pleasure in tearing down gargantuan egos like yours.
"people who "think too highly of themselves" don't waste their time giving "unsolicited" advice to others on the off chance that it might help them."
As a matter of fact, that is *exactly* what they do. Dispensing your unsolicited advice serves only to bolster your ego, because it makes you feel better about yourself to "magnanimously" counsel a bunch of random people you have labeled wretched, "lost" and beneath you. And then you get all butt-hurt and offended when we don't fall all over ourselves thanking you for "enlightening" us.
You're SO typical that you're a walking fucking cliché, Jihadi Jon.
"Now I'm advised to follow the rules of certain visitors to the blog because they don't like my "narcissistic" approach."
Au contraire. I quite enjoy your narcissistic approach. It makes you a juicy target- and I love fresh meat.
(Pork loin, anyone? :D)
"You judge what is narcissistic and what isn't based on the content - NOT based on intentions. That is by definition the reverse of what is truly empathetic, honest and NOT narcissistic."
Uh, yeah, dumbass. Your intentions serve only to appease your own ego. Your "empathy" does not benefit your audience any more than the claptrap you post from the Qu'ran. They are entirely self-indulgent.
The content of your posts is the only objective standard by which we might analyze your thoughts and opinions.
Not very bright, are you?
I'm used to be of being called narcissistic by narcissists in the past (I'm not saying you are a narcissist North)."
DeleteShocking!~
::Eyeroll::
"Speaking truth when it is not popular or unwanted is not easy but that's the story of my life:"
You speak only *your* truth, and seek to impose it on everyone else.
It is the "story of your life" because people rapidly tire of your self-righteous, judgmental tirades. You think you know better than everyone else. You are literally blinded by your delusion and superiority complex.
To wit: the organization I run feeds 50 Muslim school kids from the poorest district in my neighbourhood twice a week. I am the president and founder of an educational non-profit that directly benefits over 150 children in various ways.
I am not saying that to toot my own horn. I have nothing to brag about. I am cocky, manipulative, aggressive, and in some ways, totally hypocritical and disigenuous. I don't preach, because I have absolutely no moral authority on which to stand. I am ethically bankrupt.
I am stating it because you are so certain about the fact that I have "sold myself to the devil". The profound irony of your statement amuses me greatly.
My initial comments to you were designed specifically to root out your weaknesses and discover your triggers. Your reactions are very revealing.
Know that henceforth, whenever the mood strikes, I am going to be on your posts like an infidel tramping all over that despicable idol you fools circumambulate in a misguided attempt to please your false god.
So by all means, keep talking. I've already got you by the balls- but there's always room for more ammo.
...And I can always squeeze harder. XD
DeleteAny response I get from you, I will interpret as begging.
Lol.
A:
DeleteI was about to say you are trying to become my archenemy and that I would have loved to indulge you and actually do what you accuse me of doing: score some points to stroke my ego by ripping you apart (or so I would have thought). Then I read this:
"To wit: the organization I run feeds 50 Muslim school kids from the poorest district in my neighbourhood twice a week. I am the president and founder of an educational non-profit that directly benefits over 150 children in various ways."
"I am not saying that to toot my own horn. I have nothing to brag about. I am cocky, manipulative, aggressive, and in some ways, totally hypocritical and disigenuous. I don't preach, because I have absolutely no moral authority on which to stand. I am ethically bankrupt."
So, if what you say is true (and I'm inclined to believe it but of course I cannot know and it doesn't help that your writing is so vulgar) I have nothing to say to you except that I wish you find peace and serenity in your life. No one who admits their faults and continues to act as you seem to here does so willfully unless there is damage done to them inside.
If what you said is not true (possible for a really clever and truly shameless psycho) than I can suggest only thing: start practicing some of what you preach before you fully doom yourself.
Finally: regardless of whether its true or not, if you actually want to engage in a civil conversation with me to hash out our differences I'm happy to do so IF and ONLY IF you can show seriousness and some manners.
Thank you and good luck.
I like that - "Jihadi Jon" - you are creative at least. Now let not the NSA or the intelligence agencies start monitoring me. I'm just struggling against my own self and against the BS I see around me. I'm not actual threat to anyone - except, hopefully, real psychos!
DeleteI am not interested in a polite dialogue with you about the Qu'ran, and by all means- rip right in. I rather enjoy taking what I dish. It makes me stronger.
DeleteYou have no idea whether or not I practice what I preach. You are judging me on the basis of my vulgarity. I only revealed what I did to show you that appearances are often deceptive, and that people embody many contradictory characteristics. Sociopaths are not the caricature you paint them out to be. It is not quite so black and white as you wish it were.
I will say this: the prophet you hold in high esteem is a liar. He was a rapist. He was a warmonger, slave trader, and pedophile.
I am not interested in engaging you in a civil conversation, and I don't need your permission to engage you as I see fit.
I wonder if the sociopaths who read my exchange with "A" actually realize the contradictions in his statements or are their rational faculties so utterly depleted that they can't see the obvious. I didn't claim to KNOW you are not practicing what you preach. Recall I said IF what you claim isn't true. Second, I'm basing my assumption upon your writing style. Obviously you're not preaching the high ethics of Jesus if you're uttering a single profane word, let alone the hate you're spewing almost nonstop. I almost praised you for admitting this. It's a complement and a sign of honor & integrity (albeit hidden and limited but potentially a treasure trove!).
DeleteNo one who learns the history of Islam and Muhammad claims he was a liar. I should amend that to: no genuine scholar (barring sociopaths) ever has or does. At best they say that he genuinely believed in his message but he obviously deluded. I used to hold this same view for 12 years as an atheist. Obviously the man wasn't speaking to some creator but he definitely thought he was - I used to say. This much is obvious from his life. NO ONE has ever done or would do what Muhammad without believing it. His life is the exact opposite of psychopathy. The man ruled Arabia towards the end of his life yet he only got more and more empathetic, merciful and ended up being loved by the same people who tried to kill him for over a decade. Why? Because once he gained absolute power he not only forgave the worst of his enemies but he won their hearts by giving them more riches (because they were still greedy and needed that to feel respected). He did even let them FEEL subdued or inferior or abased even though they were. They ended up believing in him and becoming some of the greatest people in history.
That was in defense of Muhammad - not in response to you. That I'm happy to do, like I said, when you want to. It seems you don't want to so we won't get into more details.
Good luck.
A is also female.
Delete"I'm basing my assumption upon your writing style"
Questions are more effective.
"I only revealed what I did to show you that appearances are often deceptive, and that people embody many contradictory characteristics. Sociopaths are not the caricature you paint them out to be. It is not quite so black and white as you wish it were."
DeleteA, I like your thinking, and there is truth in it. I believe that such determination can only stem from considerable life experience. :)
"If what you said is not true (possible for a really clever and truly shameless psycho) than I can suggest only thing: start practicing some of what you preach before you fully doom yourself."
Jihadi Jon will most likely shamelessly self-flagellate for having said the above, A. He seems to like it, he has done it before through his "other" posts, and, after all, the Qu'ran tells him so. Doleful.
DeleteThanks Gardel. And ^good point. XD
@Jihadi Jon:
"The man ruled Arabia towards the end of his life yet he only got more and more empathetic, merciful and ended up being loved by the same people who tried to kill him for over a decade. Why? Because once he gained absolute power he not only forgave the worst of his enemies but he won their hearts by giving them more riches (because they were still greedy and needed that to feel respected). He did even let them FEEL subdued or inferior or abased even though they were. They ended up believing in him and becoming some of the greatest people in history.
There's that Community Collège Islamic Studies logic again, LOL
You don't "win someone's heart" by giving them riches- you buy their affection and loyalty. As one of the cruelest and deadliest dictators in history, Mohammed was well aware of this.
Are you really that fucking naive?
"Clueless", indeed. :P
Mo paying off his enemies isn't a big deal. People in the Middle East have been doing that for 1000's of years.
Delete"At best they say that he genuinely believed in his message but he obviously deluded."
DeleteThere was an article about a month ago that said scientists discovered a copy of the Quran that might be older than Muhammad. Totally deluded.
Yes do us the honor of citing the source. It can't be hard these days you have Google.
DeleteThese were funny - they almost made me miss my days of ignorance because I could reply in like terms and show you how to be witty and intelligent at the same time. I don't regret it though - the truth is serenity.
DeleteJust so you know: erroneous arguments remain erroneous no matter how many cheerleaders you have. How I wonder your Ivy League education (I guess you have your Devil-given insight about my "community college islamic studies") neglected to teach you rational discourse, or Devil-forbid, civility. Eww, civility, yuck. Is that what they say?
North:
DeleteI'm only responding to you because I'm sorry to say you either completely misunderstood what was said in my comment or are blindly supporting "A" for reasons unknown to me.
As for "A" being female - okay. She it is.
As for my asking "A" being effective: I said she's not practicing what she preached - namely all the ethical teachings of Jesus - because her writing is utterly vulgar and in bad taste. That much is obvious no?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3216627/Koran-Birmingham-thought-oldest-world-predate-Prophet-Muhammad-scholars-say.html
Deletefrom the article:
Delete"Keith Small, from the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library, added: 'This gives more ground to what have been peripheral views of the Koran's genesis, like that Muhammad and his early followers used a text that was already in existence and shaped it to fit their own political and theological agenda, rather than Muhammad receiving a revelation from heaven."
LOL!
The Birmingham Qur'an - as I suspected. This is actually a good example of liars and people of ill-agenda twisting facts - in this case facts supporting the Qur'an's claim to divinity - to try to state the opposite. It's rather foolishly done so here. The article says:
Delete"Carbon dating found the pages were produced between 568AD and 654AD" - Muhammad lived from around 570 AD to 632 AD. This puts the Qur'an right around his lifetime or shortly thereafter. You're trying to portray something proving the Qur'an historicity as disproving Islam. How pathetic. Keep trying but what you should actually is what God says below:
"And your Lord says: Call upon Me, I will answer you; surely those who are too proud for My service shall soon enter hell abased." - Qur'an 40:60
God forgives what you think no one could forgive.
A is not wrong, but simply has a perception of reality which you refuse to acknowledge as possibly being equally valid as yours. One's perception or experience of another is not the same as that person seeing through their own lenses of reality. To deny this is not only very close minded, but cognitively unempathetic and narcissistic.
DeleteA, a sociopath, is simply highlighting the faults of your religion, or it's "evils" so to speak. One might say that the points that you present is simply the pot calling the kettle black, but in this case the pot is attempting to veil their stance with the illusion of higher moral grounds. If you were wiser, you ought to consider the fact that your "faith" does not entitle you to any specialness, that it doesn't make you anymore significant then anyone else, and that anytime you would allow yourself to think otherwise is just the bloating of your ego.
This is amazing. How blind can people get? Everyone here projects their own - the same self-centered - mindset onto me. The moment they see something rationally argued that proves why psychopathy is an evil madness - which it is - they start their tricks:
Delete"We're just different and you force us to hide because of intolerance"
"I'm nice and loving, just not like you"
"You're deluded and narcissistic because you believe you're special (how I know that I will keep to myself, thank you)"
Yadda yadda yadda
By God I had the most trouble with the concept of Hell. How could mortals be punished so severely for crimes they commit in a finite life? I swear seeing the outright hypocrisy and distortions and agendas here makes you see why it actually does make sense. Expand this to the wider world and you can see how EVIL this attitude can actually be in practice.
Save your self-pity - psychopathy is what EVERY tradition and culture and law calls immoral, evil and ill-conceived. Keep repeating the same nonsense will only earn you your doom. The stupidest part is you need only ask real Lord - not those you seek to impress or their masters - and He will free you of this condition.
Jonaid,
DeleteI ask again - what are you trying to do?
You're creating a short-lived disturbance but not winning over your audience because you speak only of your own model of reality.
It's futile to engage with you in any sort of discussion for this reason. That A and Gardel are taking you apart is completely warranted: what appalling behaviour it is to convince M.E. to publish your words on sociopathy and religion then come in here to the blog and ram your agenda down everyone's throats. And not only that, you insult and denigrate the population of this place with every keystroke.
I reject that outright and I'll be clear about it because I like it here. I like engaging with posters even though they troll me sometimes ;) I like to hear their stories and see the world a little through their eyes. There's infinite ways to live in this universe - I prefer to open my eyes and my mind rather than jam both shut. The universe is volatile and competitive; I'd far prefer to learn and let go than grab, tight-fisted at "absolutes" based only on appeal to some questionable authority. That's relentless agony.
You might think when people stop engaging with you you've won your argument; you reference your past "successes" regularly. It's not the case. People stop engaging with you because you change your story at each instance to avoid valid criticisms - it's pointless speaking to you.
I know what it's like to fight and fight and fight to prove one's own existence. I have taken it to mathematical geniuses and "defeated" them. It's not fruitful. You might prove your existence to yourself and to the world and maybe even to your god but in aid of what? Some brief dopamine hits? You are still miserable.
Self acceptance is the path out of this deathtrap. It's the healing balm that obviates the screaming need to argue. The "rescuing" of others is only an attempt to control. It really is NOT empathy - A hit the nail on the head with that (and many, many other things.) How can you know what is best for any of us? You refuse to know any of us or our complexities or our humanity.
Deep down, Jonaid, you are okay. That's all you need; it's all anyone needs.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rfrFT_3GP4A
DeleteYeah, you've got it all,
But you've got it all wrong.
No, you don't know
You're a poor unfortunate soul.
Oh I know,
You make it seem that you feel whole,
So they don't know
You're a poor unfortunate soul.
Yeah you put on a faith facade,
Think you're holy when you're not.
I hate to break it to you baby,
But you're simply lost.
You can right all the wrongs just to feel you belong,
But simply calling out sins don't bring you closer to God.
You're just a ghost at most,
A set of empty bones,
Searching for anything and everything to make you feel whole,
When it gets cold, oh oh oh.
You don't know.
No you don't know.
Oh you're all alone,
You poor unfortunate soul.
You can't control where your body lets you go.
Oh you're all alone,
You poor unfortunate soul.
And you say that I've got it all wrong.
'Cause you just know I'm a poor unfortunate soul.
But there's no way that there's weight in the words that you preach,
When you're claiming your faith and you contradict your speech.
So I sit here and listen to your tongue and cheek,
I know that when you sit and pray you're only praying for keeps.
Cause you're a ghost at most,
A set of empty bones,
Searching for anything and everything to make you feel whole,
When it gets cold, oh oh oh.
You don't know.
No you don't know.
Oh you're all alone,
You poor unfortunate soul.
You can't control where your body lets you go.
Oh you're all alone,
You poor unfortunate soul.
You're shallow and empty and filled with regret.
I think that chest must be heavy from that cross on your neck
You only wear 'cause you're wary of what comes next after your death.
Don't think I didn't notice.
Don't think I didn't notice.
Don't think I didn't know you're just a po-oh-oh-oh
Poor unfortunate so-o-o-oul
Poor unfortunate so-o-o-oul
Poor unfortunate so-o-o-oul
Poor unfortunate
And you've got it all (poor unfortunate so-o-o-oul)
You've got it all wrong (poor unfortunate so-o-o-oul)
No you'll never know, never know, never know (poor unfortunate so-o-o-oul)
You're a poor unfortunate soul.
Don't think I didn't notice.
North:
DeleteIt appears to me that you truly meant what you said here. I'm not going to respond to your points because that I don't think it'll help - you seem to see me a certain way because my views don't make you feel good. I made a neutral observation on M.E.'s post above without any reference to my personal religious views. Your pal "A" came and then a gang with her. Just because I responded and corrected their nonsense does not mean that I was the one who initiated it or even sustained it. If you watch this post from the outside and with integrity you'd see that right away.
Having said that I'll go back to my avoiding you at your own request. You can not like me or my views but don't tell me to not state them and then defend the basest of the crowd.
"Deep down, Jonaid, you are okay. That's all you need; it's all anyone needs."
Thank you for this. I wasn't okay before thanks to sociopaths who fucked me big time and would NEVER say such a thing to me when I needed it most. Now that I am fine and speaking honestly in the midst of psychos you need not repeat your fine words to me again.
Do not mind my harsh tone. I responded in like manner. If you mean well it will benefit you, not me.
I use the term "psychopath" as it is defined. It's a generic expression for all individuals visiting & participating in this blog. It's not my fault people misconstrue or deliberately feign hurt here. Let me define them so as to be clear:
DeletePsychopath: the extreme end of the empathy spectrum where an individual is operating without any or very, very little empathy. Their concern is themselves only and they are actively destroying other people's lives without giving a hint to anyone (except fellow psychos). They'll say the nicest things but do the worst. Classic definition of devil.
Sociopath: Operating on very little empathy but maintain some level of humanity deep down. They may not deliberately hurt or damage others but deliberately refuse to take responsibility when they're told what they've done.
If anyone here does not fall into my definitions of the two terms above than they need not be offended if I attack psychos. If they do consider themselves sociopaths but don't agree with my definition, than I apologize for any offense caused - it was not aimed at you or indeed anyone else personally (how can it? you're all anonymous).
Peace folks.
Sorry I meant it is NOT a generic term for all blog visitors.
DeleteJonaid, I requested no such thing, but you did promise it. More ducking and weaving.
DeleteYou are putting yourself in the position of victim (and again at 9:13 PM) but it's not washing.
You're attempting to engage only on your own terms.
You're views don't bother in the slightest. My personal model can accommodate yours. It's yours that can not hear any other perspective.
It's your behaviour that appalls me.
Is this revenge? These people did nothing to you before you came here to insult them. And they held off for a long time before they challenged you - I'd have been less patient and it was hard for me to hold off. What were you expecting? You have labelled these people, whom you've taken no fraction of a second to understand, as EVIL and are surprised at the response? You're the victim? Please.
I ask again, what are you trying to achieve? Ask yourself.
"If anyone here does not fall into my definitions of the two terms above than they need not be offended if I attack psychos"
Delete"Psychopath: the extreme end of the empathy spectrum where an individual is operating without any or very, very little empathy. Their concern is themselves only and they are actively destroying other people's lives without giving a hint to anyone (except fellow psychos). They'll say the nicest things but do the worst. Classic definition of devil. "
This is a neat summary of what you are doing. You seduced M.E. into hearing you out - she's an open-minded explorer - then crap all over her blog THEN claim the moral high ground.
All I am doing is utterly rejecting your rubbish.
Sorry North I can't engage with you now. You're extraordinarily disingenuous in your observations. Yes that is typical of sociopaths & psychopaths. First you tried to "reason" with me because you realized I was onto something. Then you attempted to dismiss me as "arrogant" because YOU mistook (or feigned it) a single statement I made because your flawed and nonsensical arguments were not going anywhere with me. Then you started siding with you pals unsolicited because I offered my own experience in response to your personal note (again, typical psycho behavior responding with evil to good).
DeletePlease save your tricks I would say I'm above them but that would be a lie. I almost fell for it just now but again, God guides as He wills. Try your pseudo empathy & reverse ethics on less experienced & unfortunate individuals (actually you shouldn't but you will).
This place is scarier than I thought. Nonetheless, it's no worries I am ignorant of much but God - the One who made it all - is not. I learn more and more each day.
Good luck North. I still wish you find peace & truth. However, now I will not respond to you because you've crossed the limit of deceit with me. I wish I could see an apology forthcoming but I'm not optimistic.
First I was narcissistic, now...
Delete"Yes that is typical of sociopaths & psychopaths."
Now:
"arrogant"
When did I say that?
And:
"I made because your flawed and nonsensical arguments"
Evidence please or genuine arguments against...
And...
"I offered my own experience in response to your personal note (again, typical psycho behavior responding with evil to good)."
You questioned my judgement on whether my lover was a sociopath without the slightest bit of context. M.E. has many fine posts about narcissistic diminishing of others by trying to define others' realities or force them to argue and explain themselves.
"Please save your tricks"
Which are those? Please elucidate...
"Try your pseudo empathy & reverse ethics"
How's about reading my Twitter posts and seeing what I did offer you is entirely consistent with who I am.
I notice your "openness" leads to a Google Account showing precisely nothing.
"you've crossed the limit of deceit with me"
Still playing the victim?
"could see an apology forthcoming but I'm not optimistic."
No, certainly not. Your behaviour is flat out unacceptable and I make no bones about saying it. Go preach elsewhere. Anytime you come at us with your ducking and weaving vitriol, I will call you on it.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n1AD6LPmJO4
DeleteSarah (Sociopath World): Through dangers untold and hardships unnumbered... I have fought my way here to the castle beyond the goblin city... For my will is as strong as yours... and my kin-
Jareth (Jonaid): Stop! Wait. Look, Sarah, look what I'm offering. Your dreams...
Sarah: And my kingdom as great...
Jareth: I ask for so little. Just let me rule you, and you can have everything that you want.
Sarah: Kingdom as great... damn... I can never remember that line.
Jareth: Just fear me, love me, do as I say, and I will be your slave!
Sarah: My kingdom as great... my kingdom as great... You have no power over me!
...You have no power over me!
@Anon 10:09.
DeleteThank-you. That was aptly chosen and a propos.
Here is my response:
The Valley of Dry Bones
37 The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2 He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3 He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?”
I said, “Sovereign Lord, you alone know.”
4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5 This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath[a] enter you, and you will come to life. 6 I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’”
7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. 8 I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them.
9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live.’” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army.
11 Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the Lord have spoken, and I have done it, declares the Lord.’” (Ezekiel 37: 1-14)
38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,[a] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39)
Moses writes this about the righteousness that is by the law: “The person who does these things will live by them.”[a] 6 But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’”[b] (that is, to bring Christ down) 7 “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’”[c] (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,”[d] that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: 9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.”[e] 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.(Romans 10:5-13)
To quote Stephen King, hope floats, my friend. :)
You're welcome, A. You've helped make my evening entertaining.
DeleteI might mention that I have nothing truly against Islam, for I have met at least a few people who claim to be of that faith that are genuinely good (or at least I would perceive them as such). I do have an issue though with those who would seek to maliciously impose their beliefs upon me for the sake of their own religious agenda. I will seek to have and uphold my beliefs that give me fulfillment my own terms.
Amen.
DeleteIn my defense:
DeleteNORTH:
Now:
"arrogant"
When did I say that?
ME:
Extreme empath child
November 21, 6:11 pm
North to me:
"However:
"You'll seek me out I promise you."
I don't appreciate this statement. It smacks of arrogance."
NORTH:
And:
"I made because your flawed and nonsensical arguments"
Evidence please or genuine arguments against...
ME:
If anyone actually believes her or cares to know which one of us is being genuine and which is outright lying, just go to EXTREME EMPATH CHILD on Nov 18 and see our entire discussion.
NORTH:
And...
"I offered my own experience in response to your personal note (again, typical psycho behavior responding with evil to good)."
You questioned my judgement on whether my lover was a sociopath without the slightest bit of context. M.E. has many fine posts about narcissistic diminishing of others by trying to define others' realities or force them to argue and explain themselves.
ME:
"JonaidNovember 26, 2015 at 3:45 PM
North maybe he has nothing to reveal."
Either "maybe" is vague or someone is lying. Sociopath forum? I bet lying.
NORTH:
"Please save your tricks"
Which are those? Please elucidate...
ME:
It's called sophistry and I've been elucidating that's why you psychos are going nuts on me.
NORTH:
"Try your pseudo empathy & reverse ethics"
How's about reading my Twitter posts and seeing what I did offer you is entirely consistent with who I am.
ME:
Yes, psychopaths & sociopaths love social media. They get to bombard anyone who knows them with one lie after another about their views and world view. They post the exact opposite of what they actually think. Truth is evident eventually. You can only go so long before you self-contradict in an unforgivable way.
NORTH:
I notice your "openness" leads to a Google Account showing precisely nothing.
ME:
Why the need to know more about me personally? You can't answer something logically and reasonably so you need more personal ammo against me? I'm using my real name - not advertising my entire life here.
NORTH:
"you've crossed the limit of deceit with me"
Still playing the victim?
ME:
By God I was - and still am - a target of several sociopaths - including my own family. If a "victim" exists I was certainly one and an innocent one to say the least. Yet God is my witness that today I am HAPPY to have been victimized. He gave me wisdom and knowledge I would almost certainly never have gained without these experiences. Having said that, NO I'm not playing a victim but those who keep alleging must be doing that and projecting it onto me.
"I might mention that I have nothing truly against Islam, for I have met at least a few people who claim to be of that faith that are genuinely good (or at least I would perceive them as such). I do have an issue though with those who would seek to maliciously impose their beliefs upon me for the sake of their own religious agenda. I will seek to have and uphold my beliefs that give me fulfillment my own terms."
DeleteI don't speak for religions as a whole but my "agenda" is to help others see the Truth. God is the ultimate truth and I would have been the last to admit it only a few months ago. He is also the cure for sociopaths (if they want to be cured / forgiven). You don't have to take anything no one is imposing it on you. Isn't it enough proof when they gang up and go nuts in fear lest someone actually read the book of God and find Truth therein. The Meccan enemies of Muhammad already did ALL these tricks and much more. Muhammad won in the end. God always wins. Who but a fool thinks they can outwit and outdo their own Creator? Psychopathy is the worst of all illnesses - only it is largely self-inflicted.
"But there's no way that there's weight in the words that you preach,
DeleteWhen you're claiming your faith and you contradict your speech.
So I sit here and listen to your tongue and cheek,
I know that when you sit and pray you're only praying for keeps.
Cause you're a ghost at most,
A set of empty bones,
Searching for anything and everything to make you feel whole,
When it gets cold, oh oh oh..."
Mohammed was a cunning psychopath. The book he wrote is filled with heinous atrocities, and it was largely self-serving. There is no context in which crucifixion and beheadings are morally appropriate. All of the apologetic exegetical contortions in the world do not negate a very plain reading if the text.
DeleteI'll say it again: The Qu'ran is exquisitely crafted to brainwash its readers. Even the chanting produces a more open state of consciousness which will prime your brain for mindless acceptance.
You accuse others if being irrational and taking offense, but it is *you* who falls prey to both these things. This is classic projection. North has called you on it, and so have I- but you hear only the sound of your own voice.
You have not addressed a single verse or Hadith I have shared, because you don't like my vulgarity. What a convenient excuse to avoid the meat of the matter, which you are not intellectually equipped to address. You refuse to communicate on any terms other than your own. You judge everything very superficially, which is one reason I asserted that you're not very bright. If you were, you would see through the false ideology you tout.
Unfortunately, your condition- in parallel with the condition of every failed nation state in the Middle East- is largely self-inflicted.
But you'll blame the Jews just the same. :P
Yes I refuse to communicate on serious matters without a serious tone. How conceited of me. So be it.
Delete"There is no context in which crucifixion and beheadings are morally appropriate."
No apparently crucifixions are only valid when an innocent son of a deity is the victim.
"A" you're no Christian stop masquerading as one. Christians are known for their humility and generosity. You are anything but that. If you do believe in Jesus you're serving his enemies more than him.
I stand corrected.
DeleteI believe there was one context in which crucifixion was morally appropriate- and that is when Jesus willingly submitted to it for the good of others.
But I have stated before: I am not morally equipped to preach, and I have no desire to force my beliefs down the throats of others. I am nothing like the man I hold in such high esteem. But He remains my one hope in this world. My faith is not based on rationality. Call it magical thinking, if you will. But I will cling fast to it, because I literally have nothing to lose.
I have studied Islam, Judaism, Witchcraft, Sufism, and Theravada Buddhism. But never have I read anything that has rung as true to me as the teachings of Jesus Christ.
If A can't be a Christian, you can't be a true Muslim. You're gay anyways, so that's that.
DeleteStop judging by what is superficial. You have no idea whether or not I am Christian. You are not morally equipped to render such a judgment, fool. I am not, either.
DeleteYour humility is feigned, rooted in narcissistic self-righteousness, and so paper-thin that we can all see right through it. You think too of yourself, and it will be your downfall- especially if you continue to allow yourself to be brainwashed by the teachings of a self-serving, opportunistic megalomaniac like Mohammed.
Also- it bears mentioning that although it was morally appropriate for Jesus to submit to crucifixion given the context- it was *not* morally appropriate for his fellow Jews to subject Him to it. But God uses even our sin for the accomplishment of a greater good.
DeleteThis is in stark contrast to how Mohammed advises his followers to perpetuate this crime, so your argument is invalid.
I have no qualms with you as a Christian. Anyone who believes in God and the Qur'an is obliged to honor Jesus and his preachings. Nothing Jesus said contradicts the Qur'an. If anything is taken so literally that is must applied ALWAYS and ALL THE TIME (i.e. "turn the other cheek") then yes, the Qur'an and Christianity will depart.
Delete"A" there is something called responsibility. If you believe in Jesus you should take responsibility for allowing someone like me to label you as a false preacher. You're siding with self-proclaimed psychopaths & sociopaths against someone you think might be deceiving everyone.
I have nothing against Christianity and Islamic history is a testament to its tolerance of Christians. To this day - 1400 years after Islamic rule in Syria and Egypt - there are millions of indigenous Christians living there. Unfortunately - thanks almost entirely to the West's illegal wars and involvements - we now have psychopathic groups like ISIS caricaturing Islam and destroying its heritage there.
Honor Jesus and prove you're faithful to him. Do you not trust that God can and indeed will hold me accountable if I am lying about Him? You need not resort to the devil's tactics to defend what you perceive to be a false prophet. Let your Lord handle it and you speak like a Christian.
Savvy?
Gay and yet I submit to the Truth. What is your excuse? Pride? You'll croak one day (and it could be anytime) yet your pride would make one think you're the king of the solar system.
DeleteThat was for the anonymous above.
DeleteI have no responsibility to you or anyone beyond what I choose. I have not called myself anything: you are the one doing all the labeling. What should I care if you call me a false prophet? I have my own way of believing what l choose- and they are not subject to you. So call me whatever you want. I have no desire to prove myself to you, or to conform to your boxes and definitions
DeleteI call myself a conplex human being with many sociopathic traits- some of them good, some of them bad. But I am not "preaching" anything. I am, in the manner of my choice, exposing a false ideology for the bullshit it is. And I don't have to conform to your preferences in the process.
"A"
DeletePlease read the full post first. I said you perceive Muhammad to be a false prophet - not that you are yourself one.
Let's agree to disagree shall we?
Decades of bumbling, self-serving Western foreign policy notwithstanding , it is the fault of *Qu'ranic ideology* that groups like ISIS now run rampant. You are a lukewarm Muslim. Your Qu'ran is very clear about your responsibility to spread Islam through Jihad.
DeleteIt is the revival of the historical caliphate- the beast referred to in Revelation whose fatal wound had healed. If you knew anything at all about your own eschatological traditions, you might perceive that they fit lock and key with the Bible's. Except the man you call the Madhi, we call the antichrist.
You're ignorant of your own traditions. How can you ever hope to understand anyone else's?
"Your Qu'ran is very clear about your responsibility to spread Islam through Jihad."
DeleteHe knows that. He's just letting the terrorists do all the work for him. If Muslims ever take over, we'll see how he really is.
Muslims don't need to take over. The legal system of this country allows for freedom of religion and expression. Muslims are more free here to practice their faith (or not) than most Muslim lands. Unfortunately certain elements of the population with a hateful agenda (similar to some folks here) are trying to ruin that - they will undo their own civilization if they are successful.
DeleteIn reality, I have no idea whether or not these eschatological ideas are accurate. I am not some kind of prophecy expert. But I do know that in Islam, there is no separation between Mosque and State. Any nation governed by Shariah is, by definition, a theocracy. This is not the result of some "hateful faction" within Islam, *it is the necessary product of Islamic ideology and jurisprudence.*
DeleteHistory has shown that it is always foolish and ill-advised to grant any religious group agency or legal authority over the personal freedoms of individuals.
There are good Muslims, but the progenitor of Islam was not a good man, and this is evidenced the kinds of acts he prescribed for his followers. I am not disseminating some "hateful agenda" by refusing to participate in your ludicrous semantic and contextual apologetics. I'm merely calling a spade a bloody spade- and not a well-dressed single lady. :P
"Satan threatens you with poverty and commands you with evil and obscene deeds." Qur'an 2:267
DeleteWhat a well-thought out, articulate response to a perfectly legitimate critique of the theocratic structure of Islam: using the Qu'ran to foist threats against the dissenters of Mohammed. How atypical and uncharacteristic for a Muslim. It must be that I'm Zionist conspirator.~
DeleteYou know, Jihadi Jon, perhaps *you* are the one who should feel threatened, since I have already demonstrated quite clearly why, from a psychological standpoint, you are ripe for radicalization. You can be sure the NSA monitors this site.
Jussayin'.
Lol.
You're getter there. A little less solipsism and I think we'll be ready for a serious chat. We really don't need to be frivolous if we're serious.
DeleteThank you.
You want to attack me that's OK but be serious and not profane when mentioning Muhammad and criticizing the religion. Criticism is welcome but please keep it civil.
DeleteOmitting the reference to Jonaid in Anonymous’ post above (11:44 p.m.) in reference to “Labyrinth,” I can honestly say or “movie quote” that...
Delete“I need to believe that something extraordinary is possible.”
The strong belief is intricately embedded into my being. Having said that, and considering the fathomable artistry that springs forth, I wonder how long it took to create these:
http://a.fastcompany.net/multisite_files/fastcompany/imagecache/620x350/poster/2014/11/3038260-poster-p-1-tk-movie-posters-that-imagine-the-sequels-hollywood-never-made.jpg
http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/33100000/Labyrinth-The-Movie-Art-labyrinth-33180541-2000-1536.jpg
I told you already, Jihadi. If you don't like what I say, you are free to ignore me, or to respond as you wish. But you are not free to dictate what I post or say here. You are not in control of this conversation.
DeleteI have no allegiance to the lying pedophile you call a prophet- and I will not pull any punches or mince words to cater to your sensitivities.
The man you call "supremely empathetic" was the same person who advocated child rape, beheadings and crucifixion. Context is irrelevant. If you want to apologize for these heinous actions, and live your life according to Mohammed's fanatical rants, go ahead and be his deluded fool. But you certainly won't stop me from exposing what a megalomaniacal asshole he was, however I see fit.
Thank-you.
:D
Jihadi Jon said:
Delete"Nothing Jesus said contradicts the Qur'an. "
Hahaha! What a crock of shit.
Mohammed said:
Qur’an 9:123 “murder them and treat them harshly”
Qur’an 5:72 “They are surely infidels who say; ‘God is the Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary.”
Qur’an 8:12 cp. 8:60 “Instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers”; “smite above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them”
Qur’an 2:191 “...kill the disbelievers wherever we find them”
Jesus said:
"But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" - Matthew 5:44
Are you unable to read, or are you just stupid?
Those are very cool, Gardel- especially the first one.
DeleteThe movie Labyrinth is an all-time favorite of mine. Thanks for sharing. :-)
The first one carries a whole heap of symbolism for me, A. Yes, a favorite, meaning that every time I see the movie, something new and captivating adds to the experience. As a motion picture, it is spot-on and worthy of great reviews.
DeleteI am glad to share. Here are others, coming from my image "collection."
I call this one "The Mirror of Jolita." Well, Jolita is a name that I created. :)
https://41.media.tumblr.com/d0b0fe955638f7ac5fe71a17d8999d16/tumblr_noscx8TXvM1ty8nbio1_500.png
Considering its dual aura, the name that I have given this image is "He Knows."
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QQsIpCjDdBU/hqdefault.jpg
I would call it "The Rock," but it is actually part of a tree, so it must be named "Layers."
http://www.thestrut.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/bowie1-640x269.jpg
"A"
DeleteFirstly I realize I'm making an exception to my own statement earlier where I said I will not correspond with you again. Just this one time to share a final comment:
God knows I'm only deducing from what I've seen of you: you are almost certainly no Christian or in any way a follower of Jesus or even a believer in him. You are almost certainly a Zionist and probably a Jew (depending on the definition of "Jew"). I say this because of your immediate accusations of anti-semitism against me from the onset. You are masquerading a believer in Jesus and vehemently attacking Islam and Muhammad as an attempt to strike two birds with one stone. Your "criticism" (in quotes because it's actual just utter hate & nonsense) of Muhammad is without saying. By attaching yourself to Jesus and behaving in the EXACT opposite - without any exception or consideration whatsoever despite how much I've implored - you are attempting to caricature his name and the religion of Christianity by showing readers that a "Christian" can be as disgusting as you.
Now you can go back to your "you're a jew-hating conspiracy nut..." rambling. I will do my utmost to avoid you. May God have mercy on you.
love is the law, law under will.
ReplyDeleteDo you think people dislike sociopaths because they see reflections of themselves in us, and it disgusts them because of their fragile insecure minds?
ReplyDeleteQuite possibly - it's a fascinating consideration.
DeleteThe differences are not so great as people like to think.
I've said this before and will repeat it again: I fully understand - and almost empathize with - people who hate moral / religious ideologies (and Islam in particular these days) because of all the hypocrisy & evil we see coming from religious institutions & individuals. Again, I was a staunch atheist & critic of theism, especially Islam (it would be fair being that I was raised in that tradition).
ReplyDeleteI say this to remind you once again that if you want to have a serious chat about Islam and anything else (serious implying the ONLY motive is to find the truth) than be more civil and less vulgar. I don't mind jokes but outright mockery & profanity aimed at demeaning the other person's sense of self has got to go. It doesn't hurt me at all and your repeated attempts make me pity you. I feel you're better than that. Prove me right...or wrong (I hope the former).
You are a bad Muslim. You shouldn't pity me or wish to engage me in civil conversation:
DeleteQuran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
I cannot blame you for reading this verse as - forgive me - ignorantly as you do. Again, I did the same. The buck stops with muslims - they have become such a mess that one does not read the Qur'an's message as it ought to be read & understood because they look at muslims and say "this is NOT good or true and we don't want it." Unfortunately that is true more often than I'd like but still most of it is still propaganda and even IF it wasn't it is a logical fallacy to read a verse out of context, in divergence from the spirit of the book and to deduce erroneous interpretations just because the self-proclaimed followers of the book are behaving like lunatics.
DeleteWe'll get to stage 2 - when I start addressing your specific points - when you engage with me civilly. Right now I'm defending the book of God against propaganda and misinformation.
"(Muslims) have become such a mess that one does not read the Qur'an's message as it ought to be read & understood because they look at muslims and say "this is NOT good or true and we don't want it... Unfortunately that is true more often than I'd like but still most of it is still propaganda and even IF it wasn't it is a logical fallacy to read a verse out of context..."
DeleteNo, dumbass. Those of us with a capacity for rational thought read the Qu'ran and reject it's bronze age mentality. What the fuck part of "behead and crucify your enemies" do you not understand?
If you wish to ascribe any ethical credence to your "holy book", you have to perform veritable exegetical contortions. The majority of your theological rhetoric *must be* apologetic, which places you on the defensive, and therefore in the weaker position.
Better make up for it by blowing yourself up. That'll show us who's really in charge. :P
"...in divergence from the spirit of the book and to deduce erroneous interpretations just because the self-proclaimed followers of the book are behaving like lunatics. "
I ask you again. How are repeated admonitions to behead and crucify one's enemies ambiguous or even context dependent? Mohammed called men like you shirkers:
Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.
Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward"
Your faith is lukewarm, at best.
But how long will that last? How long before someone "crosses the line", and causes your blood to boil, because you are every bit as petulant, judgmental and prone to self-righteous rage as your "holy" book gives you license to be?
I regard the Qu'ran as a deeply deceptive treatise, exquisitely designed to be the perfect vehicle and vector through which to brainwash you, and inject into your soul a toxic ideology that hooks itself into your ego, puffing you up with pride, whilst inciting you to self-righteous rage. When chanted, it is hypnotic, and virtually trance inducing. In many ways, it is a masterpiece of manipulate genius, whose progenitor was almost certainly psychopathic.
Shepherds and wolves, sheep and goats.
As I pointed out, and as you yourself have demonstrated, that superiority complex is already well established in you. You already show signs of radicalization by virtue of the forceful, self-described "harsh" tone of your proselytizing efforts. Your pride will be your downfall, Jihadi. It is just a matter of time (and this is key), and it will be *directly proportional to the amount of time you spend studying the Qu'ran and Hadith, and learning under its teachers*.
Delete"We'll get to stage 2 - when I start addressing your specific points - when you engage with me civilly. Right now I'm defending the book of God against propaganda and misinformation."
What "propaganda" are you referring to? All of the objective, verifiable facts I have stated about your false prophet? :P
"Address my specific points" all you want. But you had best get cracking. Because I have provided you a plethora of Surahs and Hadiths, while all you've done is whine about how I'm swearing at you, and besmirching one of the greatest assholes in history.
In case you hadn't noticed, you are not in control of this conversation, and you are not winning this debate. You are spending your time apologizing for a monster, to people you call monsters. I am aware that this is likely above your head, but the comedic irony of this positively titillates me. :D
You are not defending the "Book of God"- you are attempting to paint a savage, bronze-age mentality as something it most assuredly is not, and I will call you on it- each and every single time- as I see fit, whether you like it or not.
Shall I squeeze your balls a little bit harder, Jon? I can tell you're a sucker for punishment. And I'm up for Round 2. And 3, and 4...
I've got all night, baby- and far more stamina than you. :)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHere's another one:
ReplyDelete"By the sun and his brightness,
And the moon when she follows him,
And the day when it reveals him,
And the night when it enshrouds him,
And the heaven and Him Who built it,
And the earth and Him Who spread it,
And a soul and Him Who perfected it,
And inspired it [with conscience of] what is wrong for it and [what is] right for it.
He is indeed successful who causes it to grow,
And he is indeed a failure who stunts it.
(The tribe of) Thamud denied (the truth) in their rebellious pride,
When the basest of them broke forth,
And the messenger of God said: It is the she-camel of God, so let her drink!
But they denied him, and they hamstrung her, so God doomed them for their sin
and razed [their dwellings].
He dreads not the sequel (of events)."
Qur'an Chapter 91: The Sun.
Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"
DeleteQuran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
These are good choices to demonstrate your viewpoint, A. Here are others:
DeleteIbn Ishaq: 327 – “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Ibn Ishaq: 990 – Lest anyone think that cutting off someone’s head while screaming ‘Allah Akbar!’ is a modern custom, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.
Ibn Ishaq: 992 – “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.” Muhammad’s instructions to his men prior to a military raid."
Funny how one quotes random verses from the Qur'an and the other quotes random statements from a collection of sayings written 200 + years after the man died (which does NOT nullify their authenticity but highlights that one ought to be careful). Does anyone here actually use context?
DeleteSociopaths argue like this:
Huckleberry Finn uses the word "nigger" in it therefore the entire novel, it's author and it's readers are all racists and bigots who ought to be ignored and chastised. Furthermore, they are EQUALLY racist and bigoted as a white man or woman who utters the word nigger today, in our time and context.
Ooh. Of course! How silly of me to not be able to look past the whole "cut off their heads and fingertips" thing, and find the CONTEXT in which these brutal verses are consistent with your view of Mohammed the Magnanimous Uber-Empath. I wasn't aware of the fact that he moonlighted in drag as the Queen of fucking Hearts. How ignorant of me.~
DeleteThis argument is as good as your inane assertion that good ol' Mo wasn't *actually* a pedophile for bedding a 9 yr old girl because "nobody considered it odd in Saudi Arabia at the time". *Especially* not one who had the nasty habit of crucifying and beheading dissenters, or anyone who offended him.
Context is everything, folks! :D
Watching Jonaid and A clash is quite entertaining. It's like a lightsaber duel. I wonder when Jonaid will say "aye, iam yo fudda."
ReplyDeleteAw, shucks. Thank you for making me Luke, good M'am or Sir. ;)
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous (6:13 pm):
ReplyDeleteSorry to disappoint but I've noticed something amazing recently as my belief in God has strengthened through almost daily confirmation. It seems I've lost the urge to respond to every vulgar display of arrogance & hate each time I see it. I've certainly lost the urge to do so in a similar manner. I'm still not perfect obviously and I will continue to defend the truth where I feel it's necessary. It is a HUGE relief actually to know that God's command is SO true: our job is to convey the truth, NOT to defend IT against psychos. He Himself will deal with them in the end.
To any readers who actually want answers on anything one of these psychos spews or what I've said, please feel free to address me directly and I will try my best. Just don't be vulgar like them. It's not the distastefulness that disturbs me but rather the cowardly nature of it all.
"You don't "win someone's heart" by giving them riches- you buy their affection and loyalty. As one of the cruelest and deadliest dictators in history, Mohammed was well aware of this."
ReplyDeleteThis one is a little personal for me. A former sociopath friend of mine - the same one I would have loved to see freed - treated my favors, including financial favors, as manipulation. He most likely thought I was trying to "buy him." It's also possible that that is the spin he put on it to sell it to himself because surely he must know deep down that I never did that. I genuinely cared for him - the real him - and I couldn't help myself but to go out of my way to make him comfortable. Deep down there was a longing to be closer also, yes, but the favors were NEVER done in the hopes of winning his heart. That is cheap and I consider that beneath me. It's dishonorable and disgusting and by God I didn't have to do any such thing if I wanted him for just a romantic relationship. I wanted him freed from the chains and delusions of psychopathy by proving to him that genuine emotions, love and care does exist. Unfortunately because I didn't believe in God then I caved in to mounting pressures of life and lost it. Ultimately he was more wrong because his actions were misconstrued needlessly whereas mine were a result of losing the courage of my own convictions after being mass betrayed by my own immediate family.
Love cannot be bought but it IS evidence of some genuine feeling of affection when someone needlessly and without an obvious agenda provides you with aid. Look inside you and imagine how much it would hurt to throw that back at them with false accusations. Don't do that to people you'd break instantly if it was done to you (because your hearts are already hardened).
Btw, your "friend" was using that as an excuse to cast you off- likely because you are overbearing, judgmental, and cloying. :P.
DeleteYou thought your financial favours entitled you to genuine affection, and took exception when your gestures were not "properly" appreciated. He was the one manipulating you, fool. He used your sexual proclivities and Savior complex to his advantage. When he didn't respond as you thought he should- you reacted with vitriol. And yet you still accord yourself the moral high ground, comparing yourself to your "friend", in order to bolster your own ego, salvage your self-perceived ethical superiority, and sate your insecurities. Typical fucking narc.
Unfortunately, this is also a recipe for a radical in the making. :P
Free yourself from the yoke of the charlatan who deceives you, Jihadi. Then perhaps the scales will fall from your eyes, so that you might truly see.
That was an accurate and legitimate description of what Mohammed did. You take everything so personally- another manifestation of your narcissism. But here are a few personal questions for you, Jon:
ReplyDeleteHow, exactly, did you "lose it"? You went ape-shit on his ass for offending you?
This was in the context of a romantic relationship?
Are you gay?
I should mention that I'm not judging you, lest you get all butthurt again. :P
How could I? I'm bisexual.
A, while you construct some valid points, I honestly do not understand your reason for continuing to “analyze” the asinine nonsense that Jihadi Jon writes in his comments pertaining to his friend. True, it is your choice and I can understand that rather well, but he is lying in a mode that makes him look downright idiotic. As I read your comments, I always hope that you can pluck the truth out of his pile of lies/compost.
DeleteI see that you have some questions for him, which I can understand, too. You like to probe, and that is explicable. Based on everything that I have seen thus far, Jihadi Jon has a way of twisting the truth, and, instead, cunningly appropriating what others have done for him. So, and this is important to comprehend, it was most likely that his friend gave him things and not the other way around (not financial favors as he so "questionably" put it, but food and clothes, which was probably done in a detached manner, anyway). What’s more, considering Jihadi Jon’s feeble mind and lack of apparent financial stability, I certainly do not believe that his friend was manipulated in doing so. Do you understand this part of it, A?
Jihadi Jon does not sound sexual at all to me, and having said so, I believe that his relationship to the friend in question was strictly platonic in real time. In fact, and judging by his “other” posts, it seems that he has a great fear of intimacy. Do you understand this part of it too, A?
Further, and in spite of the false image that he tries to create online, I refuse to believe that he has a “Savior complex” in reality. It is all a game of pretense on his part, and you are right in thinking that he is “overbearing, judgmental and cloying.” Jihadi Jon is self-destructive, taking satisfaction in spreading “poison” with his deluded "Savior" or "victim" cover, and destroying the close or evolving relationships of others. It seems to make him happy. Pathetic!
These are all potentially valid assessments. There is only so much one can ascertain via a cold read. I like to dig around for offal and see what comes out. :)
Delete"You thought your financial favours entitled you to genuine affection, and took exception when your gestures were not "properly" appreciated. He was the one manipulating you, fool."
ReplyDeleteYou're right here. How evil of me to expect a favor to be appreciated, at the very least. He was manipulating me but not because I was fooled but because I chose to NOT believe that he was capable of it. Like I say: sane mentality & rational faculties deplete in psychos gradually. The deeper they go into the pit the more arrogant, self-centered and self-righteous they get but all the while they're losing it.
I'm human I almost broke and turned psycho - which is when "I lost it" - the God the Most High saved me. I don't know why that makes you jealous. You have just as much access to Him as anyone else. Is it because you're too proud? It is beneath you to be honest and humble? Seriously, WHY do you call yourself a follower of Jesus?
Hi Jonaid,
Delete"I'm human I almost broke and turned psycho - which is when "I lost it" - the God the Most High saved me. "
Okay, your position is becoming a bit clearer.
I understand your experience to a degree; as I mentioned earlier, I walked a precipice for a while myself before accepting that peace comes when we act in accordance with our own being.
It's a good thing you have continued on your own path.
The experiences you and I have are *not necessarily* shared by others here. Please, I ask you to recognise that.
Dark triad traits are largely heritable. It's unjust to label the people here as having deliberately chosen sociopathy / psychopathy. And hence unjust to demand they follow you to salvation.
"Genetic influences explained 69% of the variance in the latent psychopathic personality factor, while nonshared environmental influences explained 31%."
Source: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/262073153_The_Heritability_of_Psychopathic_Personality_in_14-_to_15-Year-Old_Twins_A_Multirater_Multimeasure_Approach
See also:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2242349/
Twin analyses revealed significant genetic influence on distinct psychopathic traits (Fearless Dominance and Impulsive Antisociality). Moreover, Fearless Dominance was associated with reduced genetic risk for internalizing psychopathology, and Impulsive Antisociality was associated with increased genetic risk for externalizing psychopathology.
Environmental influences are certainly a factor. Everyone here has a story, Jonaid, let's have mercy.
I am right about a lot of things wherein you're concerned, Jihadi- including your innate penchant towards radicalism, on account of your personality traits. I tend to read people well.
DeleteWhat you say about the mental faculties of psychopaths degrading over time is anecdotal and to my knowledge, unsupported by any scientific studies. In other words, it's your opinion- and you're seeking to make it everyone else's "truth", too. A case in point: My father was a violent criminal when he was a younger man. He was incarcerated for almost a decade for mutilating his victim's body part. But he shows no signs of mental degradation in his old age- although he has mellowed considerably. Thank God. :P
On that subject, North is right about the heritability of this personality disorder. (Thank you for the links, I will read them.) Perhaps you should read about it instead of trying to brandish that label around like a sword.
As for why I call myself a "follower of Jesus": that is *your* assumption and label. I believe He was who He claimed to be. As for why... There are many reasons- all of which are really none of your business. Suffice it to say that if you think I'm a bitch now, think of how much worse I might be if I did not have any faith or code of ethics to constrain my actions. ;)
There was a time I did not, and my psychopathic/antisocial behaviors were much, much worse.
I am not "jealous" of you at all. I have my own understanding of spirituality- and I think you're a fool for not seeing Mohammed for who he truly was.
There is no evidence that psychopathy is inherited. In fact "psychopathy" as defined does not even exist because psychos can CHOOSE to "turn on" their empathy at will. What is inherited is a predisposition to being more or less empathetic by default. That is a result of your gene pool. Psychos in the family will obviously increase the likelihood of psychos in the next generation. However, how one is nurtured can make a difference. Ultimately, however, this "condition" can be cured in a split second if God Most High wills it. He promises to answer your call if you sincerely ask Him. What a simple experiment hmm? How about you "turn on" your empathy, be sincere, and ask for forgiveness and mercy from Him. We will not be debating this then.
DeleteLol, you are so condescending. I have my own understanding of forgiveness and mercy, as well as what it means to call upon God. I am not interested in your brainwashed counsel, nor the lies that you call "truths".
DeleteYou guys are almost right on about what he did actually. As regards sexual insecurities: yes, my only insecurity is I need to know the person I may be most intimate with is a human being - not a pack meat. It's called emotion. How insecure of me - it's okay I don't mind it but thanks for your concern.
ReplyDeleteI think it makes a lot of sense. Like Hume has said, people are slaves to their emotions.
ReplyDeleteSo in a sense, you could say they are completely selfish for that reason. But if being selfish simply means being a slave to your emotions, then the term "selfish" isn't very meaningful.
That being said, sometimes people act out of compassion to people they have little or no connection to for very little apparent reward, and they apparently do so out of pure compassion.