|
(oYo)
|
 |
June 23, 2014, 04:51:56 AM |
|
Humans react from fear or love. If you react out of fear, use an ego and negativity in your life, then you're a robot in the terms of the song. If you act out of love, then you are a human, as that as how we naturally bonded thousands of years ago before the corruption of our society began.
If you don't know, then you're probably a robot.
Just as the picture you just posted, the red pill is understandably a psychedelic that shows you the universal consciousness, the blue pill is ego and where you are free to wake up, forget it all happened, and free to believe whatever you want to believe - ie, not the truth.
Both love and fear are emotions not solely expressed by humans. Multitudes of beings are afflicted by them. If you have a pet dog or cat you may have noticed this to be true. Feeling either of these emotions (or any offshoot of them) does not make you any more or less human. Likewise, not feeling emotions does not make you inhuman or a robot either. Hence, the picture I posted is your typical false dilemma (choose "A" or "B" senario), which completely overlooks the possiblity of there being (at the very least) another third choice. Nirvana is in essence this third choice (or perhaps more accurately no choice) whereby one is free of all emotions and does not "feel the need" to make any choice. I would also like to point out that not knowing what you are is merely another possible truth and it also by no means makes you a robot. Instead, it is the acceptance that "you know you know nothing". For example, thousands of years ago we believed we were the center of the universe and it was only 500 years ago we believed the Earth was flat. You for example, believe humans naturally bonded out of love before society became corrupt, whereby I would argue humans initially bonded out of fear for their survival before modern society allowed us the possibilty to bond merely in the name of love. |
|
|
|
|
hippich
|
|
June 23, 2014, 07:12:22 AM |
|
sometimes I feel like one.Its not good.
|
|
|
|
Nobitcoin
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 966
Merit: 1000
In holiday we trust
|
|
June 23, 2014, 07:30:26 AM |
|
Class post made my day  |
|
|
|
|
valog123
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
|
|
June 23, 2014, 07:42:44 AM |
|
Im a human
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nik1ab
|
|
June 23, 2014, 08:09:24 AM |
|
Remember people, never feed dank.
|
No signature ad here, because their conditions have become annoying.
|
|
|
Danydee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2632
Merit: 1254
|
|
June 23, 2014, 11:07:58 AM |
|
maybe yes I say this cause I feel "ROBOT" more than the standard |
|
|
|
|
Lauda
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
|
|
June 23, 2014, 01:29:38 PM |
|
Remember people, never feed dank.
He certainly is hungry at times isn't he? |
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" 😼 Bitcoin Core ( onion) |
|
|
dank (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1002
You cannot kill love
|
|
June 23, 2014, 07:25:34 PM |
|
Humans react from fear or love. If you react out of fear, use an ego and negativity in your life, then you're a robot in the terms of the song. If you act out of love, then you are a human, as that as how we naturally bonded thousands of years ago before the corruption of our society began.
If you don't know, then you're probably a robot.
Just as the picture you just posted, the red pill is understandably a psychedelic that shows you the universal consciousness, the blue pill is ego and where you are free to wake up, forget it all happened, and free to believe whatever you want to believe - ie, not the truth.
Both love and fear are emotions not solely expressed by humans. Multitudes of beings are afflicted by them. If you have a pet dog or cat you may have noticed this to be true. Feeling either of these emotions (or any offshoot of them) does not make you any more or less human. Likewise, not feeling emotions does not make you inhuman or a robot either. Hence, the picture I posted is your typical false dilemma (choose "A" or "B" senario), which completely overlooks the possiblity of there being (at the very least) another third choice. Nirvana is in essence this third choice (or perhaps more accurately no choice) whereby one is free of all emotions and does not "feel the need" to make any choice. I would also like to point out that not knowing what you are is merely another possible truth and it also by no means makes you a robot. Instead, it is the acceptance that "you know you know nothing". For example, thousands of years ago we believed we were the center of the universe and it was only 500 years ago we believed the Earth was flat. You for example, believe humans naturally bonded out of love before society became corrupt, whereby I would argue humans initially bonded out of fear for their survival before modern society allowed us the possibilty to bond merely in the name of love. I think you're taking the song a little too literal. I don't mean humans are cyborgs with computer chips inside of us. I never said humans are the only beings who feel love or fear. All of our emotions stem from positivity or negativity. And in regards to being the center of the universe, the truth is we are the center of the universe. Your consciousness, that is. Space and time are illusions of this grand reality. We are not separate from a creator, we are the creator. |
|
|
|
|
sifter
|
|
June 23, 2014, 07:27:00 PM |
|
I are robot 0_0
|
|
|
|
|
ondratra
|
|
June 24, 2014, 04:05:49 PM |
|
maybe yes I say this cause I feel "ROBOT" more than the standard That word was first used in R.U.R. by K. Čapek - a czech writer that was inspired by middle age word "robota", that was used for mandatory working on monarch's fields and domain (like 4 days a week; for free ofc.). So if you are doing something you don't want to for some other people you trully are Robot  |
|
|
|
|
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
|
|
June 24, 2014, 05:11:01 PM |
|
|
Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
|
|
|
|
kurumi
|
|
June 25, 2014, 03:47:21 AM |
|
Who am i  |
|
|
|
|
Gumble99
Member
Offline
Activity: 79
Merit: 10
|
|
June 25, 2014, 01:29:31 PM |
|
Psychiatry is a delusion, it is false science.
Psychiatry is a delusion, bla bla bla.. Then everything is a delusion, so what? Knowing that doesn't change anything. "adapt delusion and live It" |
|
|
|
|
|
phosphorush
|
|
June 26, 2014, 05:20:37 AM |
|
yes, i'm a biological robot
|
Your account locked, please contact support.
|
|
|
|
phosphorush
|
|
June 26, 2014, 05:26:45 AM |
|
Psychiatry is a delusion, it is false science.
Psychiatry is a delusion, bla bla bla.. Then everything is a delusion, so what? Knowing that doesn't change anything. "adapt delusion and live It" psychology, neuroscience and psychiatry, etc are "soft" sciences, not pesudo-science (like supernatural bullshit). Their object of study is one of the most complex objects we know... so it will be very hard for it to become an hard science. Plus, it's possible that our experience of being a brain will never be well explained, unless we could simulate it on a computer, i.e. as an objective phenomena, rather than subjective. |
Your account locked, please contact support.
|
|
|
|
(oYo)
|
|
June 26, 2014, 01:58:12 PM |
|
Psychiatry is a delusion, it is false science.
Psychiatry is a delusion, bla bla bla.. Then everything is a delusion, so what? Knowing that doesn't change anything. "adapt delusion and live It" psychology, neuroscience and psychiatry, etc are "soft" sciences, not pesudo-science (like supernatural bullshit). Their object of study is one of the most complex objects we know... so it will be very hard for it to become an hard science. Plus, it's possible that our experience of being a brain will never be well explained, unless we could simulate it on a computer, i.e. as an objective phenomena, rather than subjective. I read somewhere that in the near future (if not already) it will be possible to create artificial brains in a computer simulation. The author went on to presume that when this happens the amount of artificial brains will eventually outnumber the real ones. Once this happens the odds of you being an artificial brain will be more likely than you being real. |
|
|
|
Danydee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2632
Merit: 1254
|
|
June 26, 2014, 06:10:37 PM
Last edit: June 26, 2014, 09:50:58 PM by Danydee |
|
Psychiatry is a delusion, it is false science.
Psychiatry is a delusion, bla bla bla.. Then everything is a delusion, so what? Knowing that doesn't change anything. "adapt delusion and live It" psychology, neuroscience and psychiatry, etc are "soft" sciences, not pesudo-science (like supernatural bullshit). Their object of study is one of the most complex objects we know... so it will be very hard for it to become an hard science. Plus, it's possible that our experience of being a brain will never be well explained, unless we could simulate it on a computer, i.e. as an objective phenomena, rather than subjective. I read somewhere that in the near future (if not already) it will be possible to create artificial brains in a computer simulation. The author went on to presume that when this happens the amount of artificial brains will eventually outnumber the real ones. Once this happens the odds of you being an artificial brain will be more likely than you being real. and if these artificial brains began to be more performers than humans ?? there, human beings will begin to appreciate truly its place in this world |
|
|
|
|
Danydee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2632
Merit: 1254
|
|
June 26, 2014, 06:39:08 PM |
|
Psychiatry is a delusion, it is false science.
Psychiatry is a delusion, bla bla bla.. Then everything is a delusion, so what? Knowing that doesn't change anything. "adapt delusion and live It" psychology, neuroscience and psychiatry, etc are "soft" sciences, not pesudo-science (like supernatural bullshit). Their object of study is one of the most complex objects we know... so it will be very hard for it to become an hard science. Plus, it's possible that our experience of being a brain will never be well explained, unless we could simulate it on a computer, i.e. as an objective phenomena, rather than subjective. I read somewhere that in the near future (if not already) it will be possible to create artificial brains in a computer simulation. The author went on to presume that when this happens the amount of artificial brains will eventually outnumber the real ones. Once this happens the odds of you being an artificial brain will be more likely than you being real. Now imagine that someone can reproduct your brain performances and intelligence, he would prefere the machine to you, and those whatever your size and importance. in fact, it would lead to go without you  you are dead |
|
|
|
|
herzmeister
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1007
|
|
June 26, 2014, 10:18:36 PM |
|
I read somewhere that in the near future (if not already) it will be possible to create artificial brains in a computer simulation. The author went on to presume that when this happens the amount of artificial brains will eventually outnumber the real ones. Once this happens the odds of you being an artificial brain will be more likely than you being real.
that goes not only for brains, but for a (our) whole (artificial/simulated) world, and it's called the Simulation Argument. http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html |
|
|
|
Danydee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2632
Merit: 1254
|
|
June 26, 2014, 10:19:25 PM |
|
RE: I read somewhere that in the near future (if not already) it will be possible to create artificial brains in a computer simulation. The author went on to presume that when this happens the amount of artificial brains will eventually outnumber the real ones. Once this happens the odds of you being an artificial brain will be more likely than you being real.
in my humble opinion, It must be that the problem of capability of self development and learning that they do no have discern yet |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
