optionalreaction Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 ################################################################################ ################################################################################ ################################################################################ "ARMAGEDDON - TWO..." ################################################################################ ################################################################################ ################################################################################ "A IMPORTANT FACTOR OF ARMAGEDDON IS THAT PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SURVIVE HAVE TO DO THINGS 'TWICE'. IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE STARTED THE YEAR 'TWO THOUSAND' AND THE '2' DOES HAVE A IMPORTANT SIGNIFICANCE (THE ACTUAL TIMING BEING, OF COURSE, ACTUALLY 'VIRTUAL' IN UNIVERSAL TERMS). ALSO, I ONCE HAD A INTERESTING CONVERSATION WITH MY FATHER REGARDING THE WORD 'TO', BECUASE IT DIDN'T REALLY MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME. THE QUESTION I ASKED WAS... 'CONVERSATIONALLY, HOW CAN I GO 'TO' SOMEWHERE IF I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE I AM, OR THAT YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHERE YOU ARE, OR WHERE EXCATLY I AM GOING TO?'. A LONG DISCUSSION ENSUED, AND ENDED IN A ARGUMENT AS USUAL. THE PROBLEM WITH IT IS THAT, SAYING 'I AM GOING TO THE PUB.' AUTOMATICALLY MAKES MULTIPLE ASSUMPTIONS, AND, THAT THAT MEANS THAT THAT SIMPLE SENTENCE IS ACTUALLY ILLOGICAL, BECAUSE IT IS *NOT IN _ANY_ CONTEXT WHATSOEVER*. IN SHORT, IT ASSUMES THAT BOTH PERSONS KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. THIS MAY SOUND PSYCHOLOGICALLY ELEMENTARY, BUT THE ASSUMPTION IS A *LEADING* ASSUMPTION, THAT SHOULD LEAD TO GREATER INTEGRATION, BY FURTHER QUESTIONING REGARDING THAT ACTUAL DESTINATION. IF IT IS NOT QUESTIONED FURTHER, THE PUB COULD BE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE UNIVERSE FOR ALL THE INFORMED KNOWS! THE 'LEADING' ASPECT OF THE STATEMENT IS ALSO INTERSTING, BECAUSE IF ONE HAS TO SPEAK TO PEOPLE ONE _SHOULD NOT_ BE INTEGRATED WITH, A 'LATENT' CONNECTION IS AUTOMATICALLY MADE. 'INMATES' OF A PRISON WING WILL BE VERY AWARE OF THIS, AND MANY SPEND LONG DURATIONS IN THEIR CELLS 'AT HER MAJESTIES LEISURE', NOT WANTING TO TALK TO ANYONE, PRECISELY BECAUSE OF THIS REASON. IN TERMS OF FAMILY ALSO, THE MEMBERS ARE ALL AUTOMATICALLY INTERGRATED, AND LANGUAGE ACTUALLY MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT TO DIS-INTERGRATE. THE SOLUTION, IS TO SET THE CONTEXT FIRST, FOR EVERY SENTENCE SPOKEN. SETTING THE CONTEXT FIRST FOR A SENTENCE HAS MANY PROBLEMS... 1. IT INTERRUPTS THE FLOW OF CONVERSATION. 2. IT IS LABOR-INTENSIVE AND LABORIOUS. 3. IT CAN BE MIS-INTERPRETED AS A 'INSULT'. 4. IT CAN ACTUALLY 'SLOW-DOWN' 'INFORMATION TRANSFERRAL'. 5. IT 'BREAKS' WITH 'COMMON PRACTICE', AND CAN 'AGGREVATE' A ALREADY 'TENSE' SITUATION FURTHER. 6. IF THE SUBJECT IS A WELL-KNOWN SUBJECT, IT CAN 'SET-UP', OR 'PRE-LOAD' A ARGUMENT. HOWEVER, IF THE CONTEXT IS NOT SET, SEVERAL IMMEDIATE PROBLEMS ARISE... 1. IF SOMEONE SPEAKS TO SOMEONE ELSE, A 'LATENT' CONNECTION IS AUTOMATICALLY MADE. 2. A PERIOD OF CONFUSION PREVAILS, AT LEAST UNTIL THE CONTEXT IS FINALLY KNOWN. 3. IF THE SENTENCE IS CUT SHORT, BY FOR EXAMPLE, A EMERGENCY, THE CONTEXT MAY NEVER BE KNOWN, AND THE CONFUSION NEVER CALMED. 4. IN A 'GROUP' SITUATION, THOSE WHO _DO KNOW THE CONTEXT_ AUTOMATICALLY 'OUT-RANK' THOSE WHO DON'T. 5. DELIBERATELEY 'FALSE' INFORMATION CAN BE CONVEYED AND UNDERSTOOD AND THEN RUBBISHED AND DISCARDED BY A 'TRUSTED SOURCE'. THIS MEANS THAT A 'ILLOGICAL' NEURAL PATHWAY HAS BEEN CREATED IN THE SUBJECTS MIND THAT COUKLD BE TRIGGERED AT A LATER DATE, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE 'SOURCE' OF THE INFORMATION IS ACTUALLY THE GUILTY PARTY. 6. 'INNUENDO' REARS IT'S GROTESQUE HEAD, AND, IN TERMS OF THE 'ENGLISH' LANGUAGE (BECAUSE THAT IS ALL I REALLY KNOW), IT IS OFTEN OF A 'VIOLENT' NATURE, AND AGAIN, CAN AGGREVATE A ALREADY TENSE SITUATION. 7. THE STARTING POINT OF THE SENTENCE IS AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMED TO BE 'NOWHERE' AND TO HAVE STARTED AT A 'UNKNOWN' TIME. SO, IN TEMRS OF COMMUNICATIONAL NETWORKING, 'FIRST CONTACT' REALLY IS VERY DANGEROUS, AND SHOULD BE IDEALLY DONE 'IMPERSONALLY', I.E. BY 'POST' (EMAIL OR PHYSICAL MAIL). 'SPEED DATING' IS INDEED 'EVIL'. THE 'SOURCE' PROBLEM ALSO MEANS THAT, BECAUSE THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE CONVERSATION HAVE ARRIVED AT THAT POINT IN TIME WHERE THEY ARE HAVING THE CONVERSATION, THEY HAVE COME FROM 'THE SAME CONSTRUCT' IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, AND IF THAT SOURCE IS UNKNOWN, THAT CONSTRUCT, RESTRICTED BY 'AGE' OR 'TIME' COULD BE A LARGE PROPORTION, OR 'THE ENTIRETY' OF THEIR LIFE OR LIVES. FOR THIS REASON, CONVERSATION WITH PERSONS OLDER THAN ONESELF HAVE TO HAVE EXTRA 'DEFENSIVE PRECAUTIONS' PUT IN PLACE. THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE OF 'SAME SEX' CONVERSATIONS, AND INTER-FAMILY-UNIT CONVERSATIONS. THE PROBLEM IN A QUOTE, I WOULD WRITE AS... 'I AM GOING TO THE PUB, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHERE I AM GOING FROM.' "TWO EQUALS UNCERTAINTY." AGAIN, PLEASE POST A MESSAGE ON THE OPTIONALREACTION FORUMS IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS..." ################################################################################ ################################################################################ ################################################################################ 'NAME - THEMEANMACHINE - 2007 February 22 - 00:10:28:[0240]' 'NAME - THEMEANMACHINE - 2007 February 22 - 00:20:55:[0140]' 'NAME - THEMEANMACHINE - 2007 February 22 - 00:26:10:[0881]' 'NAME - THEMEANMACHINE - 2007 February 22 - 00:30:54:[0050]' 'NAME - THEMEANMACHINE - 2007 February 22 - 00:32:34:[0601]' ################################################################################ ################################################################################ ################################################################################ END.OF.FILE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metallithrax Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 How about..... NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cchasem Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 oh. sweet. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted February 22, 2007 Veteran Share Posted February 22, 2007 umm...moved here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cchasem Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 umm...moved here lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~WinGz~ Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Normally I have nothing with grammatical issues. But I would have kept reading but the massive use of caps blinded me sincei have astigmatism. But besides that time is only an object created to help give humans a more civilized organizational way of doing things, such as food harvesting, planting, and to better organize things. I feel the second "apocalypse" will be our own undoing. I mean humans possess a great deal of knowledge its just we cant take out heads out of our "A****" to understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackwanders Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 That's the most illogical post I've ever read. And it's just a plug for your own forum. The thread should be deleted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyehac Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 um, can I have cliffnotes since my eyes can't read anything in caps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts