just george

what's with the horse?
lol, clue.

"There is nothing to defuse. Nor have I given you permission to make comments like "you're both frustrated and horny" involving me."

Your permission? Seriously? No. People can say what they please without your permission. Stop with the high handed asshollery. Is your ego so easily bruised you have to call out every little slight either real or perceived? You are the child in this.

Humans are alive, yet also dead; a synergy between life (sentient consciousness) and non-life; composed of apparently inert chemical material. Not to mention that whole "we die" thing. It's not that hard...

And the "theory" is merely an extension of Synchronicity. o.0

I don't think you get it, otherwise your sniffer wouldn't be malfunctioning.

Sentience and life are synonymous up to the point where life meets "non-life." Your typical virus normally sits on that line. Past that line, energy doesn't possess the same tangible sentience as "life."

It doesn't pass because your sniffer's malfunctioning.

You actually highlighted a different axis (vertical) with the sentience gradient (I'm talking horizontal), but it's all good.

But of course the universe exists and doesn't simultaneously, just like any given human is overtly selfish in some circumstances and overtly selfless in others.

Qualia.

And yes, the further out along the hierarchy of organization you go, the more abstract "life" itself becomes. Energy and motion.

And that's also true. But selfishness vs altruism stops being a valid dichotomy at the "life" level of organization, that certain threshold of sapience. When we move into the more derived forms of "life" at higher levels, we're talking larger processes bound by the axioms of systems theory (physics); higher than sapience, much like a flock exhibits completely different behavior than the individual birds that compose it. But yes, in basic terms, if the universe exists, it is selfish, and if it doesn't, it is self-less. Much like "ego death" achieved by either explosion or vacuum.

Yup. Even if there's no physical gain, as is the case with say... nuns, they believe that they'll be rewarded in the afterlife and act accordingly.

The general rule, a la Maynard James Keenan, is "Life feeds on life." If you look hard enough you'll see that everything is a dynamic dichotomy. Residents on each half of a given dichotomy use different means to achieve the same goal. "Selfishness" vs "Altruism" are really parallel paths, just like Ne vs Ni.... and damn near every other dichotomy. Hell, you can fill in the blanks.

Yeah. Pretty much.

Though if we're moving up to the scale of life itself, then selfish vs unselfish becomes existence vs nonexistence, and well, both of those are true simultaneously/unified as well.

Altruism is inherently selfish because one is still acting within their own best interests, just hoarding a different kind of capital. I scratch your back, you scratch mine.

And if there's one selfish individual in a world of altruists, altruism fails, and in a world of only altruists, altruism becomes static and disadvantageous.

Certainly highly weird for bunch of intps (i think, lol).

Oh, that sucks...i hope you're on the mend. Are you sure that's a health promoting regime - among humanoids crazy appears to be highly contagious
I also enjoy your posts on health issues btw - they seem to very similar to my own but i lack the credibility of having been a pharmacist (think i read that somewhere).

Ha ha i see i'm not alone in reaching tipping point for praising you today. I like your mind. Where on earth do you find the energy?

My initial impression of you wasn't all that positive. But I have come to realize that it wasn't accurate either :O

you didn't reply to a deleted post :P

I put it in the spoiler lol

Well, you're a good man, then.

Are you part Aborigine or anything?

Do you happen to be Australian or anything?

My father is an ENTP 8w7. He is a right bastard. He's also the best sparing partner and teacher I've had.