tadmjones

The notion that is perplexing is the idea that the phenomenon of experience is the reified self as awareness at base. That bodily development, change and eventual decay are conditions to the locus of consciousness/awareness, and that that locus is the self at base. The basic notions of the Vedic philosophies.

I think the essential in most religions could be characterized as a faith in a transcendental aspect of reality. A faith in the possibility of overcoming the seeming paradoxes in the gross physical environment of life on earth. The life and death of Christ, the perceptual aspects of a human being and the strive to offer an explanation or meaning for how non material aspects , ie 'love' or 'will' , can or do affect one's 'lived experience'. Why be 'good', what are the results of 'being good' , whence the good ?

Publicize the findings? Perhaps that would lessen any personal threat.

I’m perplexed with the notion that self describes subjective experience a part from any description of mental products or operations of cognition, ie the ontological basis of the ‘first person’ perspective of experience. As per Rand , and Stephen , consciousness is the act of perceiving that which exists. Would an irreducible subjectiveness be non perceivable and render it without identity and therefore non existent?

It's as if Penrose is a human LLM analog

This article offers a different frame of interpretation of what was ‘captured’. It seems a better view of the image is to see at as capturing the interactions between light’s ’energy’ and target particles , the light isn’t ‘seen’ or imaged as exhibiting dual aspects as much as what is depicted in the image is the history of the reactions between particles and light as akin to an interference pattern. https://www.insidescience.org/blog/2015/03/13/no-you-cannot-catch-individual-photon-acting-simultaneously-pure-particle-and-wave

I suppose Hindus are better salesmen then , lol.

Is that to mean Rand and Augustine agree that embracing God is a negation of the self or the mind? both? or are they one and the same? I've long thought that mind and self were the same, but lately I'm perplexed with the notion that self contains the mind as an aspect. That the more fundamental self is consciousness as such. The underlying awareness of the functioning of the mind and its contents are objects to the self.

"No, there is no way to hold any kind of elections during war/martial law. For details see Martial law in Ukraine. Besides, the respective legislation was adopted long before Zelensky became president.😁" "Besides" according to Oxford dictionary means in addition to or apart from. How was it you used the word as preamble to the legislation's origin? I inferred you implied I thought or intimated that Z was the cause of the legislation, I just couldn't fathom another reason on your part to add this. Looking forward to hearing your reasoning on this particular example of syntax.

Notice the comical misspelling , and the fact that it is a question without an answer, cuz no cycle? BTW I've lost track, which of us is rubber ?

Author Posted 44 minutes ago (edited) The more was arbitrary claptrap as there will be no election , as ordered by Z. Expand "1. Missing are your apologies for putting words in my mouth - about what I was allegedly implying. Besides, the respective legislation was adopted long before Zelensky became president.😁" Allegedly ? An objective reading would see that comment as an unsolicited 'off topic' remark. lol face Besides, I was just making a declarative statement about my implication or lack thereof, it wasn't an explicit accusation. You know how implication and inference work, yeah ? Perhaps even better than the level of my legal understanding of Ukrainian constitutional law.

The more was arbitrary claptrap as there will be no election , as ordered by Z. Unless assuming he sues for peace and rescinds martial law and then I guess steps down and the office is vacated for six months ? Ukrainian constitutional law is a little fuzzy for me, but please don’t take that as opportunity to explain to me the intricacies therein , as I view the situation as more of a Slavic civil war spurned on by those bent on weakening Russia.

I wasn’t implying Z orchestrated the legislation he authorized. Quizzical face

In the 'biz' 3% goes to the listing agent and 3% to the buyer's agent , if the same agency sells their own listing they could get the full 6, but to sweeten the deal they will sometimes negotiate either with the buyer or the other agent to lower the rate total.

The numbers on wiki are from SOCIS which looks like an Ukrainian org, and by double do you mean Z has 46 and the other guy has 80 ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Ukrainian_presidential_election And it was the 'topic' of my comment as I explained.

What follows is Zelenskyy is currently president for life, or for as long as martial law is not rescinded. So elections do not matter at this time in the Ukraine, if they ever did, really. I inferred from Stephen's post that he was criticizing the 'undemocratic' nature of dictatorships. By citing official statistics from regimes that charade about elections. I suspect too , that he is throwing shade at what he thinks Trump supporters believe about our recent and present cycle(s). Surely he must realize that Biden is a titular President, his own AG finds him incompetent to stand trial.

Off the top of my head , and I had not thought about this previously, but are other countries' real estate markets structured the same as the US's? Are mortgages and mortgage markets similar?

A wikipedia entry shows a current poll with Zelenskyy at 23.7% and his former Commander and Chief of the Armed Forces and current Amb to the UK at 41.4 % , but with the extension of martial law it doesn't look like there will be an election this March when it was constitutionally mandated to take place. So for now polling really isn't a 'thing' , yeah ?

How is Zelenskkyyii polling in this cycle ?

It looks like a 6% rate was last seen in 1992 and hasn't gone below or even to 5% since. Maybe 'high' is a clickbaiting term ? https://www.statista.com/statistics/777612/average-commission-rate-realtors-usa/

And the detail I am harping on is the detail in this article ie age restrictions for social media accounts.

Too bad, I guess, that the street you grew up on wasn't populated by stricter constitutionalists.

In the article the example of bad parenting is given as an arranged marriage to a first cousin, and that an age restriction on creating an account on a social media platform could harm children in a like situation by barring them from receiving certain information, contacts, or resources. The author agrees that the legislation is 'bad' because of that effect and the article also talks about suppression of speech or expression. I am saying the protection children need from bad parenting would be protection from their parents allowing them to participate on social media, and I don't think it is 'bad legislation' unless there is an argument that 'objective laws' that bar selling alcohol and tobacco to minors are 'bad' too.

Are laws that place age restrictions on tobacco and alcohol use 'bad legislation'? The psychological manipulations that all persons who use 'social media' are subject to are not the 'latest in moral panics' , they are design features of the medium. No one disputes that designers of the tech were studying and designing platforms with the expressed purpose of exploiting psychological manipulation techniques and effects, eg how to engage and capture attention, brain chemical fluctuations based on responses in physically interacting with touch screens, ect. Placing age restrictions on accessing the 'internet' because networked computers qua networks is a manifestation of demonic forces would be a 'moral panic'. Disallowing entities from profiting on uninformed consent of minors isn't necessarily bad legislation, perhaps anti big L Libertarian, but it doesn't 'feel' that bad. I mean I wouldn't punish(unless it was my child) the fifth grader for sneaking a cigarette behind the playground, but if they bought a pack from the corner store I'd see that as abuse by the store owner.

Now I think you've misinterpreted my motivations.