LAW IS NEITHER OBEYED DISOBEYED NOR BROKEN / AN EXISTENTIAL ONTOLOGICAL DISPROOF OF LAW

[bbyrd009]

I am saying that the state of affairs we are living now wherein we deem ourselves to be ruling ourselves via the language of law is precisely a chaotic state because we are deluded to think that law is in fact a means of controlling human conduct, when, as a given state of affairs, law cannot, does not, in fact determine anyone to do or not do anything, even though everyone currently believes that law does determine both grassroots and so called authorities in their actions.

well so you say, but i suggest that you have arrived at your current state of conduct precisely bc the law has prevented you from doing what you like, more or less; i would not be the first to remark that if a baby had the abilities of an adult, we would deem that adult a psychopath?

I have been reflecting intently regarding 1 Corinthians 15:24, which describes one of Christ's primary objectives, i.e., to destroy all dominion, authority, and power; which is exactly what my theoretical destruction of the concept of law has in fact achieved, whether or not the vast majority of people are educationally equipped at this point to follow my reasoning; and, I am thinking that Christians, therefore, in so far as they are dedicated to Christ, cannot legitimately differ with His objective regarding destruction of the Christ-disdained structure of our extant ilk of sociospheric organization.

ha well about Christians dedicated to Christ i dont much know tbh; even if i do hear it said often enough lol, but anyway fwiw i find leave the world to be much more sublime, even if less practically attainable, and a constant struggle. But i think under the law is invoked in the same spirit, so again i cant help but feel you are trying to reinvent the wheel, Duane

I have explained precisely why

oh jeez, for this i generally ask Qs about sunrise this morning, Duane, there seems to be a lot of variance in the belief about where the sun rose from this morning, yeh?

all dominion, authority, and power is readily subject to destruction at the theoretical level, which level is the most cardinally important, and, brute physical strength cannot exert itself within the purely cognitive realm of theoretical constructs, whereby we govern ourselves.

well Duane you say that, but im pretty sure i could regurgitate numerous examples of the state doing just that, exerting brute physical strength to quash nascent theoretical constructs, and not even the state, but Cassini--which can be site-searched, i just recently reposted that--and even you as well, in your precise explanations? Although these are i guess more practical examples, but after all theory is reflected in practice i guess, eventually

 

[bbyrd009]

Hegel's parents were purely of the class you disdain, if i remember right, his dad was some sort of publican, and his mom was a lawyer or something? So hopefully the irony is at least appreciated

 

[bbyrd009]

"In 1811, Hegel married Marie Helena Susanna von Tucher (1791–1855), the eldest daughter of a Senator..." https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Georg_Wilhelm_Friedrich_Hegel

lol, priceless

"An individual's "supreme duty is to be a member of the state" (Elements of the Philosophy of Right, section 258)..." so i mean heil bro, this guy is their god right now today too i guess. Dont get me wrong, he makes some good points too prolly, but was obviously quite enamored of himself also

 

[Duane Clinton Meehan]

well so you say, but i suggest that you have arrived at your current state of conduct precisely bc the law has prevented you from doing what you like, more or less; i would not be the first to remark that if a baby had the abilities of an adult, we would deem that adult a psychopath?

ha well about Christians dedicated to Christ i dont much know tbh; even if i do hear it said often enough lol, but anyway fwiw i find leave the world to be much more sublime, even if less practically attainable, and a constant struggle. But i think under the law is invoked in the same spirit, so again i cant help but feel you are trying to reinvent the wheel, Duane

oh jeez, for this i generally ask Qs about sunrise this morning, Duane, there seems to be a lot of variance in the belief about where the sun rose from this morning, yeh?
well Duane you say that, but im pretty sure i could regurgitate numerous examples of the state doing just that, exerting brute physical strength to quash nascent theoretical constructs, and not even the state, but Cassini--which can be site-searched, i just recently reposted that--and even you as well, in your precise explanations? Although these are i guess more practical examples, but after all theory is reflected in practice i guess, eventually

Thank you for reading and responding; I appreciate that a lot.

I mean that the origination of the political sciences, whereby we rule ourselves, is in thought, and, that no physical warfare takes place within pure thinking. I am at a loss to know what many portions of your writing is saying, because I do not recognize the meaning of your little abbreviational-creatures, and, am too indolent to research them on Google, thus, in so far as you so abstrusely abbreviate, you lose this reader in frequent alternating bits of missed meaning!

 

[bbyrd009]

Thank you for reading and responding; I appreciate that a lot.

I mean that the origination of the political sciences, whereby we rule ourselves, is in thought, and, that no physical warfare takes place within pure thinking. I am at a loss to know what many portions of your writing is saying, because I do not recognize the meaning of your little abbreviational-creatures, and, am too indolent to research them on Google, thus, in so far as you so abstrusely abbreviate, you lose this reader in frequent alternating bits of missed meaning!

i was pretty resistant to the notion myself, at first, but it has come to serve as an excellent filter; there are many reactions possible to an unfamiliar acronym; one can look it up, one can ask what it means, one can ignore it if it is indeed immaterial to the concept or the sentence phrase, yet ppl most often choose um more self-serving paths there, and this serves as a handy kind of sign, if you get me.

As for any lack of literal warfare in pure thinking, im wondering if i posted a vid of some debate winners exclaiming "we ripped their heads off!" might serve to argue against the notion, if the story of Cassini does not. Does anyone literally die? No, but im not sure the distinction is relevant in the greater scheme of things, they are all there to win or lose, to fight and either be victorious, or defeated, right

 

[Willie T]

Thank you for reading and responding; I appreciate that a lot.

I mean that the origination of the political sciences, whereby we rule ourselves, is in thought, and, that no physical warfare takes place within pure thinking. I am at a loss to know what many portions of your writing is saying, because I do not recognize the meaning of your little abbreviational-creatures, and, am too indolent to research them on Google, thus, in so far as you so abstrusely abbreviate, you lose this reader in frequent alternating bits of missed meaning!

i was pretty resistant to the notion myself, at first, but it has come to serve as an excellent filter; there are many reactions possible to an unfamiliar acronym; one can look it up, one can ask what it means, one can ignore it if it is indeed immaterial to the concept or the sentence phrase, yet ppl most often choose um more self-serving paths there, and this serves as a handy kind of sign, if you get me.

As for any lack of literal warfare in pure thinking, im wondering if i posted a vid of some debate winners exclaiming "we ripped their heads off!" might serve to argue against the notion, if the story of Cassini does not. Does anyone literally die? No, but im not sure the distinction is relevant in the greater scheme of things, they are all there to win or lose, to fight and either be victorious, or defeated, right

I DON'T BELIEVE IT! And in his own words!
Was Duane actually suggesting that you alter your communication and write in such a manner that HE can easily follow what you are saying? (Is this not the pot calling the kettle, black?)

 

[bbyrd009]

ha, guess so huh.
Strangely, the acronyms reveal much more than they conceal, as it usually turns out

 

[aspen]

Do you think you could try rewriting that in English? We are all duly impressed, but some people might actually want to know what was said.

lol - I thought it was just me.....I was afraid I had a stroke or something!

 

[bbyrd009]

lol - I thought it was just me.....I was afraid I had a stroke or something!

ha, doesnt mean he doesnt have a point maybe, imo keep an open mind, but so far im still not quite sure what is even being advocated? At least that Scripture does not put more succinctly? Leave the world, change your mind, under the law, become like a little child, etc?

 

[aspen]

ha, doesnt mean he doesnt have a point maybe, imo keep an open mind, but so far im still not quite sure what is even being advocated? At least that Scripture does not put more succinctly? Leave the world, change your mind, under the law, become like a little child, etc?

I neither accept, nor reject his post - how can I? I don’t speak the language!

 

[Duane Clinton Meehan]

ha, guess so huh.
Strangely, the acronyms reveal much more than they conceal, as it usually turns out

009;
I've followed my own advice and, availed myself of the use of the fingertip world-wide-inter-network-webisphere, in order to possibly achieve comprehension of what 'imo' is supposed to denote. Turns out that there are at least six possible intensions of 'imo', thus, via your employment of internet slang, you throw me into the supernumerary task of resolving, in addition to the normal travail of approximating textual meaning, which of the six possible denotations of 'imo' you are intending to convey! Thereby, you are unnecessarily adding the further complication of my having to attempt to determine, via doing a textual analysis, which of the six possible meanings of 'imo' you might possibly be intending, at any given writing, to be meaning to convey by your reductionistical internet slang; thus, you are consistently accomplishing, in your sentences, a confusing opacity, which my own writing, is accomplished merely inadvertently, and unintentionally! Nonetheless, you are a real sport, and, I await your learned response to my ascription of fault to your obfuscating employment of internet slang...

Nonetheless, via my being a very minor apprentice deity in my own right, I authoritatively implore you to make further response regarding what your distinctive intelligence thinks of my assertions regarding my having already accomplished, via merely writing-out my own observations of the world, that which scripture posits as Christ's objective(s), as per what is written in the First Corinthians verse which you have so effectively employed as your impressive signature!?
Duane

 

[Willie T]

Imo, actually, imho, this poor man is so out of touch with the real world that he may be unsalvageable. LOL And I mean that wadr. (or at least, all it deserves)
HTH, Duane.

 

[marks]

Imo, actually, imho, this poor man is so out of touch with the real world that he may be unsalvageable. LOL And I mean that wadr. (or at least, all it deserves)
HTH, Duane.

Hi Willie,

You may well have said much the same of me had you spent a few hours talking to me before I was a believer.

I was so far away from the Biblical view, there was a pastor who gave me a ride, he told me he NEVER picked up hitchhikers (And I was a sight, I assure you!) but that God had told him to give me a ride, and to tell me that God had plans for me. I laughed in his face. He had absolutely NO understanding!! But in a couple weeks I was getting baptized, and I was a Christian.

Much love!

 

[Willie T]

Hi Willie,

You may well have said much the same of me had you spent a few hours talking to me before I was a believer.

I was so far away from the Biblical view, there was a pastor who gave me a ride, he told me he NEVER picked up hitchhikers (And I was a sight, I assure you!) but that God had told him to give me a ride, and to tell me that God had plans for me. I laughed in his face. He had absolutely NO understanding!! But in a couple weeks I was getting baptized, and I was a Christian.

Much love!

Probably a different subject altogether. I have a fairly substantial background in Psychology, and could do what Duane is doing and flood this bandwidth with unnecessarily convoluted esoteric "Shrink Talk" that would benefit very few people. But, I don't. And neither do any of you who could, I am sure, easily do the same thing in your own fields of concentrated affection.
I actually was recruited by a Psychologist to facilitate groups under his practice for the very reason that he felt I would be able to reach many more people than he could — because I spoke to them in English instead of Gobbledy Gook. There were things they had to know, and he was failing in his attempt to help them understand, despite the fact that he knew the material, inside and out. And his goal was not to try and impress them with his vocabulary, but rather to help them.

 

[marks]

Probably a different subject altogether. I have a fairly substantial background in Psychology, and could do what Duane is doing and flood this bandwidth with unnecessarily convoluted esoteric "Shrink Talk" that would benefit very few people. But, I don't. And neither do any of you who could, I am sure, easily do the same thing in your own fields of concentrated affection.
I actually was recruited by a Psychologist to facilitate groups under his practice for the very reason that he felt I would be able to reach many more people than he could — because I spoke to them in English instead of Gobbledy Gook. There were things they had to know, and he was failing in his attempt to help them understand, despite the fact that he knew the material, inside and out. And his goal was not to try and impress them with his vocabulary, but rather to help them.

And there is, I think, an elementary difference between @Duane Clinton Meehan 's involvement here, and your's and mine, with your's and mine being much more similar. I can tell he's having a lot of fun with this, and I would be too, he's good at it. When I read what he writes, I understand what he's saying well enough, I think. I don't think I could write at that level! People enjoy doing what they do well.

I enjoy speaking truth as plainly as possible, and I endeavor to do that at every turn. Hopefully I am.

We all have to answer for ourselves, to what purpose do I do the things I do?

Much love!

 

[bbyrd009]

“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.” MSaavedra

 

[Duane Clinton Meehan]

009;
I've followed my own advice and, availed myself of the use of the fingertip world-wide-inter-network-webisphere, in order to possibly achieve comprehension of what 'imo' is supposed to denote. Turns out that there are at least six possible intensions of 'imo', thus, via your employment of internet slang, you throw me into the supernumerary task of resolving, in addition to the normal travail of approximating textual meaning, which of the six possible denotations of 'imo' you are intending to convey! Thereby, you are unnecessarily adding the further complication of my having to attempt to determine, via doing a textual analysis, which of the six possible meanings of 'imo' you might possibly be intending, at any given writing, to be meaning to convey by your reductionistical internet slang; thus, you are consistently accomplishing, in your sentences, a confusing opacity, which my own writing, is accomplished merely inadvertently, and unintentionally! Nonetheless, you are a real sport, and, I await your learned response to my ascription of fault to your obfuscating employment of internet slang...

Nonetheless, via my being a very minor apprentice deity in my own right, I authoritatively implore you to make further response regarding what your distinctive intelligence thinks of my assertions regarding my having already accomplished. in mere writing, Christ's objective(s) as conveyed by the First Corinthians verse, which you effectively employ as your impressive signature!?
Duane

Hegel's parents were purely of the class you disdain, if i remember right, his dad was some sort of publican, and his mom was a lawyer or something? So hopefully the irony is at least appreciated

009;
I am profoundly impressed that Hegel furthered the enunciation of Spinoza's dictum, and did an excellent rendition/extension thereof. I have about zero direct study of Hegel's written works, and, have mostly knowledge of him through secondary sources, since age fourteen, which is a lot of secondary study of Hegel. My concentration has been very extensively upon Heidegger and Sartre. Sartre's has been the most beneficial writing which I encountered during my forty three years of college matriculation, and, during breaks from enrollment, I laid about my various yachts, re-reading Sartre in order to see if what I thought I had encountered therein was in fact what I had glimpsed there; turned out that my clarified understanding of the double nihilation is the most radically powerful intellectual instrument I have ever mastered, so, I am Sartrian through and through. Sartre's writing is considered the most difficult to understand in the world; so, I have been, in a sense, being unfair to everyone on this site, by employing and confronting them with the most difficult to understand concepts in the world, which, after many decades of study, are now simple for me. Sartre's thought is radically revolutionary, and, it is what I employ as the basis for every one of my positions presented upon this forum; and, by interacting with the Christians here, I have gained an immeasurable amount of cognitive stimulus, which is extremely edifying and uplifting, and, is directing me into a new path I had never ever dreamed I might consider pursuing, i.e., a re-engagement with Christianity.
Duane

 

[bbyrd009]

I neither accept, nor reject his post - how can I? I don’t speak the language!

imo really, even from Hegel, it is just an "appeal to a higher law" restated. Unfortunately the conclusion that is usually reached is "all is vanity" due to the admittedly "synthetic" nature of the dialectic, the frame the conversation is put in? Where you might note distinct "A or not A" thinking, which might even be said to be at the heart there? (with the understanding that "all is vanity" by Solomon is said to like a certain audience)

And the results speak for themselves, maybe; nihilists suicide. Hegel was Idealist, and incidentally likely died from cholera or complications of it, let the reader understand

 

[aspen]

009;
I am profoundly impressed that Hegel furthered the enunciation of Spinoza's dictum, and did an excellent rendition/extension thereof. I have about zero direct study of Hegel's written works, and, have mostly knowledge of him through secondary sources, since age fourteen, which is a lot of secondary study of Hegel. My concentration has been very extensively upon Heidegger and Sartre. Sartre's has been the most beneficial writing which I encountered during my forty three years of college matriculation, and, during breaks from enrollment, I laid about my various yachts, re-reading Sartre in order to see if what I thought I had encountered therein was in fact what I had glimpsed there; turned out that my clarified understanding of the double nihilation is the most radically powerful intellectual instrument I have ever mastered, so, I am Sartrian through and through. Sartre's writing is considered the most difficult to understand in the world; so, I have been, in a sense, being unfair to everyone on this site, by employing and confronting them with the most difficult to understand concepts in the world, which, after many decades of study, are now simple for me. Sartre's thought is radically revolutionary, and, it is what I employ as the basis for every one of my positions presented upon this forum; and, by interacting with the Christians here, I have gained an immeasurable amount of cognitive stimulus, which is extremely edifying and uplifting, and, is directing me into a new path I had never ever dreamed I might consider pursuing, i.e., a re-engagement with Christianity.
Duane

good news!

 

[Duane Clinton Meehan]

And there is, I think, an elementary difference between @Duane Clinton Meehan 's involvement here, and your's and mine, with your's and mine being much more similar. I can tell he's having a lot of fun with this, and I would be too, he's good at it. When I read what he writes, I understand what he's saying well enough, I think. I don't think I could write at that level! People enjoy doing what they do well.

I enjoy speaking truth as plainly as possible, and I endeavor to do that at every turn. Hopefully I am.

We all have to answer for ourselves, to what purpose do I do the things I do?

Much love!

Wow, marks, a beautiful sentiment on your part. You are very insightfully correct regarding my presence on this site! After having been here for a while, I am seeing that all this interchange-tension is the kind of edifying mind-stretch you referenced earlier on.
Duane