Any “is” statement can be demoted to an “ought” statement simply by disagreeing with it.
Any “is” statement can be demoted to an “ought” statement simply by disagreeing with it.
Any “is” statement can be demoted to an “ought” statement simply by disagreeing with it.
Everyone is “mentally unwell” to some degree or another. Everyone needs acceptance. Don’t be the reason that people feel inferior.
To declare our creation complete is to condemn ourselves to be Prisoners and kill the Philosophers that challenge our reality.
Is this what [is] referencing here? Who knows, who cares. […] Importantly, we know it cannot ever be appealed to as “genuinely known”.
No axiomatic system is both complete or consistent. This has some major repercussions on governance.
We try to avoid being in situations where our choices are limited. This happens in one of two ways: gaining power or committing to impotence.
Having what can be distributed is – definitionally and factually – “socially normal”; anything less is propaganda.
While posts are being neglected, it is intentional. I’m working on a new project. This post is an update on it.
We should have seen this coming. [We can prevent things like this in the future.] Let us learn from the family Rusk and try to be better.
Regardless of what is “true”, finding the situation in which the least people suffer is the optimal decision.